Which Is Best, A Superzoom Camera Or A Dslr For Wildlife Photography?
I like to take pictures of wildlife with a Fuji s8000 with an 18x zoom. This camera is good but it has a lot of noise. I want to upgrade it but I am not sure whether a picture from a superzoom such as the Canon sx10 fully zoomed would be better than a cropped picture from an entry level dslr with a 300mm lens.
No related posts.
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Posted in DSLR Cameras Questions 
Tags: camera, Digital SLR, Dslr, Dslr Camera, Photography, Superzoom, Wildlife
Right the low end 70-300mm type SLR lenses are no competition to a superzoom camera at full length. The 70-300mm lenses are all really really poor quality, and usually lack sharpness, tend to have fringing, while the superzoom has a small sensor so it can’t deal with lower light conditions.
In an ideal world I’d go for a Canon 5D mkII, EF 70-200mm f2.8 IS with a 1.4x teleconverter to give stretch it to 300mm. But since you don’t have £5000 flying about for a camera, perhaps you’re better off with the SX10IS.
P&S cameras are fine for amateur camera users, but shutter lag and the inability to control the exposure can cause so much frustration, especially in the area of shooting wildlife. You will see that the successful wildlife photographers use 35 mm SLR’s or DSLR’s
In photography, depending on cropping a photo later is just poor technique. Sensors are small enough as it is without chopping off more image information.
You will notice that two of the most used lenses by wildlife photographers are the 400 mm f/2.8 and 600 mm f/4 lenses and they are not inexpensive. Shooting wildlife and sports use the most expensive lenses than any other subject.
A full wildlife kit can cost over $25,000 (two long lenses, a body and sturdy tripod) The zoom lens that I have used successfully is the 200-400 mm f/4 lens (wildlife or sports)
The digital noise and overall quality of an image from an SX10is are both quite good until you go into the digital zoom range. Then things go down hill fast.
But if you stay within the Optical zoom range and shoot at the highest quality setting and a relatively low ISO (400 or less), you’ll probably find that your results are outstanding.
There are a couple of examples on my Flickr page. One shows the lack of quality when at 48X (digital zoom) while the other shows the outstanding quality one can achieve at max optical zoom.
These were both shot with my Canon S3is, which is two generations older that the SX10 and only 6 megapixels.
You question regarding comparison with a “cropped picture from an entry level dslr with a 300mm lens” would depend almost entirely on the quality of the 300mm being used, and the sensor of the “entry level” camera.
But in my experience, the S3is (and certainly the SX10is – which I sell and have extensive experience with – will be superior across the board.
Of course, there will always be the argument that a larger sensor will always be better. But that has not been my experience. Cheap and big does not automatically outperform high quality and small.
A DSLR wins hands down, but you will need to spend a fair amount on a good lens. I am an amateur wildlife photographer myself, and I know A LOT of pro wildlife photographers. The most popular lenses are 500 f/4 lenses – about £5000. I started out on a £200 sigma 135-400mm, which for a year or so produced more than adequate results. It may not focus lightning fast, but its pretty sharp. I know use a 400 f/5.6 – a very popular lens for those who cant afford a 500 f/4!
Remember that a lot of superzoom speak is just jargon to make it look better – all the quotes i’ve seen for actual focal length include the crop factor. So to make it a fair comparison, a 300mm lens on an APS-C DSLR (i.e all budget models) gives the equivalent field of view as a 480mm lens.
Also remember that an ‘18X zoom’ camera means its longest focal length is 18X greater than the shortest – e.g it could go from 20-360mm. Not the same as bringing your subject 18X closer. That would need a lens of 900mm!
Hope that helps,
Steve.
The DSLR wins going away. Its larger sensor means better image files and its lenses are of considerably better quality.
The sensor in your S8000 measures 6.16mm x 4.62mm while the sensor in a Canon XS DSLR measures 22.2mm x 14.8mm. A cropped image from a sensor that large will still be better than the image on your camera’s sensor.
A 300mm prime lens will definitely outperform the lens on any “super zoom” camera.
Buy a DSLR and enjoy real photography.
I’m not a great wildlife photographer or anything, but I agree with fhotoace completely. Some of my pics are taken with a point and shoot camera, but only the ones where the animals can barely called wild any more. Okay, the 18X zoom will let you reach out and touch some of the animals, but if you want to make more than a 4×6 print, you will find that the image quality from the tiny sensor really lets you down.
An entry level DSLR will have a sensor that is about FIFTEEN times bigger than a superzoom point’n’shoot. You can do a lot of cropping on an image from a larger sensor that you just can’t do with a P&S.
Definitely go for the DSLR with something like a 70-300 lens, for starters. Most of these were taken with the Nikon 70-300 VR lens:
I admit that the 70-300 VR lens is not a real pro lens, but it’s not too shabby, either. It’s NOT one of the $149.99 lenses by any means. It’s a tad soft at the extreme 300mm.
A DSLR will give you a nicer picture, however if you’re cropping it then your picture will turn out worse than the Canon.
If you’re focusing on wildlife photography then it’d be wise to invest in a zoom lens.