Canon User Touts SX40 for Bird Photography

[Vandyu]

There's an interesting post over at Canon Talk discussing the advantages of the Canon SX30 and SX40 models as lightweight birding cameras. How do you birders think the FZ150 will perform in that category since it has shorter zoom range?

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1010&message=39364818

--

"Promise me you'll always remember: You're braver than you believe, and stronger than you seem, and smarter than you think."
(A.A. Milne)

 

[Kevin Coppalotti]

He can talk the talk but cannot walk the walk, - the pictures are truly terrible. Ken Threed is the only guy I've seen master the SX30is, he has excellent results under strict conditions, - back yard birds that are relatively tame.

Edit: Is it just me or is there not a lot of love for the superzoom category on the Canon talk forum? There seems to be a lot more interest in superzooms here and at the Fuji forum.
--
Kevin Coppalotti
http://maxhr.zenfolio.com/

 

[Mirfak]

He can talk the talk but cannot walk the walk, - the pictures are truly terrible. Ken Threed is the only guy I've seen master the SX30is, he has excellent results under strict conditions, - back yard birds that are relatively tame.

I believe that Ken spends a fair amount of time in PP to get the best out of his images. But so far he seems to be the only person talked about when discussing SX30 bird photogaphy. One person out of the population of SX30 users can produce decent images and it's recognized as a bird camera? I expect that better IQ on the SX40 will allow more folks to take better bird pictures, but the long zoom will still affect the quality.

Edit: Is it just me or is there not a lot of love for the superzoom category on the Canon talk forum? There seems to be a lot more interest in superzooms here and at the Fuji forum.
--

There certainly is far more discussion about the S100 than there is about the SX40. I think that's because the Canon users (like me) that are interested in a superzoom, prefer the Panny.

 

[jason401]

It's all just speculation. Nobody knows how well these cameras will perform until it's out on the shelves and pictures posted here by real users.

 

[kkardster]

It's all just speculation. Nobody knows how well these cameras will perform until it's out on the shelves and pictures posted here by real users.

Final judgement will have to wait, but based on experience with previous models and specs and hands-on reviews of the new models coming out one can sometimes speculate fairly well.

 

[kkardster]

Edit: Is it just me or is there not a lot of love for the superzoom category on the Canon talk forum? There seems to be a lot more interest in superzooms here and at the Fuji forum.

Odd to me as well. Surprising [to me] tons of interest in the upscale P&S S100 but hardly anything for the new SX40. Perhaps the bigger the sensor the more interest?

 

[GeraldW]

I am waiting for some definitive reviews on the SX40IS and also more on the FZ150.

Mosy of my P&S are Canon; but my superzoom is an FZ28. I used to own the Canon S5IS, and did try the FZ35 and the Canon SX10IS; but went back to the FZ28. Now, I'm not a serious birder; but an opportunity does show up now and then, and I use the FZ28 with a Raynox 1540 Pro telex. That gives about 750 mm and the Raynox is threaded for 67 mm filters and a deep and narrow angle hood I picked up.

I did give the SX30IS a look as I'd like to be able to use my Canon flash with it; but it has Canon's problem of chromatic aberration and a slow lens at longer focal lengths. The S5IS was only 432 mm, equivalent; but was f/3.5. The SX10IS and later models have an f/5.6 or f/5.8 aperture at full zoom, so that one is forced to a higher ISO, negating the advantage of better NR processing in the later cameras. Further, the F# rises very rapidly with increasing focal length. Also, there is no provision for adding a tele extender. I used a LensMate adapter for that on my S5IS.

The FZ150 has far better image quality and lower noise than the FZ100 and at lower ISO rivals the FZ35 for IQ and betters it above ISO 400. Their lenses are not as long as the SX30IS or SX40HS; but they are faster, and like the FZ28 and 35; the F# rises slowly with increasing focal length - being very close to the S5IS in that respect. Further, there is the LA3 adapter for a telex or a close up lens. With my Raynox 1540Pro telex, the FZ150 would give 924 mm, equivalent.

