50x and 60x zoom cameras

A number of bridge cameras with a giant zoom range have been recently
announced. Tiny little sensor (1/2.3") and who knows how the lens performs. Is
anybody using such cameras and how usable are the results?
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site

On 11/01/2014 09:48, Alfred Molon wrote:
A number of bridge cameras with a giant zoom range have been recently
announced. Tiny little sensor (1/2.3") and who knows how the lens performs. Is
anybody using such cameras and how usable are the results?

Can't comment on such large-range optical zooms, but the Sony HX200V I
have offers a 30x zoom, for 27 to 810 mm (equivalent), at 18 MP.
Comparing it to the 200 mm optical (300 mm equivalent) on the Nikon
D5200 (24 MP), there does seem to be some extra detail, but it can get
lost in the JPEG compression (as you are pixel peeping to see the
difference). Even at 800 mm hand-holding requires care, and with the
2:1 digital zoom offered by the Sony - meaning a 1600 mm equivalent -
hand holding is problematic at best, very difficult most of the time,
even though the camera has optical image stabilisation. You really need
a tripod, defeating "small camera" advantages.

I haven't used it a lot at the wider-end of the zoom - but the
performance was "adequate". As an experiment, I used it as my only
camera on a four-day trip to the Netherlands and was reasonably happy
with the results. I know these are only snapshots....

http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09...bum/index.html

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

I'd be pleased with the shots. Which, if any, were any taken at the longer
focal lengths?


"David Taylor" wrote in message
...
On 11/01/2014 09:48, Alfred Molon wrote:
A number of bridge cameras with a giant zoom range have been recently
announced. Tiny little sensor (1/2.3") and who knows how the lens
performs. Is
anybody using such cameras and how usable are the results?

Can't comment on such large-range optical zooms, but the Sony HX200V I
have offers a 30x zoom, for 27 to 810 mm (equivalent), at 18 MP. Comparing
it to the 200 mm optical (300 mm equivalent) on the Nikon D5200 (24 MP),
there does seem to be some extra detail, but it can get lost in the JPEG
compression (as you are pixel peeping to see the difference). Even at 800
mm hand-holding requires care, and with the 2:1 digital zoom offered by
the Sony - meaning a 1600 mm equivalent - hand holding is problematic at
best, very difficult most of the time, even though the camera has optical
image stabilisation. You really need a tripod, defeating "small camera"
advantages.

I haven't used it a lot at the wider-end of the zoom - but the performance
was "adequate". As an experiment, I used it as my only camera on a
four-day trip to the Netherlands and was reasonably happy with the
results. I know these are only snapshots....

http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09...bum/index.html

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

David Taylor wrote:
On 11/01/2014 09:48, Alfred Molon wrote:
A number of bridge cameras with a giant zoom range have been recently
announced. Tiny little sensor (1/2.3") and who knows how the lens
performs. Is
anybody using such cameras and how usable are the results?

Can't comment on such large-range optical zooms, but the Sony HX200V I
have offers a 30x zoom, for 27 to 810 mm (equivalent), at 18 MP.
Comparing it to the 200 mm optical (300 mm equivalent) on the Nikon
D5200 (24 MP), there does seem to be some extra detail, but it can get
lost in the JPEG compression (as you are pixel peeping to see the
difference). Even at 800 mm hand-holding requires care, and with the
2:1 digital zoom offered by the Sony - meaning a 1600 mm equivalent -
hand holding is problematic at best, very difficult most of the time,
even though the camera has optical image stabilisation. You really need
a tripod, defeating "small camera" advantages.

I haven't used it a lot at the wider-end of the zoom - but the
performance was "adequate". As an experiment, I used it as my only
camera on a four-day trip to the Netherlands and was reasonably happy
with the results. I know these are only snapshots....

http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09...bum/index.html


Hi,

Although some of your Dutch pictures lack detail, one cannot tell if
that is due to the e-mail attachment and the PC screen. In any event,
the pictures are interesting, albeit in just a few locations.
A dish in one picture says: Het weer en de Vrouwen zijn niet te
vertrouwen = The weather and women are not to be trusted. I had a
problem once while living in Utrecht, NL. I said trouwen (to marry)
instead of vertrouwen (to trust), to a lady fiend, and it was
uncomfortable when I realized my error and quickly explained. I was only
there a few weeks when that occurred; by 2 months or so my Dutch was fluent.

Not being a birder, I find that the 5X zoom in my camera is sufficient
for almost all my picture taking. The zoom with 10 toes often helps in
the field, while selective cropping and then printing also helps.

Thanks for sharing your pictures.

Mort Linder

On 1/11/2014 9:26 AM, David Taylor wrote:
On 11/01/2014 09:48, Alfred Molon wrote:
A number of bridge cameras with a giant zoom range have been recently
announced. Tiny little sensor (1/2.3") and who knows how the lens
performs. Is
anybody using such cameras and how usable are the results?

Can't comment on such large-range optical zooms, but the Sony HX200V I
have offers a 30x zoom, for 27 to 810 mm (equivalent), at 18 MP.
Comparing it to the 200 mm optical (300 mm equivalent) on the Nikon
D5200 (24 MP), there does seem to be some extra detail, but it can get
lost in the JPEG compression (as you are pixel peeping to see the
difference). Even at 800 mm hand-holding requires care, and with the
2:1 digital zoom offered by the Sony - meaning a 1600 mm equivalent -
hand holding is problematic at best, very difficult most of the time,
even though the camera has optical image stabilisation. You really need
a tripod, defeating "small camera" advantages.

I haven't used it a lot at the wider-end of the zoom - but the
performance was "adequate". As an experiment, I used it as my only
camera on a four-day trip to the Netherlands and was reasonably happy
with the results. I know these are only snapshots....

http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09...bum/index.html


I disagree. They are much better than ordinary snapshots. They show
composition, which is the result of thought and planning. Indeed, they
are interesting to view.

--
PeterN

On 12/01/2014 03:21, PeterN wrote:
On 1/11/2014 9:26 AM, David Taylor wrote:
[]
http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09...bum/index.html


I disagree. They are much better than ordinary snapshots. They show
composition, which is the result of thought and planning. Indeed, they
are interesting to view.

Thanks! Maybe I meant "snapshot" quality, but I make no pretence to be
a "good" photographer - perhaps technically competent. Of course, that
is a small subset - which should raise the average level (all being well!).

--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On 11/01/2014 21:00, John Keiser wrote:
I'd be pleased with the shots. Which, if any, were any taken at the longer
focal lengths?

I don't think any of those were, John. I have put up some originals
(likely out of the camera) shots at or very near 810 mm focal length he

http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09...0mm-shots.html

Be warned of the JPEG artefacts on the images, not visible in normal
viewing, only if pixel peeping. This is an 18 MB camera (4896 a 3672
pixels). I would have preferred fewer pixels, to be honest!
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

This one is for the 'duck:


http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09...07-1215-26.jpg

URL may have wrapped.
--
Cheers,
David
Web: http://www.satsignal.eu

On 2014-01-12 11:53:36 +0000, David Taylor
said:

This one is for the 'duck:


http://www.satsignal.eu/Hols/2012/09...07-1215-26.jpg

URL

may have wrapped.

Your salute is appreciated sir.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

In article , Mort says...
I said trouwen (to marry)
instead of vertrouwen (to trust), to a lady fiend, and it was
uncomfortable when I realized my error and quickly explained.

There is a similar word in German ("trauen"), spelled differently but
pronounced in the same way. The meaning can be both trust and marry.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site