[RockvilleBob]

Good day for dragon flies
They just stay on a dead crepe myrtle branch
Photos are about 25% of the original

Attached Images

     

[Kevriano]

Good day for dragon flies
They just stay on a dead crepe myrtle branch
Photos are about 25% of the original

Love these. One of my favourite subjects.

[Kevriano]

Here's a selection of recently taken birds of various types, all on the DA 150-450 as usual. Some crops too.

Long Tailed Tit Fledglings with Mum, in our garden
Barn Owl (Captive)
Chaffinch
Great Tit
Greater Spotted Woodpecker
Greenfinch
Twany Owl (Captive)

[normhead]

A few more from today in the yard, this time taken with my XG-1 at 233.6 mm or 1248mm FF equivalent.








When you use 233mm on a small sensor, you really get some reach. I'm dying to compare these images with a few taken on my Q-S1 and the DA*60-250. This camera would be a fraction of the size of that set up.

[marcusBMG]

XG-1 at 233.6 mm

"...ultra-zoom bridge camera with a 52x optical zoom range that translates to a 24-1248mm focal range (in 35mm camera terms). The lens also features sensor-shift Shake Reduction to help iron out any camera movement and it also boasts a wider-than-average f/2.8 maximum wide-angle aperture. Image capture is taken care of by a 16.0MP back-illuminated CMOS sensor..." Photographyblog.com (gives it 4/5 stars).

Good pics - these superzooms are actually really impressive optically, amazing really that the lens can go from 4.3mm to 223mm focal range. However the nikon superzoom I had a brief look at had a pretty nasty p&s type evf - hows the evf on the XG-1? Also these bridge cameras don't usually do RAW...?

[normhead]

"...ultra-zoom bridge camera with a 52x optical zoom range that translates to a 24-1248mm focal range (in 35mm camera terms). The lens also features sensor-shift Shake Reduction to help iron out any camera movement and it also boasts a wider-than-average f/2.8 maximum wide-angle aperture. Image capture is taken care of by a 16.0MP back-illuminated CMOS sensor..." Photographyblog.com (gives it 4/5 stars).

Good pics - these superzooms are actually really impressive optically, amazing really that the lens can go from 4.3mm to 223mm focal range. However the nikon superzoom I had a brief look at had a pretty nasty p&s type evf - hows the evf on the XG-1? Also these bridge cameras don't usually do RAW...?

Those are the complaints, not very good EVF, doesn't do raw, but the exposure and jpeg engine are excellent. IN fact, in some cases I had to work pretty hard to get my K-1 images to look as good as the XG-1 images that were for the most part good right off the camera.

Still it's a lot more fidgety and imprecise than a DSLR. Just as an experiment I'm going to take only the XG-1 and K-1 on a 10 day trip. NO K-3. We'll see how it goes.

So far I'm the only one on the forum that admits to owning one, and I wrote the review. I gave it 6 out of 10 and it could have been worse. It's frustrating to use, but it is also is tiny and gets you out to 1200mm. When it's good it's really really good, and when it's bad it's horrid.

[Kevriano]

I have been very tempted to buy a good bridge, because the zooms are ridiculous, and there are times when 930mm equivalent in the K3/1.4 Tc/150-450 combo isn't enough. I've seen some remarkable results from some.

[Racer X 69]

Let me know i f she thinks I'm a stud. I keep track of those kinds of things.

I bet Tess does too.

[normhead]

I bet Tess does too.

It's better for everyone if Tess doesn't hear about this conversation.

[Canada_Rockies]

Back to bridge: I have been impressed beyond belief with Claire's X-5 results. Much of it is to do with her excellent eye for a picture, but the JPEG quality is excellent. If I have it correctly the X-5 is the XG-1's daddy.

[boriscleto]

If I have it correctly the X-5 is the XG-1's daddy.

Well, it was the bridge Pentax marketed before the XG-1. Did they come from the same OEM in China? I have no idea...I guess the X-90 would be the XG-1's Grand daddy, and the X-70 its Great grand daddy...

[Canada_Rockies]

Well, it was the bridge Pentax marketed before the XG-1. Did they come from the same OEM in China? I have no idea...I guess the X-90 would be the XG-1's Grand daddy, and the X-70 its Great grand daddy...

