What Kind of Camera Do You Use?

I've recently gotten a Sony H50 (my sister now has my H2). It has a x15 zoom and a great macro so it's wonderful for bird photos and also insect and flower close ups. It has a tilting LCD screen which I loved on my old Olympus 5050Z.

I have a Canon PowerShot S3 IS. You can use it on Auto for point and shoot or get fancy with some manual settings. I take most of my bird pics on Auto. There is a 12X zoom and a very good macro function. I also got a teleconverter lens from Canon (the only one that fits this camera) which brings the zoom to 18X. The 2 negatives are that the aperture only goes to F8 and there are only 6 megapixels. Although I would love to get a DSLR some day when I have the $$$, this has served me very well.

And we know you have beautiful photos...

Good to know! (*adds "tilting LCD screen" to wish list of features*)

Critterologist, the PowerShot S3IS has a tilting LCD screen. I use it a lot.

No tilting screen on it... but I just discovered that Amazon has the P. Lumix DMN-FZ28 for $265 (silver)... and I'm not sure I can resist that. (It's this year's successor to the FZ18, with a little more resolution and HD video capability.)

cbl51 - when I am taking bird pics, I use a scene mode called Landscape + Portrait. The camera seems to focus more reliably in this mode.

Thanks for the info, beclu727. I will certainly try that out. My camera does have a really good macro function

I've been using a Nikon D200 (it is a DSLR) with a Nikkor 18-200mm lens. For the technicalish people, here's the full lens name: AF-S Zoom-Nikkor ED 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF DX VR

Basically it's a great lens for all around use. It's got the vibration reduction, which is good for me since I don't use a tripod. Good for close ups, landscapes, zoom. Of course, it's certainly not the BEST lens for macro, nor for telephoto.

I like it because I can use it for pictures of people, pets, plants (the 3 P's LOL), it took great photos in Glacier National Park, and yes I use it for birds. But with only 200mm it is not the greatest for birding. It will at least get me a good enough shot to pass the ID test in most cases! And that's all I really want - if I was looking to take award winning bird photos, I'd buy a 400-500mm lens. Of course if the bird is close enough you can get really good pictures with this one.

As for the camera body (Nikon D200) it's fantastic. It's been called a "semi-pro" camera. Basically I like it because I know diddly about cameras, so I just put everything on auto and then point and shoot! My boyfriend (who actually owns the thing) likes to be able to tweak the aperature, shutter speed, white balance, blah blah blah. It's got 10.2 pixels.

I don't know how much it retails for now - since Nikon has released the D300 I am sure the price has dropped on the D200. I found one listed for about $800. Oh yes, and the lens retails for around $750, though you can find it for cheaper if you look around. I just saw it for $500 on one website.

Heidi

As far as superzoom lenses go that 18-200 nikon is pretty nice. I have one, and it will be a great travel lens when we have our honeymoon in Panama. It does have its limitations, but given the range it covers, it's hard to top for an all purpose lens on a cropped sensor body.

I have a Nikon D300.

The 18-200 is pretty nice and I love it as a walk-around lens. I did notice a distortion on the 200mm end. If you want, I think I kept a few from the summer that I could post. Let me know.

Did you all know about these kinds of mounts? I did not until I got a book for Christmas on bird photography.

http://www.cameta.com/index.cfm/fa:display.showprod/productid:29943?utm_source=googlebase&utm_medium=base

I immediately thought of Rose sitting in her car last year.

or… a hollywood style car mount! LOL
http://www.filmtools.com/carmounts.html

That first ones pretty neat Marna!

Yah, I thought so too. I could so use that at my Mom's. BEWARE tufted titmouse!!!

My window mount is very very fancy and has served me well! Sorry for the poor quality but I used a flash in the dark!! LOL!

Wow Rose yours is more high tech than mine (smiles). Mine is just the car door with my hand holding the lens like I'm shooting the 8 ball in the corner pocket. I need to upgrade.





This message was edited Dec 27, 2008 7:25 PM

This message was edited Dec 27, 2008 7:26 PM

LOL Met!! I drag that stupid bean bag every place I go!!

are you using rice or beans, rose?

I used some plastic doll pellets...keeps the bugs away!

Nikon D90

Okay, I've just got to add my 2 cents worth to this discussion. Like everybody else, I've been on a multi-year quest to find the perfect digital camera for bird photography. Of course, money doesn't grow on the same trees as the birds I'd like to photograph.

When I first started taking bird photos, I had an older Olympus digital camera. It only had a 3x optical zoom, which was nowhere near adequate.

Two years ago, I bit the bullet and bought a Canon Rebel XTI SLR ($750) and a Canon 70-300mm IS zoom lens (another $600), but 300mm still wasn't enough zoom power.

I recently sold my 70-300mm lens on eBay; and considered buying the a Sigma 50-500mm lens . Some of the folks here with SLR's are using that same lens; but it currently sells for around $1100. I really didn't want to spend that much money; so I've invested in a new point and shoot camera with almost the same zoom power.