CameraLabs claims that the SX40HS uses the same sensor as the SX230HS; but with a new processor. Using the DPReview comparator, the FZ150 tromps all over the SX230HS at higher ISO. Compare them at ISO 800 and 1600. Can the DIGIC V processor make up the difference? I'm thinking, NO. So in lower light, or where a higher shutter speed is wanted to stop action, the FZ150 should have a 1-2 stop edge.

I don't think the birds will care; but I think the SX40HS is ugly.

--
Jerry

 

[Vandyu]

Well, I rarely go to the Canon Talk forum because I really don't like their cameras. Just ventured there to see what people were saying about the new SX40. I do visit the Nikon Talk forum and there is very little activity there with regard to the P80-500 series superzooms. I looked at that camera through several versions and didn't care for it. Panasonic still rules the superzoom category, IMO.
--

"Promise me you'll always remember: You're braver than you believe, and stronger than you seem, and smarter than you think."
(A.A. Milne)

 

[kkardster]

I don't think the birds will care; but I think the SX40HS is ugly.

It will matter if it scares them off as well!

I'm leaning towards the FZ150 - do you have any pros/cons based on your experience about using your teleconverter to extend its reach?

 

[Vince Doran]

To a couple of the points above:

• I think the Canon forum is quiet on the SX-40 because the average reaction is like mine, a little disappointed. I thought for sure Canon would match the higher resolution of the Sony HX-100 lcd/evf, and having used both I found the high res very useful. I thought they would surely match the 1080P 50-60 fps video of the Sony and the Panny, and considering that they can readout the sensor fast enough to shoot 10fps burst, I don't know why they didn't. I hoped, after seeing the FZ150's claimed 5fps WITH AF BETWEEN, that the SX-40 might do the same, because that could be a REALLY COOL feature for shooting my running sons. As a user of the Canon Pro-1, I had some faint hope that Canon might go to their strength and build a statement lens (the Pro-1 had a fluorite element and L designation) that would extend the current amazing capabilites. But, they didn't. So, the SX-40 looks like another great camera, but it didn't blow anyone away, thus, quiet. If I worked in Canon SX-40 marketing, I'd be a little worried right now.
• Ken Threed does some great-looking work, but he doesn't create the details; the SX-30 is simply the best (by a little) among the current superzooms at capturing fine detail at full zoom. The Panny is too short and the Sony has destructive noise-reduction that can't be turned off. The differences are at the limit, but the SX-30's limit is just a little better. And the 'hard to use' idea is bunk, the camera is fine, most of us just don't put in the effort that Ken does to shoot great shots and work at PP. The great-looking birds that swarm the HX-100 posts are mostly shot close (which trumps any small differences) and seldom shown full-size (which masks small NR blurs). Beautiful in many cases, but tell little about the "small bird not near" capability.
• The FZ-150s feature set looks really good, maybe they've got something in the focus-speed that Canon doesn't. (I fear though, that Canon just has more high-dollar equip sales to worry about cannabalizing.)
• Apples can't be compared to apples when the camera has done a lot of processing; much of the "higher-iso, low noise" improvement being touted in the current gen looks a lot like what I see when I run Topaz DeNoise or NoiseNinja over my current ISO 800 shots, which is not to say there is no improvement, I'm really hoping there is because that is the biggest Achilles heel of any of the current superzooms. However, that also means one should be very careful comparing FZ150 processed images to SX230 processed images, in the SX30 at least it is clear that Canon choose to do less processing than some others, which has pluses as well as minuses. Of course with Raw (good on Panny and thanks CHDK) one can choose later and to your own priorities.

Looking forward to real shots from users, and a chance to see if the FZ150 handles teleconverters better than the SX-30/HX-100.

 

[kkardster]

I'm leaning towards the FZ150 - do you have any pros/cons based on your experience about using your teleconverter to extend its reach?

Does adding 8.5 ounces to the end of the lens cause any concern?

 

[Mirfak]

Mosy of my P&S are Canon; but my superzoom is an FZ28. I used to own the Canon S5IS, and did try the FZ35 and the Canon SX10IS; but went back to the FZ28. Now, I'm not a serious birder; but an opportunity does show up now and then, and I use the FZ28 with a Raynox 1540 Pro telex. That gives about 750 mm and the Raynox is threaded for 67 mm filters and a deep and narrow angle hood I picked up.