All I know is that Claire ordered it on the web -- and picked the Pentax bridge because I would be upset if she picked any other brand The price was great, just Cdn$250 and she has gotten a whole lot of use out of it. I got her a copy of LR 6 and she b******d and complained about the complexity until she learned it (after using a free Auzzie system), and now she is a whiz, cropping and adjusting like nobody's business.

She didn't like the weight of the SLR and the need to change lenses. Now she takes almost as many shots as I do.

[WPRESTO]

Those are the complaints, not very good EVF, doesn't do raw, but the exposure and jpeg engine are excellent. IN fact, in some cases I had to work pretty hard to get my K-1 images to look as good as the XG-1 images that were for the most part good right off the camera.

Still it's a lot more fidgety and imprecise than a DSLR. Just as an experiment I'm going to take only the XG-1 and K-1 on a 10 day trip. NO K-3. We'll see how it goes.

So far I'm the only one on the forum that admits to owning one, and I wrote the review. I gave it 6 out of 10 and it could have been worse. It's frustrating to use, but it also is tiny and gets you out to 1200mm. When it's good it's really really good, and when it's bad it's horrid.

I will freely confess, and have on some post on some obscure PF thread that no one follows, that I have two Panasonic pocket P&S cameras. The LF1 has a remarkably good lens. So long as there is minimal cropping, the images cannot be distinguished from K1 images at the resolution limitations of PF (IMHO). The second is a Pana ZS40 with a zoom that goes to 750mm FF equivalent, but it is only slightly larger than a pack of cigarettes or a deck of cards. IQ is not as good as the LF1, but the latter only goes to 200mm FF equivalent. I can fit either of them into a tiny rigid Pelican waterproof case, with extra battery & memory card, and the package is still lighter & no larger than my K3 with a 40mm f2.8 mounted. Both of the Panas have EVF viewfinders as well as the screen, the viewfinders are really poor and I rarely use them. I sometimes carry one when we walk the dog, and have taken the long zoom camera when we do a family vacation at someplace such as Disney World.

Below, three images taken with the ZS40. The first at widest zoom setting, straight out of the camera; the second at the longest zoom position, straight out of the camera; the third a slight crop of the second with some PP, which is more realistic as far as what-you-can-get, because how many of us do no PP whatever?

[ivanvernon]

I will freely confess, and have on some post on some obscure PF thread that no one follows, that I have two Panasonic pocket P&S cameras. The LF1 has a remarkably good lens. So long as there is minimal cropping, the images cannot be distinguished from K1 images at the resolution limitations of PF (IMHO). The second is a Pana ZS40 with a zoom that goes to 750mm FF equivalent, but it is only slightly larger than a pack of cigarettes or a deck of cards. IQ is not as good as the LF1, but the latter only goes to 200mm FF equivalent. I can fit either of them into a tiny rigid Pelican waterproof case, with extra battery & memory card, and the package is still lighter & no larger than my K3 with a 40mm f2.8 mounted. Both of the Panas have EVF viewfinders as well as the screen, the viewfinders are really poor and I rarely use them. I sometimes carry one when we walk the dog, and have taken the long zoom camera when we do a family vacation at someplace such as Disney World.

Below, three images taken with the ZS40. The first at widest zoom setting, straight out of the camera; the second at the longest zoom position, straight out of the camera; the third a slight crop of the second with some PP, which is more realistic as far as what-you-can-get, because how many of us do no PP whatever?

I will confess to having a Canon G-12 which is pocketable and quite convenient. Indeed, what it lacks in image quality it more than makes up for by its size, ample settings, and convenience in general.

[normhead]

All I know is that Claire ordered it on the web -- and picked the Pentax bridge because I would be upset if she picked any other brand The price was great, just Cdn$250 and she has gotten a whole lot of use out of it. I got her a copy of LR 6 and she b******d and complained about the complexity until she learned it (after using a free Auzzie system), and now she is a whiz, cropping and adjusting like nobody's business.

She didn't like the weight of the SLR and the need to change lenses. Now she takes almost as many shots as I do.

Like you, I wouldn't have paid full retail price for it, but I also paid about $250 Canadian for it. At that price it's a bargain. Plus it's the perfect car camera. It fits in the glove box. I just can't get over how good it is at what it does. For $250 bucks. I can't buy a decent DSLR lens for $250 forget about a whole functioning camera system.