You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
We are getting a lot of interesting birds in the garden. Our current camera struggles with the ones down the far end on the feeders.
Are modern compact cameras better than old ones or do I need to up the budget to get better?
Yes.
Optical zoom is king.
Compact camera for birds is generally* dodgy choice as it will use a digital zoom at the kind of length you’re after?
Used VGC bridge camera for that budget I’d say. Used Nikon P510?
They seem to sell for around that
Even if you doubled your budget ... for bird shots I’d still be looking at the above, just maybe a more recent incarnation with moar zoom?
*To throw in an affordable compact that just might do it - maybe have a look at Lumix TZ90?
Yeah I'd say a 'superzoom' bridge camera would be the thing, and defo better than a 2010 version.
I would also suggest a cheap tripod if you are not already using one. Then you can zoom and prefocus on the feeder ready for a bird to fly in.
Of course you could also do what I just did...buy a secondhand Fuji X mount camera, an adapter and a couple of old vintage manual focus lenses. I have a Pentax M SMC 75-150 in unused condition on its way for a whole 25 quid which will be a 225mm focal length on a Fuji X Camera.
Fuji X-E2 body and 3 lenses plus adapter was under 300 quid!
Its the speed of operation. I had a superzoom camera from 2010ish (Canon something) and it took ages to zoom and ages to focus.
What you should get is a DSLR/mirrorless with long lens and a tripod.
^ +1 if the OP interest warrants the hike in budget and learning-curve?
Spending the dosh on a good lens vs a ‘good enough’ body is generally accepted a better choice than vice-versa. I would echo that, having ‘splashed out’ £100 on a budget zoom lens when I began getting into digital DSLR. The images were so dark and mushy that I wasn’t happy with one single frame. I sold the lens at a loss not long afterwards!
400mm telephoto is considered a decent minimum reach for birding. You’d still need to be fairly close to the feeder to fill a frame with the bird. 400mm lens on a full-frame camera body would be IIRC roughly equivalent equivalent to 8x optical magnification with binoculars?
You’d ideally be 20ft or closer from the feeder. 15ft would be better. A popup bird hide/blind could be a good investment.
Also a sturdy tripod with a pan-head. I paid about £100 for a trekking tripod but you could get a decent used tripod for £50? A pan-head is a good compromise for long lenses. A ball-head best avoided for same. A gimbal head is probably best for bird photography but there are typically much more expensive.
Camera body? Plenty to choose from but assuming buying used just be sure to but one with a relatively low shutter-count rather than high as shutter rebuilds are prohibitively costly for budget DSLR. Low to mid-end models looking at 50k-150k shutter actuations life span, so be looking for half that or less on a used model.
On a mirrorless system you’d be typically looking at a longer life span.
Only worry about service life if buying an older used body. Or buy from a reputable used dealer with some kind of assurance.
Are modern compact cameras better than old ones or do I need to up the budget to get better?
What is your current camera? Cutout do with knowing this before making recommendations.
All new current long zoom compacts have a small sensor and compromised lens to get the cost down (you might find the long zoom but not good quality or one that lets plenty of light in. Depending what your 10 year old camera is they might not be significantly different image quality wise.
I think we ned to know model numbers.
But I'm more optimistic then others here that on your budget a superzoom is the way to go.
I think a used dslr with quality 70 300 would be at least £300
I think a used dslr with quality 70 300 would be at least £300
I have just been looking and bought a (good) big zoom lens for my son's Nikon.
A Nikon 3100 is £99 on MPB, lenses up to £100 while not totes the best are still very good, particularly if comparing with a compact. £200 could get an older but great DSLR set up.
OP, what is your current camera>
A curveball, but my compact (LUMIX LX10) has WiFi connectivity including remote control of the camera. So I can set it up close to the bird feeder and then control it from a distance. It also has 4K photo modes that let you take what is effectively a short video then pull out the frame you want to capture the exact moment. I’m pretty sure that these (and plenty similar) can be had for under the OPs budget.
I have just been looking and bought a (good) big zoom lens for my son’s Nikon.
A Nikon 3100 is £99 on MPB, lenses up to £100 while not totes the best are still very good, particularly if comparing with a compact. £200 could get an older but great DSLR set up.
OP, what is your current camera>
The body is the easy bit. My d90 could be had for that. I have a 70 300 afs. These go for a bit over £200. For most things it's brilliant it's just a bit weak for birds on the on feeder as they need a bit of cropping. I think my dad's super zoom on a day with good light could match it a quite a low price.
But in general used dslr gear is crazy cheap and amazing quality
For most things it’s brilliant it’s just a bit weak for birds on the on feeder as they need a bit of cropping.
It depends how far the feeder is, no?
@zippykona - what camera have you got at the moment and how far away is the feeder?
I would possibly say not DSLR and more yes bridge/mirrorless.
Purely because low end dslr's won't have the AF performance of bridge/mirrorless and surely that will be very important for you
Rule out any that don't have the zoom you want.
Then judge it off reviews looking specifically at autofocus performance...
Definitely consider second hand but modern still counts here.
On the SLR/bridge comparison, I would say that most of the bridge superzooms would come with some kind of optical stabilisation, whether on the lens or the sensor. You will pay more for that on the DSLR side of things & depending on whether you use a tripod or not, it can make all the difference.
I've got a Nikon 70-300 with the VR optical stabilisation. Unless shooting in bright sunlight, I couldn't imagine using it at the longer end with the stabilisation off (unless stuck on a tripod).
I'd have thought a second hand superzoom would be ideal for this.
These were all with a Canon SX70 HS
I would possibly say not DSLR and more yes bridge/mirrorless.
Purely because low end dslr’s won’t have the AF performance of bridge/mirrorless and surely that will be very important for you
Really. All dslr, even cheap old one, have phase detect af. They can follow moving objects. But this only really became available on superzooms more recently same with mirroless. So I can't think of any bargains in this category. Which models where you thinking of?
fz200? 24-600, f2.8, has tracking focus, can be had for £100ish. Light
fz 1000, a bit over £200, but 1 inch sensor
Don't bother. It's a mug's game. It's extremely difficult and time consuming to get good wildlife pictures, and anything else is just a picture of a sparrow on your feeder.
If I had a feeder what I'd do is set up a camera right next to it, leave it there and then have it either motion activated or remote activate by you when the birds turn up.
Really. All dslr, even cheap old one, have phase detect af. They can follow moving objects.
Yeah but cheap old ones don't do it very well. Getting worthwhile pics of moving wildlife is even more difficult than stationary.