Take a look at the Flickr camera finder ... It'll give you some examples of other photos users have taken with it.
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
OT: Looking for camera advice : OT
Sex God
Hi Pete
have a look at Fuji's Finepix s100fs. It's a bridge camera with a 400 equivilant telephoto lens and allows for full manual control of the camera.
It also only comes in at about £350.
Have a look at Ultimate Nature Gear for some great wildlife hides for the kind of photography you are talking about.
have a look at Fuji's Finepix s100fs. It's a bridge camera with a 400 equivilant telephoto lens and allows for full manual control of the camera.
It also only comes in at about £350.
Have a look at Ultimate Nature Gear for some great wildlife hides for the kind of photography you are talking about.
Sex God
Quote by dirtydoggers
If your interest lies mostly in wild beastie photographs, you might find the following link useful.
My only attempt at bird photography. According to the book, this would be a Tawny owl?
LMFAO :lol2: now thats what i call an owl, though i would suggest more of a 'tabby owl' ? :shock:
thanks for the link, very interesting :thumbup:
Sexpert
Hi, I would check out this review first if I was you...
To be honest, if you are interested in animal photography you will find you outgrow the S2000 very very quickly, when you discover its limitations...
That will be £250 wasted. If I’m honest, I would really really really consider a DSLR. I have shot deer ect with my 70-200mm L2.8 lens with a x2 converter and even that was a struggle to get decent shots of real wild animals.
Honesty has to be the best policy, and with the DSLR you can always get better glass and faster glass as your hobby and shooting skills improve. With the S2000 you’re always stuck with that glass! And the glass and an eye for a good photo is what makes the difference, not megapixels or shooting modes, or other gimmicks...
Sorry for the ramble, but wouldn't want to splash out and be disappointed with the limitations of your camera in a few months time.
Rgds
A
To be honest, if you are interested in animal photography you will find you outgrow the S2000 very very quickly, when you discover its limitations...
That will be £250 wasted. If I’m honest, I would really really really consider a DSLR. I have shot deer ect with my 70-200mm L2.8 lens with a x2 converter and even that was a struggle to get decent shots of real wild animals.
Honesty has to be the best policy, and with the DSLR you can always get better glass and faster glass as your hobby and shooting skills improve. With the S2000 you’re always stuck with that glass! And the glass and an eye for a good photo is what makes the difference, not megapixels or shooting modes, or other gimmicks...
Sorry for the ramble, but wouldn't want to splash out and be disappointed with the limitations of your camera in a few months time.
Rgds
A
Quote by Suffolk-cplVery true, but you're talking about a lens that costs around £1200, an extender worth about £200 and a camera body that could be anything up to several thousand quid. I have the same lens and mainly shoot with a 5D mkII, but it took me years to justify that sort of outlay.
To be honest, if you are interested in animal photography you will find you outgrow the S2000 very very quickly, when you discover its limitations...
That will be £250 wasted. If I’m honest, I would really really really consider a DSLR. I have shot deer ect with my 70-200mm L2.8 lens with a x2 converter and even that was a struggle to get decent shots of real wild animals.
I'd still recommend the initial SLR investment though - you can collect the lenses as you go ... you won't get very good animal shots with a compact unless you're in the zoo.
To explain further, forget about the 400mm zoom ... you have to consider the size of the sensor the light is hitting, the quality of the image processor, and the amount of light that is actually getting through that lens - You're quite capable of getting great shots with a compact, but you will be severely limited to what sort of photography you can do.
Sexpert
Quote by WaterpistolVery true, but you're talking about a lens that costs around £1200, an extender worth about £200 and a camera body that could be anything up to several thousand quid. I have the same lens and mainly shoot with a 5D mkII, but it took me years to justify that sort of outlay.
To be honest, if you are interested in animal photography you will find you outgrow the S2000 very very quickly, when you discover its limitations...
That will be £250 wasted. If I’m honest, I would really really really consider a DSLR. I have shot deer ect with my 70-200mm L2.8 lens with a x2 converter and even that was a struggle to get decent shots of real wild animals.
I'd still recommend the initial SLR investment though - you can collect the lenses as you go ... you won't get very good animal shots with a compact unless you're in the zoo.
To explain further, forget about the 400mm zoom ... you have to consider the size of the sensor the light is hitting, the quality of the image processor, and the amount of light that is actually getting through that lens - You're quite capable of getting great shots with a compact, but you will be severely limited to what sort of photography you can do.
