Point & shoot with larger sensor & long zoom?

[fbrdphreak]

Helping my Dad out with some camera shopping. He's always used regular P&S' and been happy enough with them. He's shopping for a new one that has plenty of zoom for him to get pics of the cars on the track when he attends races.

But, if possible, I'd like to help him find a P&S that has a larger sensor. What I always hated about my P&S cameras was the abysmal low light performance and I saw a couple new Canon P&S' that have larger sensors.

Of course, these new Canons don't have a long zoom on them. It really needs to be 12x+, closer to 20x if possible. I understand quality goes down in those cases, but tis what he needs to shoot the cars from the stands.

I did take a look at the image sensor ratings on dxomark or whatever that site is. The Canon G11 & G9's sensors are rated quite a bit lower than my D5000, which leads me to question how much improvement these will bring over other P&S at similar prices, ones that have the zoom my Dad needs.

Lastly - I saw the new ultra-slim micro-4/3 or whatever Sony's announced. He would have no use for any type of manual controls, automatic and specific scene controls would be all that he uses. BUT - if the price of one of these + the zoom lens isn't much more than a high end P&S, could this be an option? I think the bulk of a low-end DSLR like mine is out of the question, but these don't have that.

What other options am I missing?

Cliffs:

*Looking for camera with good low light performance, long zoom without DSLR bulk
*No need for manual controls; good auto & scene settings needed
*Price range is around $400-500, but could go up for the right device

 

[996GT2]

Why does your dad need good low-light performance? Aren't the majority of car races run during the daytime?

To answer your question:
No superzoom point and shoot will give you good low light performance. Certainly nothing compared to even what the cheapest DSLR will give you. There are only a few point and shoots that are good in low-light, and two of the most recent ones are the Canon S90 and Panasonic LX3. Both have fast f/2 lenses in addition to their large sensors. On a superzoom, the lens often gets to f/5.6 at the long end of the zoom, which results in horrible low-light capability.

To be honest, some of the superzoom cameras are really not THAT much smaller than a small DSLR like the Nikon D40. And you can get an entry-level DSLR with a telephoto zoom lens for less than $500. If you absolutely have to get a point and shoot with a long zoom, I'd look at the Canon SX 10 IS.

 

[jpeyton]

If he's looking to take pictures of moving cars on a track, no P&S camera will cut the mustard. If the cars are parked, that's a different story.

But there is a huge difference in quality between an interchangeable lens camera and a P&S. Not only are the sensors much bigger, but the response time is much faster (good for track days) and the optical quality of the lenses is generally better as well. You can get a smaller budget DSLR with a good telephoto lens for around $600 (Canon Rebel XSi + 55-250IS or Nikon D5000 + 55-200VR).

But if size is a concern for him, definitely have him take a look at the micro-4/3rds cameras and Sony's NEX system. A Sony NEX-3 and a 18-200mm lens would be enough range for shooting cars on a track; so would a Panasonic G2 and a 45-200mm lens.

 

[ElFenix]

the panasonic fz50 was the last superzoom with a bigger sensor. the size of the lens at any given FoV increases with the cube of the diagonal of the sensor. the fz50 was SLR sized to get a fast 12x zoom (f2.8-3.7) with a G11 sized sensor (which i wouldn't exactly call a big sensor. 2/3" for a fixed lens camera).

there is a rumor that canon's first response to u4/3, sony nex, and samsung nx (gee, anyone see a trademark fight happening there soon?) will be a big sensor fast zoom camera. but it likely won't be a full-on superzoom. the canon pro1 offered a 28-200 lens. it'll also likely be expensive.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Thanks guys.

The low light aspect wouldn't be as much for the track, I agree that shooting long zoom in low light at fast moving objects just wouldn't be pretty on any P&S. I'm more thinking if he's in a garage, or wandering down pit lane and it's cloudy or at dusk. All my P&S did terrible indoors without tons of lighting, but maybe I had shitty ones with crappy lenses? It's been a while.

Thanks for the reminder about the lens. I need to remember that the sensor isn't the only part of low light performance.

Do you think a larger sensor + fast lens P&S would give a noticeable step up from a "regular" P&S? I've only used mid-range P&S and my D5000, so I'm rather ignorant as to everything else.

 

[ElFenix]

the fz50 users seem to really like it. problem is that camera is now 4 years old or so. so image processing and sensor tech is 4 years old.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Well, it's a moot point anyway. He ended up buying a Canon SX20 IS. Seems decent enough. I was just hoping to get him into something that would actually take better photos, rather than just something with a long zoom. Ah well

 

[corkyg]

He made a good choice. I have the SX10-IS, and use it in conjunction with my 5D for shoots where I don't want to carry a lot of equipment. The SX20-IS is a very capable little camera. The photo quality is really quite good.

 

[fbrdphreak]

How does it do in, say, a low lit interior room? Perfect visibility by your eyes, but dim enough that you'd prefer more lighting to get a good shot. In this situation, you up the ISO and open your aperture on a DSLR. On all the P&S I've ever had, they just turned into worthless noise.

 

[corkyg]

Noise is relative to the use. Actually it does quite well in low light when the intended use is in a publication where the size is no greater than about 4x6 or smaller. I use it in church when flash is not allowed. I was able to get a decent shot of an individual during a concert, and the only illumination was candles and a battery light on the music stand.

Today, I find digital shooters to be overly obsessed with "noise." In the old days, we shot film and pushed it to ISO (ASA) 6400 in the darkroom. High speed film has more grain. Today that is called noise, but, useful information can be obtained. I recall a very useful photo at night of a man's face illuminated only by his draw on a cigarette in his mouth. It was sufficient for identification.

Noise becomes a problem mainly when folks try to enlarge the picture beyond its intended usage size.

The SX10 and 20 are more than P*S. I always shoot in P mode, and never let ISO be automatic in low light work. The SX cameras have all of the mode controls of a DSLR.

 

[fbrdphreak]

Cool, thanks for the perspective.

 

[corkyg]

Just remembered another big plus for the SX series - they have articulating LCDs - very useful for holding high at arms length over people's heads as well as outstand macro work. I really wish my 5D had that. I think Nikon has it on the D5000.

 

[fbrdphreak]

You are correct on both counts. The articulating LCD is one of the reasons I suggested he get the SX; I loved it on my old canon P&S, although haven't used it much on my D5000 yet.