About three months ago, I bought my latest digital camera. It's a Panasonic DMC-FZ28 that has an 18x optical zoom. At maximum zoom, that's roughly equivilent to 480mm. (The camera also has digital zoom; but as others have said, you lose too much resolution with digital zooming.) When I bought my new Panasonic camera, it sold for $329 on Amazon; but the price has dropped about $60 since then.

So far, I've been MUCH happier with the picture from my Panasonic camera DMC-FZ28 than I was with the ones I took with my Canon SLR setup. The only thing I miss about using my SLR is that the off/on and zoom functions operated more quickly. Other than that, my new camera has most of the same exposure control settings; and I think the photo quality is actually better with it. It also had a pretty good movie mode, which my SLR didn't have.

Currently, 18x is the most powerful optical zoom of any point and shoot camera on the market. It's not bad for bird photos; but even the 500mm zoom range is a bit whimpy for distant shots. Which camera you utimately buy is up to you; but I'd definated recommend chacking out the Panasonic DMC-FZ28 before you make your final decision.

That's great Jane! I think for most people, a point and shoot with that kind of zoom range is ideal!

I have the Panasonic Lumix FZ18 (18x optical zoom and 8 mps) and agree it takes some really nice pictures. I recently upgraded to the Canon 50d. At first, I thought the same thing as NM_Jane, the Canon pictures were a little soft as compared to the Panasonic, but quickly realized that if shooting JPEG, which is all that I shot with the Panasonic, the Panasonic does lots of in camera processing. I also started out shooting JPEG with the 50 and quickly realized two things that cause my shots to not be that great: first is me the photographer and my skills, and second is I realized is that I had no in camera processing settings. I was shooting in the picture setting - Neutral - which has "0" in camera processing. I later began tweeking the settings and getting better results. However, I am now shooting in the RAW and doing all the post processing in Photoshop - much better in my opinion. Mind you, you can shoot in the RAW format with the Panasonic camera also and post process but as far as the camera sensors and lenses go - no comparison - Canon hands down.

I have the 300mm F4 L lens with the tele converter, which puts this lens at a 35mm equivalent of 420mm and if you add in the crop factor of the camera, its at 680mm. There's no shutter lag like the Panasonic where I've missed some shots.

If I had to recommend a point and shoot camera to someone it would be the Panasonic Lumix FZ18 or 28; the FZ28 has 10mps and HD connection for tvs). As a matter of fact I still shoot some pictures with the Panasonic. But it just doesn't compare to the 50d and my L lens.

This message was edited Dec 29, 2008 3:06 PM

I've been looking, lately, and the Panasonic Lumix FZ18 was my first choice from reading reviews and seeing its very nice suite of features for both still and video photography. But then I went to Ritz and held one... and held the Nikon Coolpix equivalent... and my opinion changed. The Nikon is just a bit more compact, and for my hand that means I can easily shoot and reach all the controls one-handed. The Lumix is just a bit too big for my hand, for easy use. I know I'd have to deal with that slightly awkward size when I go up to a DSLR, but I'm trying to weigh the additional features and capabilities of the Lumix against the ease of use of the Coolpix.

If I had even a slightly larger hand, I wouldn't hesitate to choose the Panasonic Lumix FZ18. :-)

Now, I may just see what the next release of the CoolPix is loaded with...

Please join us for more camera discussion on this new thread

http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/937664/

critter, I read about the Nikon Coolpix P80 a couple of days ago and was sorely tempted, as it's selling here at the moment at less than half the prime lens I want for my DSLR D40. It's still £200, but the lens at the cheapest is £458. What this lens gives me is the ability to get very large images of very small bugs, lol, which I want. But the Coolpix, with the same 10.1MP but obviously on a much smaller sensor, has 18x Optical zoom and pics can be taken from as close as 1cm.

Zoom is one thing, but the ability to be able to take pics closer is a distinct advantage, and the Coolpix are well known for their ability to take very good closeups. The prime lens for the SLR is 105mm (1.5x equiv. 157mm) and can be taken from about 11" from the sensor, or a working distance of 6" from lens. I would also like a longer zoom lens for distant bird shots as my 55-200mm is equivalent to max. zoom of 300m, minimum shooting distance about 3' 5" which isn't the best for small bugs.

What the Coolpix does is cover both short and long, with 35mm equiv. of 27 to 486mm so would be a very handy camera for some occasions. I still think I would prefer the versatility of the DSLR for most things though. The Nikon D40X isn't awkward to handle, it's one of the lightest but I still worried about the total weight with the lens being around 780gms I think, (454gms to a pound weight). With the neck strap at the correct length, it hangs about around my waist level, and can be supported with no trouble with hands either side, and is not at all difficult to hold up when using. I had more trouble holding a small Sony DSCV1 in one hand than I have with this, it causes no real problems as the weight is balanced out. The controls are in perfect position to use too, and it looks like the Coolpix P80 has adopted some of this.

http://www.europe-nikon.com/product/en_GB/products/broad/1596/overview.html

I can't afford either at the moment though!

canon powershot SD950 IS....is this a good camera?

Hey CC, come on over to the current thread.

http://davesgarden.com/community/forums/t/937664/