I agree, and wasn't trying to justify the cost of some posh glass
(Mrs Suffolk is still in shock over that one)i was just trying to point out I honestly beleive the OP would be very disapointed with his wildlife photos from a bridge/compact after a short while, and that a DSLR with a cheap 400mm zoom and a cheap tripod would be much better as a starter for a system that will give years of pleasure (and which can be expanded).
Sex God
AAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH 
:banghead: :banghead:
:lol2: sorry guys, I've been trying to take all this on board, and i have to agree, a DSLR would be great, however I've been trawling all the auction sites, cheapo gear sites, even the swap sites, but i just cant quite make the grade so it really is going to have to be a 'Bridge' type camera. you see i have a fixed budget that i just cannot go over.
However having read and re-read this thread, i have decided that i can afford a reasonably good Bridge type camera.
I am now looking at a 20x zoom, but cannot find one with an f setting lower than f2.8, will this give me enough "light to lens" in dawn / dusk conditions i wonder?
I can get a x20 zoom f2 camera for under now to me, if it does what i need, then i'm more than happy with that.
Thanks all for your input by the way, it's been an education, and not just in photography ;o)
:banghead: :banghead: :lol2: sorry guys, I've been trying to take all this on board, and i have to agree, a DSLR would be great, however I've been trawling all the auction sites, cheapo gear sites, even the swap sites, but i just cant quite make the grade so it really is going to have to be a 'Bridge' type camera. you see i have a fixed budget that i just cannot go over.
However having read and re-read this thread, i have decided that i can afford a reasonably good Bridge type camera.
I am now looking at a 20x zoom, but cannot find one with an f setting lower than f2.8, will this give me enough "light to lens" in dawn / dusk conditions i wonder?
I can get a x20 zoom f2 camera for under now to me, if it does what i need, then i'm more than happy with that.
Thanks all for your input by the way, it's been an education, and not just in photography ;o)
Sex God
Quote by Pete_sw
I can get a x20 zoom f2 camera for under now to me, if it does what i need, then i'm more than happy with that.
I'm not overly familar with F-stop capabilities on stills cameras as i'm more of a TV camera geek. At F2.8 i'd probably be dropping a bit of gain onto a TV cam (and going 'grrrrrrr' as i know i'll have noise artifacts) or looking for a big fekin light to switch on.
I believe stills cameras have an extra trick if you can fiddle with the ISO settings, which is the equivalent of swapping to a different type of film in old 35mm cams. Might be worth having a read up on this and seeing if and how well your prospective new toy does this.
Sexpert
The trouble with F settings on compacts and bridge cameras is the sensor size is also much smaller than on most DSLRs. What does this mean? Well, a shot taken with a 200mm lens at 200mm at 2.8 on a DSLR, will give a fastish shutter speed and a nice depth of field with bags of bokeh (nice desired blurr). On a compact at 200mm at will not give the same DOF or bokeh.
Also, upping the ISO will half your shutter speed each time, but at a cost, increase in digital noise.
If you are going down a bridge camera route, try and take some test shots with one at Jessops first. You realy need to be happy with it's capability and not what you think its capability will be!
Hope this helps.
Also, upping the ISO will half your shutter speed each time, but at a cost, increase in digital noise.
If you are going down a bridge camera route, try and take some test shots with one at Jessops first. You realy need to be happy with it's capability and not what you think its capability will be!
Hope this helps.
Sexpert
Quote by meat2pleaseu
I'm not overly familar with F-stop capabilities on stills cameras as i'm more of a TV camera geek. At F2.8 i'd probably be dropping a bit of gain onto a TV cam (and going 'grrrrrrr' as i know i'll have noise artifacts) or looking for a big fekin light to switch on.
Not to familiar with movie cameras, but F2.8 on a still camera is very fast, with a very wide open aperture, meaning less light is required, and almost no noise on the shot.
Sex God
Quote by Suffolk-cpl
I'm not overly familar with F-stop capabilities on stills cameras as i'm more of a TV camera geek. At F2.8 i'd probably be dropping a bit of gain onto a TV cam (and going 'grrrrrrr' as i know i'll have noise artifacts) or looking for a big fekin light to switch on.
Not to familiar with movie cameras, but F2.8 on a still camera is very fast, with a very wide open aperture, meaning less light is required, and almost no noise on the shot.
:thumbup: that’s what I needed to know
A friend of mine just lent me a 'Bridge' camera with a 7x optical zoom and that is woefully inadequate for what I would like to do so am now almost sure I'm going to go far a 20x with at least f2.8 capability.
