Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Best digital for wildlife shots?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 4:13:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hi,

Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for wildlife/nature
shots, in addition to everyday regular family & vacation pics? I'd like it
to be able to take nice macro shots, as well as have a decent zoom range.

Thanks,

Ray

More about : digital wildlife shots

Anonymous
December 6, 2004 4:13:13 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ray Muensch wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for wildlife/nature
> shots, in addition to everyday regular family & vacation pics? I'd like it
> to be able to take nice macro shots, as well as have a decent zoom range.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray
>
>

Take a look at the Canon S1-IS
It is a 3.1 MP, 10X Optical zoom WITH Image Stabilization (IS).
IMHO, (IS) is a necessity for hand held shots at 10X
For about $100 more you can get a Panasonic FZ20.
It is a 5 MP, 12X Optical Zoom WITH Image Stabilization
For wildlife, I think a high power optical Zoom with (IS) is the most
important feature you should have, simply because it is usually very
difficult to get close enough to wild creatures to capture any detail
without substantial Tele capability.
Check out the specs on these cameras at:
http://www.steves-digicams.com/2004_reviews/fz20.html
Bob Williams



Bob
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 11:18:11 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

For a bit more you could get the Konica Minolta Z2 Dimage. 4 Mega pixel,
10X Optical. Took several pictures of ravens flying over the Grand Canyon
at Toroweap and got great pictures.

"Ray Muensch" <rmuensch@kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:xCTsd.9685$NO5.7302@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Hi,
>
> Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for
> wildlife/nature
> shots, in addition to everyday regular family & vacation pics? I'd like it
> to be able to take nice macro shots, as well as have a decent zoom range.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray
>
>
Related resources
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 4:54:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The Canon S1 IS is one (there are others). Has a 10x optical image
stabilized zoom -- and zoom is needed for that; equiv fl is 38-380mm.
Also can focus very close for macro shots. Has a TTL EVF viewfinder for
accurate compostion. Has been $399 recently but I saw an ad at $349 on
the weekend.

I have one and like it (and also have a 300D and 20D)

Phil

Ray Muensch wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for wildlife/nature
> shots, in addition to everyday regular family & vacation pics? I'd like it
> to be able to take nice macro shots, as well as have a decent zoom range.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray
>
>
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 6:46:32 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>From: "Ray Muensch" rmuensch@kc.rr.com

>Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for wildlife/nature
>shots, in addition to everyday regular family & vacation pics? I'd like it
>to be able to take nice macro shots, as well as have a decent zoom range.

So you need a long zoom lens, in addition to macro capability, and you want all
this for under $400.
I want to win the Powerball Lottery.
Let's see who gets lucky first.
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 7:19:10 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Annika1980 wrote:
>> From: "Ray Muensch" rmuensch@kc.rr.com
>
>> Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for
>> wildlife/nature shots, in addition to everyday regular family &
>> vacation pics? I'd like it to be able to take nice macro shots, as
>> well as have a decent zoom range.
>
> So you need a long zoom lens, in addition to macro capability, and
> you want all this for under $400.
> I want to win the Powerball Lottery.
> Let's see who gets lucky first.

Canon S1 IS fit the bill?
Anonymous
December 6, 2004 9:51:42 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:
> Annika1980 wrote:
>
>>>From: "Ray Muensch" rmuensch@kc.rr.com
>>
>>>Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for
>>>wildlife/nature shots, in addition to everyday regular family &
>>>vacation pics? I'd like it to be able to take nice macro shots, as
>>>well as have a decent zoom range.
>>
>>So you need a long zoom lens, in addition to macro capability, and
>>you want all this for under $400.
>>I want to win the Powerball Lottery.
>>Let's see who gets lucky first.
>
>
> Canon S1 IS fit the bill?
>
>

LOL! I would say so

Other features to look for are quiet/silent running mode (no click whirrs)

If you are imaging wildlife bigger than you find an escape route as a
priority :-)

Aerticeus

Like DJT says - s good zoom helps. If the zoom is built in it a bit
lighter to carry (compare 35mm, DSLR and ZLR equivalents - the ZLRs are
really quaite naice)

erm - lens hood? maybe a long range extension?

A
Anonymous
December 7, 2004 11:56:07 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 01:13:12 -0600, "Ray Muensch"
<rmuensch@kc.rr.com> wrote:

>Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for wildlife/nature
>shots, in addition to everyday regular family & vacation pics? I'd like it
>to be able to take nice macro shots, as well as have a decent zoom range.

Ray,

I think the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ3 is the one. Its 12x
image-stabilized zoom with 1 : 2.8 aperture throughout the zoom
range beats the Canon Powershot S1 IS nicely. But the latter is
also a good, feature-rich camera. It depends on how much weight
you want to put on the more difficult wildlife photos.

Hans-Georg

--
No mail, please.
Anonymous
December 10, 2004 11:02:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

The Canon S1 IS. I have two pages of pics (nature) from it on my website at
www.freds-place.net . It is a very impressive little camera.

"Ray Muensch" <rmuensch@kc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:xCTsd.9685$NO5.7302@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
> Hi,
>
> Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for
wildlife/nature
> shots, in addition to everyday regular family & vacation pics? I'd like it
> to be able to take nice macro shots, as well as have a decent zoom range.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray
>
>
Anonymous
December 11, 2004 4:06:12 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Fred B. wrote:
> The Canon S1 IS. I have two pages of pics (nature) from it on my website at
> www.freds-place.net . It is a very impressive little camera.
>
> "Ray Muensch" <rmuensch@kc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:xCTsd.9685$NO5.7302@twister.rdc-kc.rr.com...
>
>>Hi,
>>
>>Which digital camera (under $400 or so) do you recommend for
>
> wildlife/nature
>
>>shots, in addition to everyday regular family & vacation pics? I'd like it
>>to be able to take nice macro shots, as well as have a decent zoom range.
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Ray
>>
>>
>
>
>
Shhh!

