[Tweeters] bridge camera

[Nancy Crowell via Tweeters]

Probably Sony - which also have white lenses. Super lightweight.

By the way, you can reprogram your shutter release on most Nikons. I routinely change mine to back button focus. Just read your camera manual and you should come across a custom buttons section that will explain.

Nancy
"Images for the imagination."
www.crowellphotography.com
________________________________
From: Tweeters <tweeters-bounces at mailman11.u.washington.edu> on behalf of Mark Walton via Tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2024 7:26:51 AM
To: TWEETERS tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: [Tweeters] bridge camera

Hello Gary,

I've been following this discussion with great interest. I currently use a Nikon D850 with a Tamron 150-600 mm lens. I've generally been fairly happy with it but, as I get older, my back becomes progressively unhappy about me walking long distances with a super-heavy camera around my neck. This camera has lasted through > 3000 birding trips over the last several years so I am well aware that it could die a sudden death at any time. So I've begun to think about a replacement.

I also have a Nikon D1000, which is nice when I want to document a rarity that is super far away and that is helpfully just standing around. The main drawback I see is that focusing requires pushing the button halfway down and then pushing it the rest of the way down to snap the photo. This doesn't work well for me in the far more common situation where I'm trying to photograph a flyover rarity, or a passerine that pauses on a branch for no more than one Planck Time.

For my next camera I gave serious thought to a Panasonic Lumix FZ80D -- except that it seems that this is another camera that requires that you push the button halfway down to focus. I just don't do well with that because, when a nice rarity is flying over, I am usually so frantic to get a quick photo that I mess that up.

I've noticed that a lot of the skilled birders have some sort of Canon camera with a long, white lens. No idea what model the camera and lens are but it looks *FAR* lighter than my current backbreaker camera. Does anyone know what kind of camera that is?  Any other suggestions are welcome -- I will never be a competent photographer. I just want to document rarities and get photos that show the field marks of hard-to-identify birds.

Mark

Ar Máirt 17 Noll 2024 ag 06:15, scríobh Gary Bletsch via Tweeters <tweeters at u.washington.edu<mailto:tweeters at u.washington.edu>>:
Dear Tweeters,

A few weeks ago, I wrote to Tweeters in regard to bridge cameras. My trusty Canon SX50 HS had gone kaputt, so I needed a replacement.

I then spent a few weeks reading up on various cameras. Thanks to all of the Tweeters who wrote to me with recommendations and disrecommendations and such.

In between lake-effect blizzards, I drove the 63 miles to Buffalo; Delaware Camera up there is the only camera store within a hundred miles of where I live. I got there early and was glad that I did, as they soon got pretty busy--hardly surprising, when they are the only brick-and-mortar camera store in the entire region, not counting Canada. Luckily, I had the only old guy in the store helping me, which is just what I wanted!

Long story short, I ended up buying a Nikon Coolpix P950. This camera is roughly as good as was the Canon SX50 HS, better in some ways, worse in others. Here is a breakdown comparison between the two cameras. I would add that the Canon SX70 would be roughly comparable to the older SX50, so that one could probably compare the P950 to the SX70 and get a fairly similar result to that between the P950 and SX50.

By the by, Lillian Stokes did not recommend the Canon SX60 when that camera came out as the replacement for the SX50. I don't see any commentary on the Stokes website in regard to the SX70, but some birders have told me that they likewise preferred the older SX50 to the SX70. I am still considering having my old SX50 repaired, if Canon can do that for a reasonable price. It's probably just some little chip that went bad.

The Nikon P950 is better than the Canon as far as focus goes; the Canon had no useable manual focus. The P950 does indeed have a manual focus that is fairly easy to use.

The P950 costs about a third more than a new Canon SX70, a little over $900 compared to $699. I am sure that I could have bought the P950 online and saved a few dollars, but I always prefer buying in person, and don't mind paying a bit more for the superior shopping experience one gets in a real store.

The P950 is big. I do not ever want to have a camera slung around my waist, or have a foot-long lens hanging down my side. I want to keep my camera stashed away under my birding vest, ready to photograph rarities and hard-to-ID individuals, and otherwise stay out of sight and out of mind. The size and weight of the P950 places it at the extreme high end of the range of cameras that can be stowed in this manner. It weighs over a kilogram, nearly double the weight of the SX50. Over the past week and a half, I have had to adjust to having such a cinderblock bulging out my vest, but it is workable, even when I'm wearing the bulky parka and layers that one must wear here this time of year.

The zoom on the P950 is good. I am not sure if it is any better than the remarkable zoom on the SX50, but I can get photos of distant waterfowl out on the ice. I am not yet certain whether the P950's zoom is as good as the one on the SX50; sometimes the images I get with the zoom all the way out do seem a bit dimmer than the ones I was used to before. Time will tell.

At times, the Canon SX50 could be infuriatingly slow. That came and went. It almost seemed as if the SX50 had mood swings like a person's, sometimes "deciding" that it would take its sweet time about turning on, or zooming in on something. By comparison, the Nikon P950 does seem a bit slow to respond, but it is consistent, not moody--if that makes sense!

I don't really care about "features" as much as most people do. The much newer P950 is loaded with features that the Canon SX50 did not have. Maybe the engineers had not yet invented those features when the SX50 came out. For example, one can obtain software for the Nikon, and use that to connect the camera to a phone or maybe to a computer, via Bluetooth. So far, I have just uploaded my photos by means of a cable, which is fine by me. My eyes start swimming when I start to read up on all of the other features, so I can't say anything about them. Buried in the menus of the P950, there are all sorts of capabilities that I have not explored. I might never get around to doing so.

There is actually a "bird" mode in this camera, but I have not tried it. Maybe I'll try it today; all one needs to do is turn the mode dial to the little "bird" icon, so it shouldn't be too hard to do!

Thanks again to all of the Tweeters who responded to my original enquiry.

Yours truly,

Gary Bletsch
_______________________________________________
Tweeters mailing list
Tweeters at u.washington.edu<mailto:Tweeters at u.washington.edu>
http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/tweeters
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman11.u.washington.edu/pipermail/tweeters/attachments/20241217/27b93fa4/attachment.html>