kxl
Social Documentary
If you do, what's your experience been?
I have occasional need for a long tele, which doesn't justify spending thousands on a super-tele prime/zoom for my D800e. I am looking at the Tamron 150-600mm, but at $1069, even that is more than I'm willing to pay at this time, plus the fact that it is just not available anywhere. The older model Tamron 200-500mm may be a viable used option -- not sure yet.
Which leads me to the super-zoom bridge cameras, specifically the Fuji Finepix S1. Anyone own one, or any of the others? How does it perform from 600mm and up? I know that the output will be nowhere near my D800e or A7R, but is it even worth considering? Intended output will be web and 8x12 prints.
Your thoughts?
Thanks.
I have occasional need for a long tele, which doesn't justify spending thousands on a super-tele prime/zoom for my D800e. I am looking at the Tamron 150-600mm, but at $1069, even that is more than I'm willing to pay at this time, plus the fact that it is just not available anywhere. The older model Tamron 200-500mm may be a viable used option -- not sure yet.
Which leads me to the super-zoom bridge cameras, specifically the Fuji Finepix S1. Anyone own one, or any of the others? How does it perform from 600mm and up? I know that the output will be nowhere near my D800e or A7R, but is it even worth considering? Intended output will be web and 8x12 prints.
Your thoughts?
Thanks.
btgc
Veteran
Don't have any but small sensor and OIS typical to this cameras should help to get more DOF and less shake.
GaryLH
Veteran
I have an fz200. 24-600 fov. I also have a 45-200 for my m43 which ends up 90-400. Both offer good stabilization.
I originally thought I could use the fz200 for bird shots since I hate hiking w/ a tripod... I currently just use it for grab shots. For me, while it was not bad, I found out that
- my ability to hand hold greater than around 450ish even w/ image stabilization is not great
- even the best shots just don't look as good to me as what I can get from the 45-200 and 400 fov from the m43 zoom I get more keepers
- m43 image even cropped to me holds up better than the fz200 at 600 fov.
But fz200 is pretty old tech. I would check out the new one inch sensor bridge cameras. The new Panasonic pz1000 maybe a better compromise, otherwise a m43 solution could be a better way to go. I personally have like the results that I gave gotten w/ both the 45-200 zoom and an m adapter plus the 90 or 135 (180 or 270)..ymmv.
At the time I bought the fz200, the Fuji was a bit more and reviews did not rated it better than the Panasonic.
Given these are at best medium quality build, mass market, normal consumer products and the possible sample variations that are inherent w/ the cost structure, it is probably a wash which is really better. Out of 50 Panasonic's vs 50 Fuji's, I suspect there are going to be some Panasonic's that are better than the Fuji's and vice versa.
Another possibility might be getting a Nikon one v1 or v2 and use adapted lenses on it.
All these solutions are going to be lighter than the d800 plus the Tamron. Some are going to cost just as much. For web use, I am not sure there would be a difference. For 8x12, my fz200 IMHO is at the edge of acceptable (from your prior comments in other threads, I think u are pickier than I am btw). The shots I have seen from my cousins rx10, I would say are fine for 8x12..
The alternative to the Tamron could be the Sigma 150-500 maybe.
I originally thought I could use the fz200 for bird shots since I hate hiking w/ a tripod... I currently just use it for grab shots. For me, while it was not bad, I found out that
- my ability to hand hold greater than around 450ish even w/ image stabilization is not great
- even the best shots just don't look as good to me as what I can get from the 45-200 and 400 fov from the m43 zoom I get more keepers
- m43 image even cropped to me holds up better than the fz200 at 600 fov.
But fz200 is pretty old tech. I would check out the new one inch sensor bridge cameras. The new Panasonic pz1000 maybe a better compromise, otherwise a m43 solution could be a better way to go. I personally have like the results that I gave gotten w/ both the 45-200 zoom and an m adapter plus the 90 or 135 (180 or 270)..ymmv.
At the time I bought the fz200, the Fuji was a bit more and reviews did not rated it better than the Panasonic.
Given these are at best medium quality build, mass market, normal consumer products and the possible sample variations that are inherent w/ the cost structure, it is probably a wash which is really better. Out of 50 Panasonic's vs 50 Fuji's, I suspect there are going to be some Panasonic's that are better than the Fuji's and vice versa.
Another possibility might be getting a Nikon one v1 or v2 and use adapted lenses on it.
All these solutions are going to be lighter than the d800 plus the Tamron. Some are going to cost just as much. For web use, I am not sure there would be a difference. For 8x12, my fz200 IMHO is at the edge of acceptable (from your prior comments in other threads, I think u are pickier than I am btw). The shots I have seen from my cousins rx10, I would say are fine for 8x12..
The alternative to the Tamron could be the Sigma 150-500 maybe.
kxl
Social Documentary
Thanks Gary - all excellent points. I had not considered the m43 or Nikon v1 - I'll have to check them out. I'm usually not picky for people shots (I think the imperfections add character), but I do a little picky about nature photos, which would be my intended use for this new rig -- whatever it may be. Thanks again.
Addy101
Well-known
Well, 1/2.3-inch sensor. To me a no go, but YMMV.
Did you consider the Sigma 150-500? Affordable new, cheap used, decent quality and probably as good or beter then that Fuji S1 in the IQ department.
Did you consider the Sigma 150-500? Affordable new, cheap used, decent quality and probably as good or beter then that Fuji S1 in the IQ department.