Anyone here with a DSLR also using a P&S super zoom

[irse]

I was thinking about getting a Canon SX40 for vacations. I have a D300s and a 16-85 plus a 70-300 VR that I was planning on using as my vacation camera and lens set. But haveing two young kids (4 and 9) and having to lug around their luggage, I was thinking about just getting a super zoom. for places like animal parks, zoo, etc. Then I could just leave the D300s at home. It would make traveling a lot lighter. I know the IQ would be a step down but may be good enough.

My main question would be about shutter lag, AF and using a EVF after using a optical viewfinder for so many years. I know there will be some shutter lag although probably now better than when I was just using a P&S. My main concern is taht I've been using an optical viewfinder for so long, how is the EVF?

So does anyone here have a super zoom P&S and how do you like it? Do you regret your purchase or would you do the same thing again? I guess I can try it and see if I like it but would rather not do that if I can gather enough info. Thanks

 

[Kaido]

I was using my T2i & SX200 (thin zoomy P&S) for awhile. I ended up donating the SX200 to my dad because he was camera-less, but it was a great combo & I would highly recommend it. Sometimes you just want to whip out a camera and shoot whatever you want without having to swap out lenses or lug something huge around. For kids, you can't really beat it - you just can't switch from a wide to a telephoto fast enough to keep up with how quickly they run around. The EVF on the SX40 swivels too, which is really handy for different situations. Plus it gives you a backup camera "just in case".

 

[corkyg]

Been doing that for over 2 years. When I travel abroad, I can take my superzoom in my laptop bag, and it does the job for me. I am on my 3rd Canon SZ - now the SX30-IS. I plan to upgrade to the SX40-IS. I leave my EOS 5D II at home - such a load with 2-3 lenses.

A lot depends on what you need to do with the images. The SS is up to my task needs, and no regrets. Today, air travel is too restrictive to bother with a heavy camera bag.

 

[MadScientist]

I haven't purchased a P&S superzoom yet. Waiting for BF prices. Here's a comparison review of a few: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q311travelzoomgrouptest/

I am leaning towards the Nikon S9100 but some bad reviews on freezing issues and having to RMA it. Cheapest I've found it is at Amazon and Newegg for $240. shipped. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004M8SVFM/ref=asc_df_B004M8SVFM1755455/?tag=dpreviewbuybox-20&creative=394997&creativeASIN=B004M8SVFM&linkCode=asn

 

[DaWhim]

i had a panasonic zs3 for superzom but it got stolen in colombia.

i would love to buy the zs10 as a replacement, zoom even more than my zs3.

 

[Throckmorton]

I don't have an SLR but I love my Sony HX1 superzoom. The current version is the HX100V. It also has GPS.

The EVF is great. Unlike most EVFs, it's set up so you can see it properly even wearing glasses. It also works through polarized sunglasses at any angle. The res is very high too, one reviewer said he thought it was an OVF.

EVFs have a huge advantage... you can take pictures into the sun and specular reflections of the sun without damaging your retina. I'm not sure how it is that photographers using OVFs are stupid enough to take sunset pics. Hopefully they at least don't look directly at the sun.

 

[irse]

Thanks. I think I'll try it and see how I like it.

 

[Munky]

I would go a step further and recommend a camera that can fit unobtrusively inside your pocket. Lately I've been using my N8 phone camera on vacations instead of lugging around my DSLR, and I found it really convenient and liberating to have a pocketable camera. With kids, I'd imagine the convenience would be even more noticeable.

 

[Throckmorton]

I would go a step further and recommend a camera that can fit unobtrusively inside your pocket. Lately I've been using my N8 phone camera on vacations instead of lugging around my DSLR, and I found it really convenient and liberating to have a pocketable camera. With kids, I'd imagine the convenience would be even more noticeable.

"Travel zooms" are awesome

 

[yhelothar]

Are superzooms that much more portable than DSLRs? They look to be about the same size to me.

 

[Throckmorton]

Are superzooms that much more portable than DSLRs? They look to be about the same size to me.

They're slightly smaller and the lenses retract so they end up being much easier to transport.

Munky is right though, a compact travel zoom is better. You can slip one into your pocket without a case.

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_TZ20_ZS10/verdict.shtml

 

[LegendKiller]

I haven't purchased a P&S superzoom yet. Waiting for BF prices. Here's a comparison review of a few: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/q311travelzoomgrouptest/

I am leaning towards the Nikon S9100 but some bad reviews on freezing issues and having to RMA it. Cheapest I've found it is at Amazon and Newegg for $240. shipped. http://www.amazon.com/dp/B004M8SVFM/ref=asc_df_B004M8SVFM1755455/?tag=dpreviewbuybox-20&creative=394997&creativeASIN=B004M8SVFM&linkCode=asn

I have the 9100 and haven't had a problem with it. We just bought a D5100 but will still use the 9100. The 9100 is a great little camera, good in low light and most other things we throw at it.

 

[yhelothar]

They're slightly smaller and the lenses retract so they end up being much easier to transport.

Munky is right though, a compact travel zoom is better. You can slip one into your pocket without a case.