Any lack of range after that will have to be compensated for with honing back the old stalking skills, which when I think about it was part of the exercise anyway
Sex God
Quote by Suffolk-cpl
I'm not overly familar with F-stop capabilities on stills cameras as i'm more of a TV camera geek. At F2.8 i'd probably be dropping a bit of gain onto a TV cam (and going 'grrrrrrr' as i know i'll have noise artifacts) or looking for a big fekin light to switch on.
Not to familiar with movie cameras, but F2.8 on a still camera is very fast, with a very wide open aperture, meaning less light is required, and almost no noise on the shot.
On vid cameras the iris and shutter speed are usually totally independant. You open/close the iris to control the light while the shutter speed is usually left stock, unless you're looking to control fast or slow motion problems or to create an 'in camera' effect (which doesn't happen much as you're better off faking it in post on the whole).
stills cameras and film cameras sort of need you to use a different head as the stills cam is looking for that perfect moment while the film cam needs to control it over a long period. This possibly explains why Paps and general Togs are pretty much hated by news crews as the c*nt$ just wander right in front of of TV crew for their perfect second without a care, yet whinge like moaning bitches if anyone dares approach within 10 feet of the edge of their shooting zone
At F2.8, your depth of field is very limited... you'd better have good focus speed (manual or auto), and this is not easy with wildlife.
Remember this rule of thumb.... you should be spending at least 1.5 times as much on lenses as the camera.
I used a 5D MkII and a 1D MkII to avoid changing lenses when shooting wildlife... one with a 400mm L zoom and one with a 200mm prime
Invest in the lenses above the camera every time.
And don't get suckered into the megapixel race... there are actually many reasons why higher megapixel is WORSE quality, but I don't want to go into mega technical detail. If you get above 8mp you'll be fine for almost all applications.
Remember this rule of thumb.... you should be spending at least 1.5 times as much on lenses as the camera.
I used a 5D MkII and a 1D MkII to avoid changing lenses when shooting wildlife... one with a 400mm L zoom and one with a 200mm prime
Invest in the lenses above the camera every time.
And don't get suckered into the megapixel race... there are actually many reasons why higher megapixel is WORSE quality, but I don't want to go into mega technical detail. If you get above 8mp you'll be fine for almost all applications.
Sexpert
Totally agree, but for those on a budget, I still think going down the DSLR route is still money well spent.
Also, PLEASE note that F2.8 is the BEST you'll get on a zoom. It will not be F2.8 across the entire zoom range(or unlikely to be!)
Finally, F stops are not absolute... they are ratio... F2.8 on one lens is not the same as F2.8 on another, so be wary of that.
Above all, with wildlife, the single biggest factor to getting a great shot isn't your equipment. It's your patience. Nothing will give you finer shots than that.
Finally, F stops are not absolute... they are ratio... F2.8 on one lens is not the same as F2.8 on another, so be wary of that.
Above all, with wildlife, the single biggest factor to getting a great shot isn't your equipment. It's your patience. Nothing will give you finer shots than that.
Sex God
Quote by meat2pleaseu
Meaty, if you are going down the Canon route, try and get the extra money together and go for a 450D rather than a 1000D, the 1000D is too limited with its auto-focusing.
I'm actually thinking of going for this offer on the D60 dual lens kit
Finally ordered it today (£430 :bounce: ) , collecting it Wednesday then waiting for the blood class 6 SD cards to turn up (hopefully before i sod off on holiday). I'll let you know what i think of it when i get back :mrgreen:
Sexpert
Yippeeeee, :thumbup:
Well done, a DSLR will serve you well. :P :P
Now we have converted you to that, we can pick on you for going down the Nikon route and not the Canon !!
:smackbottom: :smackbottom:
Only kidding, the D60 is a great camera from what I have heard!
Don't forget to post some of your work when you get back!
Well done, a DSLR will serve you well. :P :P
Now we have converted you to that, we can pick on you for going down the Nikon route and not the Canon !!
:smackbottom: :smackbottom: Only kidding, the D60 is a great camera from what I have heard!
Don't forget to post some of your work when you get back!
Sex God
Quote by Bill0305
Theres not a lot else to be said other than a very important factor - a digital camera, you can turn the shutter sound off so you have a silent running camera - pretty important if your trying to shoot a deer......
Happy shooting...
I find it difficult to hold the camera and the gun at the same time :twisted:
