Thanks for the feedback, Bill.
I have no doubt that for *serious* wildlife (birds are wildlife, right?) photography, a high-dollar full-frame DSLR and $18K lens would make significantly better images. And I understand that in the context of how small and light and easy to carry our compact cameras are, the prospect of a DSLR (non-super) telephoto lens sounds daunting and unweildy. But look at it from the perspective of carrying (and paying for) a D4 and 800mm lens - that's a truly painful proposition!
The D7100 with it's 1.3 crop and a (for example) 70-300 only gives me the same reach I already have. A 300mm f/4 on a Nikon 1 body gives me 810mm f/4, which sounds like the better reach and faster aperture that I'm looking for, and I don't see a way to get that reach & speed with any DSLR at a reasonable price.
This is what I'm looking for, thank you! Although I'm surprised that you would need f/8 to get a sharp image from the 70-200. Very surprised. Perhaps it's the crop? I wouldn't be cropping in post, I'm letting the camera do it for me with the smaller sensor.
Perhaps a rent/borrow situation is in my future.
Kevin - I have just bought a D7100, to upgrade my D300 - to upgrade to the new 24meg sensor, new engine, better low light performance and a x 1.3 in camera crop, (i.e. to get more pixel on mu images) - but only time will tell.
so with the D7100 + Nikon 300mm f4 plus Nikon TC x1.4 I get 1.5 x 1.3 x 1.4 x 300mm = 819mm at f5.6 and 12 meg plus on the in camera crop image
I need to get out "early" morning with the set up on my tripod to give it a chance so I will have to report back in a week or so once my little "feathered" friends have co-operated a little.
My conclusions are, (I have been attempting serious (amateur) bird photography for over a year now and have tried the Nikon V1 set up, a Fuji HS30 EXR which goes up to 800mm and the Nikon DX DSLRs).
1). There is no substitute for good Nikon glass = ££££'s
2). The better the Nikon DX DSLR body the happier I am = ££££'s
3). Bridge cameras are really a waste of time for anything other that bringing "big" birds a little closer - IMHO just no good for anything in the distance.
4). Once you put long Nikon glass, say 300mm on a V1 body it does get a little unwieldy.
5). The V1 with the 70 300mm Nikon VR zoom is OK/good and certainly works as a carry around plus the "zoom" allows you to find the subject and focus reasonably quickly on it.
6). If you want consistent results, with good IQ and speed of focus, just accept the fact that you need to spend money on a DSLR, good glass and a (heavy-ish) tripod.
Conclusion_2 - if you do not want to spend loads of money on a DSLR plus good Nikon glass and have no intention of moving from a "compact" to a DSLR - just stop at the V1/2 and the very good Nikon f4.5/5.6 70mm 300mm VR zoom, (i.e.no point in sticking expensive Nikon primes and the 70/200mm f2.8 zoom on the end of the V1)............. the next step up, (£££'s), would be the Panasonic 100mm - 300mm on a M43 - (never used this set up but I have read that it is good)
If you are serious about bird photography the only way is to speak to your bank manager/wife .........