I like to take pictures of wildlife with a Fuji s8000 with an 18x zoom. This camera is good but it has a lot of noise. I want to upgrade it but I am not sure whether a picture from a superzoom such as the Canon sx10 fully zoomed would be better than a cropped picture from an entry level dslr with a 300mm lens.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Which is best, a superzoom camera or a dslr for wildlife photography?
- Thread starter David H
- Start date
The digital noise and overall quality of an image from an SX10is are both quite good until you go into the digital zoom range. Then things go down hill fast.
But if you stay within the Optical zoom range and shoot at the highest quality setting and a relatively low ISO (400 or less), you'll probably find that your results are outstanding.
There are a couple of examples on my Flickr page. One shows the lack of quality when at 48X (digital zoom) while the other shows the outstanding quality one can achieve at max optical zoom.
These were both shot with my Canon S3is, which is two generations older that the SX10 and only 6 megapixels.
You question regarding comparison with a "cropped picture from an entry level dslr with a 300mm lens" would depend almost entirely on the quality of the 300mm being used, and the sensor of the "entry level" camera.
But in my experience, the S3is (and certainly the SX10is - which I sell and have extensive experience with - will be superior across the board.
Of course, there will always be the argument that a larger sensor will always be better. But that has not been my experience. Cheap and big does not automatically outperform high quality and small.
But if you stay within the Optical zoom range and shoot at the highest quality setting and a relatively low ISO (400 or less), you'll probably find that your results are outstanding.
There are a couple of examples on my Flickr page. One shows the lack of quality when at 48X (digital zoom) while the other shows the outstanding quality one can achieve at max optical zoom.
These were both shot with my Canon S3is, which is two generations older that the SX10 and only 6 megapixels.
You question regarding comparison with a "cropped picture from an entry level dslr with a 300mm lens" would depend almost entirely on the quality of the 300mm being used, and the sensor of the "entry level" camera.
But in my experience, the S3is (and certainly the SX10is - which I sell and have extensive experience with - will be superior across the board.
Of course, there will always be the argument that a larger sensor will always be better. But that has not been my experience. Cheap and big does not automatically outperform high quality and small.
I'm not a great wildlife photographer or anything, but I agree with fhotoace completely. Some of my pics are taken with a point and shoot camera, but only the ones where the animals can barely called wild any more. Okay, the 18X zoom will let you reach out and touch some of the animals, but if you want to make more than a 4x6 print, you will find that the image quality from the tiny sensor really lets you down.
An entry level DSLR will have a sensor that is about FIFTEEN times bigger than a superzoom point'n'shoot. You can do a lot of cropping on an image from a larger sensor that you just can't do with a P&S.
Definitely go for the DSLR with something like a 70-300 lens, for starters. Most of these were taken with the Nikon 70-300 VR lens:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/tags/wildlife/
An entry level DSLR will have a sensor that is about FIFTEEN times bigger than a superzoom point'n'shoot. You can do a lot of cropping on an image from a larger sensor that you just can't do with a P&S.
Definitely go for the DSLR with something like a 70-300 lens, for starters. Most of these were taken with the Nikon 70-300 VR lens:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/samfeinstein/tags/wildlife/