Digital cameras, how much zoom?

[AnnieAK]

For all of you guys who have digital cameras with quite a bit of zoom: what do you think of it? Jesse, you have one with 10x, don't you? There was a discussion on here some time ago about lenses, and how much zoom you need. Is 10X just not quite enough? How about 15X or so. That's somewhere between a 400 and a 500 mm lens equivalent, isn't it?
I think think the 15X (combined) zoom that I have with my setup with the Eagle Eye lens added on is pretty good, but it seems that one or several of you said even 15X or 17X wasn't enough. With my setup, I don't have the continuous zoom. I have up to 3X, then I have to leave it at 3X when I put the 5X on and go straight to 15X.
I was interested in the Nikon D100, because I had a Nikon for years and had a 500 mm lens and a zoom that I really liked, but my old manual focus lenses won't handle the auto functions, so I'd end up having to buy new lenses in order to really get the goody out of a technical marvel like the D100, and I just don't feel like shelling out $1900 for the camera body and then a whole bunch more for lenses.
What I'm thinking of now is getting one of the higher pixel camera with an 8 or 10X lens. If it would take a telephoto lens (like Oly's 1.7X), I think that would be just the ticket. Thoughts?

 

[spectr17]

Hello Annie,

My Olympus 2100 with it's 10x optical zoom and with my Olympus 1.7 tele lens attached all equals roughly 675 mm in SLR camera talk.

This is good enough to fill most of the frame at 100 yards. Past that and you'll need more optical zoom. Sometimes you just can't get closer than 150 yards and the extra zoom really comes in handy.

I've shot some pics with the Sony 20x optical zoom cameras and they reach way out there that's for sure. The trade off is having to use a tripod to get sharp pics and loosing light with all that tele lens in front.

I think 15x would be a good zoom for what is presently offered in cameras & lenses.

From pics I've seen, out past say 200 yards you really need to go to a good spotting scope like a Kowa and use digiscoping techniques.

One thing to check on your idea of the higher megapixel with a tele lens in front is to make sure they are compatable with each other. For some reason I remember people taking the Olympus B300 1.7 tele lens and trying to use it with other cameras besides the Olympus 2100 and it didn't work well. You can ask about the specific camera and tele lens compatabilty in Steve's Digicam forums. That's where I got the info to go to the B300. Link is to the Olympus forum but Steve's Digicam also has other brand camera forums too.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/forum.asp?forum=1008

Good luck and let us know what you decide on.

 

[AnnieAK]

Thanks, Jesse. I agree that one of the big problems with going higher on the magnification is the loss of light. The farther north you go, the less intense and flatter the light is. There's a big difference; I really notice it when I go to the lower 48 to visit family. There's definitely a warmer, deeper quality to the light down there.
I got the info about the B300 and the Eagle Eye from this site, it has mostly info about Oly's:
http://www.cliffshade.com/dpfwiw/

I'm going to take my time getting this camera; the prices on the high-MP cameras, even digital SLRs have really come down in the last year or so.

 

[BamaRob]

I have the C2100UZ and an Olympus 1.5x tele- lense for it. This gives me 15x optical. Not quite as good as the 17x with the B-300 (but I got my tele- lense for < $100

). As spectr17 pointed out, the closer you can get to the subject, the better. It's nice to be able to fill the frame with the subject, but I've found that the 1600x1200 resolution in the 2100 allows me to shoot wildlife (mostly deer) out to 200 yards then crop the image to say 800x600 with the subject filling the frame. Of course, I wouldn't want to make 8x10 prints from this, but the image quality is still pretty good. 20x would be nice, but with the loss of light that comes with it, I'm not sure how functional it would be in the field.

As for getting close to the subject... I've found that it's best to have my camera with me at all times. If I'm specifically going out with the intent of shooting pictures, the critters never seem to come close enough or allow me to get close enough. If I'm going hunting, fishing, driving to work, etc. they show up within 50 yards and stand there posing for me. I got some great shots of a red shouldered hawk on my way to work last week. He was perched next to a small county road watching for prey in the right-of-way. I pulled up in my truck not 20 yards away and shot 10-12 shot of him.

Later,

BR

 

[WildBird]

Just ordered a Raynox 1.54x lens for my C-730. Will take me out to 585mm in 35mm talk. Its the model in the upper left on their page.

http://www.raynox.co.jp/english/digital/eg...egolyc700uz.htm

Check out the full-sized demo pic posted. This was done using a C-700 which has resolution of 2.1mp.

It should arrive in a couple of days and I will report. WB

 

[WildBird]

Got the Raynox 1540 (1.54 zoom) in 2 days from the seller. Very reliable. $176 delivered. Very impressive. The lens weighs 8 oz. Here are a couple of pics shot from a tripod using the camera self timer. Think I will buy the optional remote to use as a shutter release. These are unretouched. WB

Oly C-730 at 10x full zoom

Raynox lens at full 15x.

Now to get a light tripod (any suggestions appreciated) and find some wildlife opportunities. WB