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_TZ20_ZS10/verdict.shtml

I agree with the travel zoom. If you're going to spend $400+ on a camera for its portability, and take a huge sacrifice in image quality along the way, I'd take the extra leap and get the travel zoom.
Personally, I'd just stick with one lens on my DSLR if the superzoom P&S was compact enough. You can crop on the DSLR if you need the extra zoom, and you'd still get the same image quality as on the superzoom.

 

[corkyg]

Are superzooms that much more portable than DSLRs? They look to be about the same size to me.

You can't be serious. There is a significant difference in size and weight. This illustrates . .

Box 1 is the SX30-IS. Box 2 is my 5D II and a compact 70-300mm lens which with the 24-205 lens is reasonable close to the SX3- capability. I can drop the SX30 into the center compartment of my laptop next to the A/C Adapter, whereas the DSLR requires a complete separate case, which can be a big hassel when travelling by air overseas.

There is a difference in image quality, but not significant for the use of the resulting images, ie., video slide show on CDR or DVD.

 

[vbuggy]

I'm considering doing the same thing. Managed to borrow the Canon and the Fuji superzoom, and am currently leaning towards the Fuji - and I will probably be buying. I see it being useful in some roles.

I'm not a pro. Strictly sub-amateur - but I do know the ins and outs of course and I do know what I find usable.

One thing's for sure with these things - the images are *definitely* from a compact camera either way. There is no way you'd mistake the output as coming from an APS-C class sensor, even in an unfair crop test heavily favouring the superzoom.

30-35x zoom is, frankly, ridiculous. What is amazing though is that it's actually quite usable (especially on the Fuji for various reasons, including the lens).

Throckmorton has a good point, but better glass has merits in terms of frequent use of long zoom - there is definitely more capability on hand than a travelzoom. The demerit is that although it is smaller than a DSLR and obviously taking 2-3 lenses with you, it is marhuuursssive ("massive" doesn't really do the disparity justice) compared to a really compact compact like the S95.

If you're not planning to explore the outer edges of the focal length options, then something like a NEX would make much more sense (although of course it'd cost more) and would be much smaller with the short zoom - and the combo will throw out *much* better pictures within the limits of the focal length, and even further out to a degree if you consider the crop limitations of the compact camera sensor vs APS-C.

Personally I have the older NEX-5 and I still find the Canon/Fuji would make sense to buy for a number of reasons. The zoom option is obvious but the fact that it's basically an all-in-one box - especially the Fuji, in terms of the lens performance, exposure options and aperture options at short zoom ranges combined with the long reach, the shoot-properly-anywhere versatility with the tilting/swivelling (Fuji/Canon) display + the EVF, and the much-better-than-compact-compact video capability - does give it a place in situations I don't want to be fumbling around with the Sony and a couple of lenses. It's all there, and the speed from which I can go from shooting something hundreds of meters away to shooting something right in front of my face, especially with the Fuji, is almost supernatural.

It's just that your usage vector has to justify it because of the size/IQ compromise, and for some people a DSLR + mirrorless, or a combo of DSLR + ultracompact, might make more sense. Rather like a laptop, if you buy it on the basis of 'I think I might need to do everything, so I'll get something cheap that does everything' may mean you end up shooting youself in the foot if e.g. all you really actually need is something in the 20-80mm range like most people.

Ultimately it's an odd halfway house really - it's nowhere near a half-decent DSLR/mirrorless IQ wise while being almost as large, yet it provides much more shooting options and opportunity than anything actually compact. I think though coming from a DSLR as opposed to going up from a compact, the limitations of the sensor may bother you more, though it will be less of an issue if you learn to shoot to the camera's strengths.

 

[Munky]

Now let's see a size comparison not using a full-frame DSLR with a superzoom lens, but a consumer DSLR and a kit lens

 

[vbuggy]

Now let's see a size comparison not using a full-frame DSLR with a superzoom lens, but a consumer DSLR and a kit lens

It is almost as large. The kicker is obviously that you don't get 30-35x zoom.

 

[sixone]

I was thinking about getting a Canon SX40 for vacations. I have a D300s and a 16-85 plus a 70-300 VR that I was planning on using as my vacation camera and lens set. But haveing two young kids (4 and 9) and having to lug around their luggage, I was thinking about just getting a super zoom. for places like animal parks, zoo, etc. Then I could just leave the D300s at home. It would make traveling a lot lighter. I know the IQ would be a step down but may be good enough.

My main question would be about shutter lag, AF and using a EVF after using a optical viewfinder for so many years. I know there will be some shutter lag although probably now better than when I was just using a P&S. My main concern is taht I've been using an optical viewfinder for so long, how is the EVF?

So does anyone here have a super zoom P&S and how do you like it? Do you regret your purchase or would you do the same thing again? I guess I can try it and see if I like it but would rather not do that if I can gather enough info. Thanks

Shutter lag - not great, but not terrible. SX40 has the high-speed burst, which is great - if you time it right.

AF is faster than my D5000 - a LOT faster.

EVF isn't great. Better than the LCD in bright sunlight, but it gets the job done.

