chezzyr Posted September 14, 2015 #1 Share Posted September 14, 2015 Hi folks We are going on our first cruise in a month (pacific islands). I use mostly SLR camera/s for my travel photography. I enjoy wildlife/nature but limit myself to 'smaller' telephoto lenses eg 200mm/f2.8, 300mm/f4. I have zero interest in anything bigger (what I consider rocket launcher lenses). In fact, I have even been wondering if I should get myself a non-SLR 'superzoom' before the trip and take advantage of tax refund etc. I do have a recently purchased Olympus Tough camera that should be good around the beaches and general picture opportunities - but it does not have much reach. Would adding a superzoom be overkill, should I just stick with an SLR body or two and their lenses (remember the 300mm is my longest reach)? Thanks in advance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xlxo Posted September 14, 2015 #2 Share Posted September 14, 2015 If image quality is desired... superzooms should be avoided. However if practicality is desired... superzooms are great. love my Nikon 18-200 and 18-300mm just twist the wrist to change focal length sensor stays cleaner as you minimize lens changes takes up less space in a travel bag built-in flash may be obscurred when lens is extended... may need to bring an external flash to get around that problem. [YOUTUBE]G8ghz3KuQ-w[/YOUTUBE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted September 14, 2015 Author #3 Share Posted September 14, 2015 Sounds like they would be great, versatile lenses....for a Nikon (I am a Canon user). Keen on some feedback on some of the better superzooms. I guess more specifically I am interested knowing about the image quality at longer reaches beyond what I am used to (ie 300mm on my 'crop sensor' DSLR). Because I am already covered up to 300mm if you know what I mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUT2407 Posted September 14, 2015 #4 Share Posted September 14, 2015 Sounds like they would be great, versatile lenses....for a Nikon (I am a Canon user). Keen on some feedback on some of the better superzooms. I guess more specifically I am interested knowing about the image quality at longer reaches beyond what I am used to (ie 300mm on my 'crop sensor' DSLR). Because I am already covered up to 300mm if you know what I mean. It really depends on how seriously you take your photography and what you want to do with the finished product (on screen, printed if so how big). Your 300 mm (on a crop) is already a 480 in real money. The biggest problem, in my opinion, with the superzooms is the small sensor, rubbish in low light. I have used the 50SX and another that was about 25X zoom (can't remember the model) and was way underwhelmed. The only one I'd consider (a canon man too) is the new G3X but about $1K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUT2407 Posted September 14, 2015 #5 Share Posted September 14, 2015 I do use a Canon 28-200, but by go to is an old 28-135 IS prefer it even to the 24-105 that extra 30 on the tele end is worth it in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted September 14, 2015 Author #6 Share Posted September 14, 2015 I probably wouldn't want to spend more than around $400-$500 and I am trying to convince myself I need a non-SLR (there will be times I simply don't want the weight of an SLR body and lens). But these superzooms are hardly 'compact' either. I am fairly serious about image quality and low light performance is handy! Printing of images would be mostly limited to photo books (keepsakes) 10-14" max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PerfectlyPerth Posted September 16, 2015 #7 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I have had most of the Canon bridge camera super zooms and my current favourite is the SX50. Its done 2 trips to Antarctica - producing awesome shots for canvas prints and photo books, as well as lots of other cruises and mini holidays etc. I really love that it shoots in raw and particularly used its high speed burst mode for capturing crisp birds in flight and whales breaching. It also handled the cold and ice very well on both trips (as have all my Canons). Nope its definitely not pocket sized but nor is it a huge weight in your arm or round your neck. I am a fan of cameras that feel like actual cameras - not cigarette boxes - so thats why I stick with the bridge cameras for size and shape and the feel in my hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare mskaufman Posted September 16, 2015 #8 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I have had most of the Canon bridge camera super zooms and my current favourite is the SX50. Its done 2 trips to Antarctica - producing awesome shots for canvas prints and photo books, as well as lots of other cruises and mini holidays etc. I really love that it shoots in raw and particularly used its high speed burst mode for capturing crisp birds in flight and whales breaching. It also handled the cold and ice very well on both trips (as have all my Canons). Nope its definitely not pocket sized but nor is it a huge weight in your arm or round your neck. I am a fan of cameras that feel like actual cameras - not cigarette boxes - so thats why I stick with the bridge cameras for size and shape and the feel in my hand. I have the previous version (SX-40) and am more than happy with it. It has done two Med cruises, Canada/New England and a Baltic Cruise. It fills a niche that my SLR doesn't by being able to get close in shots in locations. This picture was taken from about six blocks away. http://i1233.photobucket.com/albums/ff386/mmkbx75/IMG_0197.