Let's keep this little secret to ourselves

This is far too valuable to share with the big wide world

Aerticeus
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 1:09:20 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <e32cr0t6aocs1c2to1rqrp9qaq36f8slvr@4ax.com>,
Hans-Georg Michna <hans-georgNoEmailPlease@michna.com> wrote:

>I think the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ3 is the one. Its 12x
>image-stabilized zoom with 1 : 2.8 aperture throughout the zoom
>range beats the Canon Powershot S1 IS nicely. But the latter is
>also a good, feature-rich camera. It depends on how much weight
>you want to put on the more difficult wildlife photos.

Is the lens really sharp enough for the 3 MP, though? It has the same
effective focal length range as the FZ2, so it may be the same lens that
was used for 2 MP.
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
December 24, 2004 11:59:37 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

JPS@no.komm wrote:
> In message <e32cr0t6aocs1c2to1rqrp9qaq36f8slvr@4ax.com>,
> Hans-Georg Michna <hans-georgNoEmailPlease@michna.com> wrote:
>
>> I think the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ3 is the one. Its 12x
>> image-stabilized zoom with 1 : 2.8 aperture throughout the zoom
>> range beats the Canon Powershot S1 IS nicely. But the latter is
>> also a good, feature-rich camera. It depends on how much weight
>> you want to put on the more difficult wildlife photos.
>
> Is the lens really sharp enough for the 3 MP, though? It has the same
> effective focal length range as the FZ2, so it may be the same lens
> that was used for 2 MP.

The "same" lens is also used on the 5MP FZ20. DPreview lists the FZ20
lens as:

.. 36 - 432 mm equiv. (12x zoom)
.. F2.8 (throughout zoom range)
.. MEGA OIS (Mode 1 / Mode 2)
.. LEICA DC VARIO-ELMARIT
.. 13 Elements in 8 Groups
.. 3 Aspherical Lenses/3 Aspherical Surfaces, 1 ED Lens

but doesn't give the details for the FZ3. For the FZ2 it gives:

.. Leica 12x optical zoom with optical image stabilization
.. 35 - 420 mm equiv.
.. F2.8 (constant throughout zoom range!)
.. 13 elements in 8 groups

The FZ2 has a 1/3.2" sensor, and the FZ20 a 1/2.5" sensor, so I would
imagine that the lens design is at least scaled between the cameras. The
FZ3, though, also has a 1/3.2" sensor, so perhaps the lens is the same as
the FZ2?

Cheers,
David
Anonymous
December 27, 2004 2:25:25 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> Hans-Georg Michna <hans-georgNoEmailPlease@michna.com> wrote:
>> I think the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ3 is the one. Its 12x
>> image-stabilized zoom with 1 : 2.8 aperture throughout the zoom
>> range beats the Canon Powershot S1 IS nicely. But the latter is
>> also a good, feature-rich camera. It depends on how much weight
>> you want to put on the more difficult wildlife photos.

The Lumix FZ20 would be better for wildlife because of its 36-432/2.8
(f/2.8 constant all the way out) lens. As a non-wildlife camera
the K-M A2 is usually considered better, but has 28-200/2.8-3.5 only.
I'm surprised by all the recommendations for the Canon Pro1.

JPS@no.komm wrote:
> Is the lens really sharp enough for the 3 MP, though? It has the same
> effective focal length range as the FZ2, so it may be the same lens that
> was used for 2 MP.

Looking at full-resolution samples, the Lumix is the only non-DSLR
that approaches DSLR quality in terms of sharpness, though at high ISO
it is worse in noise. Most consumer digicams (non-DSLR) use Sony CCD,
and either the avoidance of that CCD, or the Leica lens, accounts for
the Panasonic's quality.

Maybe your conclusion would be different...
Anonymous
December 27, 2004 3:28:12 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:59:37 -0000, "David J Taylor"
<david-taylor@invalid.com> wrote:

>The FZ2 has a 1/3.2" sensor, and the FZ20 a 1/2.5" sensor, so I would
>imagine that the lens design is at least scaled between the cameras. The
>FZ3, though, also has a 1/3.2" sensor, so perhaps the lens is the same as
>the FZ2?

David,

I'm pretty sure your assumptions are correct.

Hans-Georg

--
No mail, please.
Anonymous
December 27, 2004 8:16:57 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hans-Georg Michna wrote:

> On Fri, 24 Dec 2004 08:59:37 -0000, "David J Taylor"
> <david-taylor@invalid.com> wrote:
>
>
>>The FZ2 has a 1/3.2" sensor, and the FZ20 a 1/2.5" sensor, so I would
>>imagine that the lens design is at least scaled between the cameras. The
>>FZ3, though, also has a 1/3.2" sensor, so perhaps the lens is the same as
>>the FZ2?
>
>
> David,
>
> I'm pretty sure your assumptions are correct.
>

Where did these odd fractions originate? How come they don't state them
in mm's?

--
John McWilliams
Anonymous
December 27, 2004 8:38:02 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John McWilliams wrote:
[]
>>The FZ2 has a 1/3.2" sensor, and the FZ20 a 1/2.5"

> Where did these odd fractions originate? How come they don't state
> them in mm's?

From the days of Vidicon and other camera tubes used in television.

http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/...

Yes, I would prefer to see sizes in mm.

David
!