Panasonic Z50 for birding?
 

Is anyone using a Panasonic Z50 for birding, and if so, what results? An SLR with a proper zoom lens with image stabilization is too heavy for me. I am in my 70s and carry Swarovski 8x42s along with the necessary birding book, water, etc. A tripod won't do. I don't have an automobile, travel by bus or subway, etc. I believe it's Leica that is just out with a camera similar to the Z50 but the price seems high ($800 or so and I have seen no reviews) especially since I would guess that others will come out with similar high end semi point-and-shoot cameras (if that is the correct term for them) and the technology may be refined soon in this area.

Hi AlanM
I have a FZ30 (the model before the FZ50) I love my FZ30, And although it's a lot lighter than most SLR's I wouldn't use mine without a tripod or even a mono-pod at anything over 200mm zoom, 1/2 of full zoom (But then I'm not very steady) Having said that, With the 400mm zoom lens on the camera you won't have the need to buy extra heavy lenses. And as far as I know the Leica is the same camera as the FZ50 Just re-badged.
I have Attached two shots to show the lens at work, Both shots were taken from same place, The village must have been at least 10 miles away.

Alan ,there is also a Canon camera,PowershotS3 IS.This camera has IS so you could perhaps not need to use a tripod,and I think,it has a 13x zoom.I have heard good reviews from this cam,and I have seen shots of birds which have been taken with it.Someone else may come along with a little more info for re this camera,Alan.

I have an FZ50, which I've been using for birding. This is my first digital camera, so I'm just learning the technology. I love it, although I have not yet taken many photos in low light. In the beginning I had my doubts about moving to a digital camera, but could not afford a DSLR, but the camera quickly won me over.

The automatic focus is too slow for flight shots, but since it has manual focus, it's not a problem. It captures excellent detail - you'll need a memory card, the one that comes with it can only handle six images at full resolution. The anti-shake is brilliant; I handhold almost all my photos, and shake has not been a problem. Personally, I couldn't be happier with it. Well worth the price.

A few of words of caution Alan from another 60+ who was about to go DSLR and didn't
(1) I also belong to an outfit called Wild About Britain (use link on my signature.) I noticed a trickle of people using FZ30s, but few stuck to them and I think there is both comment and a lot of bird and nature pics posted there too. You can also do camera based search on pbase. Obviously a lot of people are younger and richer.
(2) as an FZ7 owner, the cheap and cheerful Panasonic 12x, I suspect you may find FZ50 performs better with good light than in poor, but that may not be a worry if you have to get public transport home! I also had a chance to sell my FZ7 and had a look at Canon S3 IS again as I had wondered whether to spend the extra on it when I bought. Came to the conclusion people were not putting out any better images, the controls are less user friendly, but it might just have a good enough lens to stand a 1.4 or 1.7 converter, but then so does the FZ50 and the controls on that are even more accessible than on my FZ7, ie more manual, less joystick. Agree that the Leica is almost identical.
(3) the image stabilisation is a great selling point on panas, but I don't think it is worth bothering with unless pushing luck at 1/20sec or longer, better to jam one edge against something and the snib on the back is useful for that - and what may not at first be obvious is that every in-camera tweak you use makes it more difficult to do corrections with PS later; the panas are also designed for folks that by-pass the computer and go straight from camera to printer "daft I call it"

Reading the comment from Chris(Daedal) re cam straight to printer,I totally agree.I would not dare print straight from card.One would have to very confident that the prints were perfect enough to warrant the cost of the ink and paper!!!.

I agree completely - images that look really good on the little camera screen often turn out to be rather less so on the computer monitor. It seems that these cameras were crafted with two markets in mind: the instamatic crowd, who want acceptable holiday shots at the click of a button, and have plenty of money with which to impress the neighbours, and the people who seriously hope to take good photos, but can't afford an SLR. I had forgotten the camera had the direct printing function, but I definitely wouldn't try it. Like Christine, I have better things to do with my money than waste it on paper for the bin.

It should be remembered that the FZ50, and probably other, similar cameras, are quite capable of being set in the camera store to operate for all time completely automatically, to produce acceptable images in most conditions. Acceptable being extremely variable among different camera owners. You can also zoom out to 21x, but once you get there, you have just two megapixels. Not all the functions on this camera will be useful. Whereas if you go to a DSLR, most likely all functions will have their use.

For me, the real reason I like this camera is the sheer convenience - no need to change lenses, it's small and light, and it's capable of taking good photos. It has its drawbacks though, and one of these may prove to be low light. But as I live in Australia, I'm hoping that won't prove to be a problem - at least, not often.