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUT2407 Posted September 16, 2015 #9 Share Posted September 16, 2015 I have the previous version (SX-40) and am more than happy with it. It has done two Med cruises, Canada/New England and a Baltic Cruise. It fills a niche that my SLR doesn't by being able to get close in shots in locations. This picture was taken from about six blocks away. http://i1233.photobucket.com/albums/ff386/mmkbx75/IMG_0197.jpg I still have, and at times use an SX-1, I know I'm a dinosaur but hey 10mp and a 20X optical zoom. But then again I still also use a Canon Pellix from the 60s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted September 16, 2015 Author #10 Share Posted September 16, 2015 For the cruise, for instance, I was thinking about a non-SLR I could add to my kit rather than something that would REPLACE my SLRs. Something that would give me long reach should I need it. I have already packed my carry on back pack (test run to check weight for flights etc) and it simply won't fit another camera (as it is my partner will carry one of my lenses but his carry on will be pretty chockers also). I am appreciative of the comments, keep them coming if you wish as it is something I am still thinking about even if it won't happen in time for this cruise. Thankyou! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare mskaufman Posted September 17, 2015 #11 Share Posted September 17, 2015 My bridge camera is in addition to my DSLR (and a pocket camera that I carry around the ship). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GUT2407 Posted September 17, 2015 #12 Share Posted September 17, 2015 My bridge camera is in addition to my DSLR (and a pocket camera that I carry around the ship). I basically do the same. Except my "bridge" is a mirrorless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted September 17, 2015 Author #13 Share Posted September 17, 2015 Except, I'll have 2 SLR bodies, 2 lenses and 1 Olympus Tough so there is no room for anything else 'chunky' in my carry on. Perhaps one day when I am ready to 'wean' myself off the second SLR body! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outdoorphoto Posted September 17, 2015 #14 Share Posted September 17, 2015 I'll give my 2 cents on this. I'm a pixel peeper and IQ is important to me. As I've gotten older, I really dislike the weight of DSLRs and all the lenses. For cruises I've stopped carrying them, even to Alaska this year. For long zoom I've gone to the Canon SX50 HS. Goes out to 1200mm eq. and the lens stabilization is excellent. At base ISO 80, the image quality is remarkable. ISO 160 is the absolute max I'll use, unless I just want a photo record shot. I shoot RAW and develop in Lightroom and get IQ that I'm happy with. No small sensor camera does well with low-light conditions. The SX50 is great in full sun, bright conditions, but as others have noted is less than stellar in low light. Canon USA store has refurbs for around $200. The latest SX60 has gotten some poor reviews, so I'd stick with the SX50. Just to round out my comments, I've also purchased a Samsung NX3000 mirrorless with the 16-50 lens. IQ rivals my 5D and Rebel and it's tiny. I'm good to about ISO 800 with it. I now use this as my walking around camera. These cameras don't replace my DSLRs for a serious photography trip, but I really like them for general travel. Hope this info helps! Rob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chezzyr Posted September 25, 2015 Author #15 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Thanks for taking the time to respond, certainly food for thought. It seems though I am now going to have to spend my money on a laptop or tablet to take on my upcoming cruise. I have started a new topic as I need help in that department - should anyone wish to take a look. Thankyou. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
setsail Posted September 25, 2015 #16 Share Posted September 25, 2015 (edited) I think you should, since you like wildlife. I have been using the canon SX cameras for several years now and got the new SX 60 before our last cruise. Its great and takes wonderful pics. No trouble in low light if you have a steady hand. Never use a flash on ships, too much glass and bling. To get a lens for your dlsr you would need a lens 36 inches long and weighing 35 lbs and costing 10's of thousands $. Edited September 25, 2015 by setsail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c230k Posted September 25, 2015 #17 Share Posted September 25, 2015 Give the superzoom a try. Just bought a Canon SX50 HS superzoom camera for $159.00 refurbished, with one year warranty from Canon. Thought fro that price was a great deal an older model but well liked. Tom :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruin Steve Posted October 4, 2015 #18 Share Posted October 4, 2015 I've completely ditched SLRs when traveling... I'm not a "pro"...I just want good travel photos...I'm not blowing them up to poster size...I'm not selling them on the market...I take photos for my own enjoyment and to show friends and family...As out there as I get is to post some on Facebook, etc... So, for my purposes, the "bridge" camera works fine for me...In fact, I really enjoy being able to zoom in and things like wildlife from a LONG distance away... For the past six years, I've been using a Nikon P90 with a 60x lens... I'm now looking to upgrade this to a new Nikon P610 with a 60x (24-1440 mm) lens--and with a bunch of newer features like WiFi transfer, for example... These cameras are relatively small, easy to pack and carry everything I need...No longer do I schlepp around a large camera bag with 3 or 4 lenses and other equipment--I only have a small case to carry the camera, a couple of spare batteries and an extra SD card and the charger...and that's it...When I get the P610, I'll add a 52mm polarizing filter (since, unlike my current P90, the P610 can accept one)...With that 24-1440 mm lens, I can take a photo of just about anything...and carrying the camera around is EASY... Right now, I'm seeing the P610 going for as little as $305... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now