What hood would that be?

The FZ150 has far better image quality and lower noise than the FZ100 and at lower ISO rivals the FZ35 for IQ and betters it above ISO 400. Their lenses are not as long as the SX30IS or SX40HS; but they are faster, and like the FZ28 and 35; the F# rises slowly with increasing focal length - being very close to the S5IS in that respect. Further, there is the LA3 adapter for a telex or a close up lens. With my Raynox 1540Pro telex, the FZ150 would give 924 mm, equivalent.

I'm also considering the Raynox 1540/1541 tele extender if I get the FZ150. It's light & compact - way more so than the 2025. The 1541 is also much sharper than the 2025. Although it would be less convenient, the FZ150 with the 1541 would be far superior to the SX30/SX40HD lens. I only wish that there was a wide angle adapter that could work with the FZ150 and LA3 adapter.

CameraLabs claims that the SX40HS uses the same sensor as the SX230HS; but with a new processor. Using the DPReview comparator, the FZ150 tromps all over the SX230HS at higher ISO. Compare them at ISO 800 and 1600. Can the DIGIC V processor make up the difference? I'm thinking, NO. So in lower light, or where a higher shutter speed is wanted to stop action, the FZ150 should have a 1-2 stop edge.

Not to mention that the long zoom would contribute to killing IQ.

I don't think the birds will care; but I think the SX40HS is ugly.

I have to agree. I've never liked the looks of SX series.

 

[Vandyu]

GeraldW stood back, put his glasses on, shook his head, and then asked his wife for her opinion on the SX40. After much serious consideration, Gerald said to the forum, "I don't think the birds will care; but I think the SX40HS is ugly."

That makes two of us, Gerald. It just doesn't look right. Plus, it's made of the slick Canon plastic that looks like--well, plastic.

--

"Promise me you'll always remember: You're braver than you believe, and stronger than you seem, and smarter than you think."
(A.A. Milne)

 

[Vandyu]

When people actually get their hands on these two cameras, we need seasoned bird shooters to volunteer their expertise and participate in a bird shootout. Any one think they might be interested?

--

"Promise me you'll always remember: You're braver than you believe, and stronger than you seem, and smarter than you think."
(A.A. Milne)

 

[Kevin Coppalotti]

I'm definitely considering the FZ150 for birding mainly for its focus speed. As any small bird shooters know these critters are constantly on the move, - if they sit still for a couple of seconds you are lucky.

The SX40 seems to have the same slow voice coil focus motor as the previous model. In terms of image quality I think it is going to be hard to tell the difference, - both models seem to have improved.
--
Kevin Coppalotti
http://maxhr.zenfolio.com/

 

[Cerebrus]

Does adding 8.5 ounces to the end of the lens cause any concern?

The converter does not mount directly to the lens, you have to use an adapter. Panasonic's model number is DMW-LA5, same adapter for the FZ 100.

----

http://flickr.com/photos/cerebrus/

 

[Vince Doran]

Interesting comment about the focus speed. Have you shot both extensively? In taking a couple thousand shots of feeding birds, some of whom really flit in and out, I have not really felt hampered by the SX30's focus speed, except in very low light where I believe any contrast-detection focus system is going to struggle. However, Panny's ability to get the FZ150 to do 5fps with refocusing means they must have a quick system.

 

[Vince Doran]

Do you have evidence that the FZ150 lens (presumably very similar to the current Panny 600mm?) plus Raynox TC is better at the long end than the SX30? Given the normal effect of TC on lens, seems unlikely, but if true, would be great.

 

[Gary S]

Sure, I'll be joining in when I get it. Mainly for fun. I've done a fair amount of birding with DSLRs as well as the Panasonic FZ100.

I'm sure the FZ150 will do great as long as you can get sufficiently close to the birds. These small sensor cameras don't hold up well if you crop a lot. I also have the Panasonic 1.7x teleconverter with the Adaptor so I'll be trying that with it too.

Here's a few bird photos. The last one is from the Panasonic FZ100. The first shot is just from a 200mm lens. Not captive. It was a standoff between him and me.

 

[Vince Doran]

Some beautiful shots! What were the first three shot with?