Comparing prices of modern compacts and bridge cams versus SLR's,and as Rose has mentioned it is easier just to have one cam,and no lens changes.I have seen the 300D for sale at around £100-200.It was around £950,when new 3-4yrs ago!!!.This cam,or the Nikon equivalent ,can be used with say a Tamron 28-300 lens,which is virtually useful for all types of shots,landscapes,not too wide,but it is okay,if a bird is not too far away and a decent size,Gull etc,again the 300mm focal length is okay.Excellent for close ups of children ,dogs etc,and family groups,also the lens is set up to take macro shots.So for the price of a new compact or bridge cam,one can have an SLR with the higher pixels,which are acceptable,and a low cost ,but very good lens,which is also very lightweight.Just an idea.

I would get an SLR if the lens had image stabilization. However a D300 with the Tamron lens (non-IS) weighs 10 oz more than the Z50. With IS, any zoom lens and relatively light SLR brings the weight up far too much. And I need IS. That's why I thought of compromising with the Z50.

I think the comparison against an FZ50 should be made with 350D or 400D, 350 being the lightest in weight, the 400 smallest in physical size, which was attracting me for similar reasons to Alan. The comparison then is how a cheapish all-in-one lens for canon would compare with the Leica lens on the Pana.

if you have not already looked at http://bobatkins.com/photography/reviews for canon lens reviews, well worth it Alan. Likewise if you haven't already have a look at full review of FZ30 and preview/changes FZ50 at
http://www.imaging-resource.com/MFR1...asonic_reviews
these are real in-depth reviews and example images are full size, not reduced; unfortunately they don't have a bird pic

There is an in-depht review of the Panny FZ50 and a large gallery (including some bird-shots) here:
http://dpreview.com/
As far as Leica is concerned, I did some comparision shots with FZ50 and V-Lux1 and the outcome is that I ordered an FZ50 plus a Raynox 2.2x Converter (for birding shots).....
Best regards
Werner

PS: here you can compare Canon D30 and Panny FZ50 birding shots side by side: http://www.flickr.com/photos/aftab/

Enjoy it Werner. :D

You know what I like best of all about my FZ50 for birds? The silence. After I've silenced all the cute little 'pips' the camera makes, I can even put the shutter on silent mode - so I get more than one shot, the bird doesn't hear the first one. I did find it a little disconcerting at first, because I was so accustomed to a noisy shutter - but now I love it even for people, because it doesn't draw attention.

I was about to get a TCON17 for FZ30 before my computer crash. Now I've spent too much in electronics to spend on optics until after xmas. The TCON17 is said to be a must have for birding with the FZ series. Though when you're at 700mm equivalent zoom you''ll need a tripod.

When I bought the FZ30 back in June, I was about to purchase a DSLR (I'd actually transfered money from one account to another) then I saw the photos on WAB using the FZ30 and had a drastic rethink. Why buy a DSLR - well you do that to swap lens, but the FZ goes from 35mm to 420mm, and it does macro with the Raynox attachment.

For 25 years I've carted about a bag full of lens and other equipment for my SLR. One shoulder is now several inches lower than the other as a result and I swear I walk lopesided as a result. But mainly the stuff in the bag stayed in the bag, and laterly the bag was left in the boot of the car. When the equipment was carted about, by the time you'd switched lens the moment had passed anyway. So basically all that equipment, at least for me, was hardly ever used, I just stuck with the 70-210mm tameron zoom and a doubler.

So I checked what others were getting in macros, birds, landscapes, and portraits with the FZ and decided to get that instead. Now undoubtedly a prime lens is going to be far better than a zoom, but then you need a 28mm, 50mm, 105mm or 135mm macro, 200mm, 300mm or 400mm lens. Which is a lot of optics and a lot of weight. to cart about. So unless you've got a spare golf cart, you end up sticking a general purpose zoom on the front of it which sort of defeats the purpose of a SLR.

Just my opinion :p

AlanM,

I bought an FZ50 about a month ago, upgrading from an FZ10. Panasonic has made a lot of improvements between these two models. Like you, I was looking for a relatively light and compact digital camera that at least gave me a chance to take half way decent bird photos. So far, I'd give the FZ50 a grade of "B". I've taken some OK photos with it, but still fight shutter/autofocus lag (too many shots with the bird's head turned away, or an empty perch). Low light photography definitely results in noisy images. Also, I'm having a problem getting autofocused images of birds against backgrounds--the camera wants to focus on the background rather than the bird, despite using the spot focus mode--which I hope is a matter of technique or settings rather than an inherent problem. Manual focus is almost worthless in this situation, I find.

