Birds Show Birds

Euro Robin

Robin_26th_Mar.jpg
 
Here's where the Panasonic ZS-100 hits its limit - not by *not* being a birding camera, but by showing considerable noise in ideal lighting. I suppressed the noise as much as possible, so it's good enough to keep, but I'll need to get closer. Cropped 50 percent.

Panasonic ZS100, f5.9, 1/320 handheld, ISO 125.
Redwing_Blackbird10_s.jpg
 
Here's where the Panasonic ZS-100 hits its limit - not by *not* being a birding camera, but by showing considerable noise in ideal lighting. I suppressed the noise as much as possible, so it's good enough to keep, but I'll need to get closer. Cropped 50 percent.

Panasonic ZS100, f5.9, 1/320 handheld, ISO 125.
Redwing_Blackbird10_s.jpg

Yeh Dale, a lot of people take "good" shots of birds with these modern compact zooms, which they are pleased with ....... but to get "proper" shots you needs the kit and nothing, IMHO competes, (yet) with a DSLR and a long expensive lens on a good tripod and head etc. ........ which works out at big bucks ........ just the way it has always been and still is
 
Yeh Dale, a lot of people take "good" shots of birds with these modern compact zooms, which they are pleased with ....... but to get "proper" shots you needs the kit and nothing, IMHO competes, (yet) with a DSLR and a long expensive lens on a good tripod and head etc. ........ which works out at big bucks ........ just the way it has always been and still is

My wife gets great shots - much better than this, with her Canon G3x superzoom. Michael Reichmann raved about it on Luminous Landscape.
 
Yeh Dale, a lot of people take "good" shots of birds with these modern compact zooms, which they are pleased with ....... but to get "proper" shots you needs the kit and nothing, IMHO competes, (yet) with a DSLR and a long expensive lens on a good tripod and head etc. ........ which works out at big bucks ........ just the way it has always been and still is
I agree with this view Bill, but nonetheless have sold off my Pentax gear including its excellent long lens. My "compromise" now (used in the above waxwing shot) is m4/3, so far with the Oly 75-300 - compromise some final shot quality for halving the weight. The m4/3 admittedly does not get to "proper" high res sharp shots showing all feather texture etc, perhaps to "fairly good" shots in decent light where ISO 640 is possible even at high shutter speeds (eg. above shot), falling to "sorta good" shots in shadow light where high shutter speeds need ISO 3200 (which usually loses feather texture at this ISO). Still fun to get the best bird shots my equipment can capture given the conditions, and that I am an occasional birder only.... :2thumbs:
 
I'd imagine that there are numerous applications or target markets etc. for images of birds, and I'd guess that there are just as many quality levels demanded in these places. Maybe the erstwhile "National Geographic" quality image still has meaning - I don't know, but while my bird above probably would be totally lost in any sort of competition to be used in an important ad or product imprint, I don't think you'd have to go any better than 4x the quality (i.e. the 600 mm effective zoom of the Canon G3x versus the 250 mm of the ZS-100) to quality for a few offers, especially if the price is right.
 
Not the best quality, but I kept it because the Osprey was looking for fish, and after flying around and not finding any, it settled down on this scrap metal bar in the flat next to the Mt. Pleasant pier, and sat there for the better part of an hour. There have been very few fish lately, coincidental with the city's plans to turn the fishing pier into a private marina this year.

image.jpeg
 
Back
Top