I'd much rather drag around the SX40 than the DSLR. I think you'll find the IQ is plenty good enough.

 

[yhelothar]

It is almost as large. The kicker is obviously that you don't get 30-35x zoom.

Yup the 5D next to the SX30 looks about the same size difference as a consumer APS-C next to the 5D.
Put a superzoom on the APC-S DSLR that's about as large as the SX30. That'll give you about 17x zoom (18-300mm). Crop the pic to get to 30x zoom and I bet the image quality would still be better.

Not that all that zoom would make you take better pics anyways.

 

[yhelothar]

I think you'll find the IQ is plenty good enough.

I guess different people have different standards for IQ. OP: I'd suggest you to see sample pics and if it's good enough, go for it.
The biggest difference will be in low light situations.

 

[vbuggy]

Yup the 5D next to the SX30 looks about the same size difference as a consumer APS-C next to the 5D.
Put a superzoom on the APC-S DSLR that's about as large as the SX30. That'll give you about 17x zoom (18-300mm). Crop the pic to get to 30x zoom and I bet the image quality would still be better.

Not that all that zoom would make you take better pics anyways.

Now *that* is way optimistic. You're not going to go beyond an 80mm or so in the same length of lens. If you could get 18-300 in the same sort of dimensions (or price), yeah it makes absolutely no sense for any situation.

But as I said, since you can't...
- T3i with the 28-300 will be like $2500, total weight will be like ~5lbs not to mention the sheer sticky-outness
- NEX-5N, EVF+ Sony long zoom would weigh less and be more compact vertically and horizontally but the lens would end up sticking out effectively as much, and will only reach out from-to 55-210mm and cost >$1200
...it does make sense for some.

The superzooms the likes of the Canon and Fuji (and once again, especially the Fuji because among other things it's not dependent on Li-Ion cells) are *really* do it all machines which can do everything more or less decently. If you're not in 'I'm a photographer' mode and want ultimate versatility in certain situations I'm pretty certain they work.

An 18-135mm APS-C shooting at 135 would still recover notably less information per pixel after cropping than the superzooms shooting at ~400mm (let alone >700), despite the disparity in direct image quality. But of course, as I said you have to shoot to the camera's strengths. So while in a DSLR you'd let the sensor to a lot of the work, you have to use the lens a lot more in these machines, which of course limits postprocessing options.

 

[zlejedi]

Isn't 5D II FX proffessional camera?
I remeber my Minolta Z3 wasn't that much smaller compared to Nikon D40 (well as long as i didn't attach 70-300 to it )

And it was felt really bad going back to Z3 when I had too (since we share DSLR in familty) due to bad view fiender, and crappy work in low light.

 

[irse]

Basically I'm thinking about portability and the sacrifices in image quality and usability when I'm looking at super zooms. I do have a D3 and D300s when I am strictly going for image quality. I'm looking more for a vacation camera where I'm just going to take snapshots (hopefully well composed) to basically just view on the computer, put up on facebook and maybe print a 5x7 to put in the office. It'll be just to preserve memories, not to display. Here are what I really like to shoot.

http://www.nakoa.org/2011/10/uh-vs-new-mexico-state-photos/

 

[vbuggy]

Basically I'm thinking about portability and the sacrifices in image quality and usability when I'm looking at super zooms. I do have a D3 and D300s when I am strictly going for image quality. I'm looking more for a vacation camera where I'm just going to take snapshots (hopefully well composed) to basically just view on the computer, put up on facebook and maybe print a 5x7 to put in the office. It'll be just to preserve memories, not to display. Here are what I really like to shoot.

http://www.nakoa.org/2011/10/uh-vs-new-mexico-state-photos/

Exactly. I needed a travel camera for which I didn't need to pack multiple lenses, and this is exactly the role I'm considering superzooms for.

But you will probably have to modify your DSLR-trained picture-talking style as I mentioned for best results.

I've been pitting the SX30 against the HS20 and the Fuji is optically and functionally superior in general, and runs off AA's (settable profiles for Ni-Mh, Alkaline and Lithium).

I'm going to bet the SX40 delivers better looking images in a like-for-like situation due to the reduced megapixel sensor, but the ability to grab images faster on the Fuji due to the control layout does seem to make it a better P&S for me.

 

[corkyg]

Isn't 5D II FX proffessional camera?
I remeber my Minolta Z3 wasn't that much smaller compared to Nikon D40 (well as long as i didn't attach 70-300 to it

5D MKII is a full frame DSLR. I have had EOS D60, 20D, 5D, and now 5D MKII. They are all about the same size, and all use the same family of lenses. My illustration and response was purely why I use a superzoom in certain travel situations. What anyone else does is their business, not mine. I can only speak from my own experience. I have had 4 superzooms - Nikon P80 (bad shutter lag); Canon S3; Canon SX10; and Canon SX30. I do plan to get the SX40.

As for image quality - not bad. These are with the SX10 in South Africa. The first is the overall scene - the gathering at the watering hole.

Then using the extended zoom, one can capture social interaction at a safe distance.