The good news: it's a pretty capable camera with a lot of nice features. The image stabilization helps a lot. Most of my shots have been handheld at maximum telephoto (12x), and a reasonably high percentage don't exhibit blur. It's certainly a more practical--and cheaper--travel camera than an SLR with a 400mm lens. For the price, I think it's worth a try. You just need to accept that you won't get the autofocus speed, sharpness, and lack of noise that a Canon EOS offers.

How about the new Olympus 410/510. E-510 has IS. Small with great telephoto possibilities.

It was the Olympus E500 that I was going to get before deciding on the Panasonic after reading reviews that there were few macro lens alternatives other than those provided by Olympus.

Olympus 35mm f3.5, Olympus 50mm f2, Sigma 105mm f2.8, Sigma 150mm f2.8 extension tube for nearly all the rest. I use 35mm and extension tube on 40-150. The E510 is not available until June but I may get one spec looks good. Live view is useful for macro although I use an Angle finder with 2x magnification.:)

Unless you have a firm reason for pana or any other camera, I would strongly second the excellent suggestion of Christine for Canon S3. I don't say that just because I am a Canonist, but for about $350 this camera won't stop to amaze you for long time to go. Has all features you want including IS, long sharp diamond quality optical zoom, versatile capabilities both auto and fully over ridden manual. I suggest you look at some of these first moon shots taken by S3 to judge for yourself.

LINK

BTW where is USA are you leaving that you don't need a personal car??! You must be either in Pittsburgh or Boston... Well no mater what, have fun and don't forget there is no 60s or earlier guy around who has switched to digital and has had a second thought.

My wife has had some very good results using FZ7 for birding pics, so I'd imagine Z50 would be better. However, good light is needed as quality fades after ISO100 (although ISO200 can be acceptable). Remember that even with that great zoom on the Pana, wou will still need to get relatively close to the bird - if it's small bins, it'll be small in camera.

I have FZ-30 and D-70, Recently I started to take picture of fly pigeon ( just to try my hand in something diffrent).Well what I experienced is this:-
1) Both the cams need to be set in manual mode , even focusing( I set it to predetermined point where I feel the pegions are more likely to come.) Now difficult part.Manual focusing ,at least for me, in FZ-30 is irritating ( may be not used to that kind of setting ,like using a small botton for foussing >most of the time focusing ring come to hand then you had it,one lage thing image comes in EVF which does not go immediately.& I just watch my best shot being flying away, for which I have waited for hours, GOD ,sometime is not fair with me).Whereas D-70 focusing is just like breathing to me ,Effortless & smooth.
2) now the Time to press the Shutter,This is the most interesting part,Keep it half pressed ,Let say the bird has come to frame- fully press the button immediately,You will see some fluttering image on EVF ( all confusion),Press immediately for 2 nd time just to ensure some good shot,FZ-30 wont respond.
But in D-70 is just at the point where I wanted >Click done...Next click done at least I get 2 frames one after another.
3)FZ-30 shut down after 1 min, even if you keep the shutter half pressed after one min.( OK.Ok I know there is setting to increase the time, but you lose the bettery power more faster, good feature but does not work in given situation),Release again re-press,by the time, you will lose few more shots,
4) But one thing I do admit if by lucK (PLZ note I said by LUCK) a good shot has caputered by FZ-30 then it is razor sharp,,D-70 is not lagging behind
Conculsion of mine:- FZ-30 best to use in sitting bird <You get lots of time to compose and get a very beautiful image, if it is an action I think nothing beats DLSR

"FZ-30 best to use in sitting bird": are you sure ?

Look at this:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/221/5...ef0e6b1f88.jpg

OK, it's an FZ50 ;)

Warnerasutter, What I said ,is- Images are sharp in FZ-30 ( I am not disputing that fact).What I wish to say (infact observe that the resposive time of the cam.) the chances of success in "dslr" is more than FZ-30.Let me put it this way ,If I have taken one image on FZ-30 the bird is either flowen away or at some other point.Infact I have few success in FZ-30 as you have shown to me, but they are few.But the rate of success is more on "dslr".Well this is my personal thinking ,You may disagree with me that is an another matter. May I suggest, Take any "dslr"(Nikon or Canon) and FZ-30 or 50 with you .and try to take the flying bird with both the cams."Experiance the differance"

well whilst not a FZ50, i do have a FZ8, which never ceases to amaze me with its pitures. the zoom is great to,12x optical, and with the 4x digital you get the 48x! sounds like it should look rough but with a tripod or steady hand you"ll be more than impressed with the results.