Skip to comments.Nikon P510 Offers Highest Zoom Ratio Ever Seen in a Compact Camera
Posted on 02/01/2012 9:39:16 PM PST by SWAMPSNIPER
click here to read article
Even if that 42x can turn out 20x of awesomeness, it’ll still be worth the buy.
Looks like a lens out of a GlobalHawk. lol
This will be great if the photos are good. I’d love to have one for our spring trip.
Oh, another toy I have to have. One more Nikon for my collection.
Before I left for Canada last Christmas, bought this Olympus that Best Buy was selling where they threw in the tripod, 4 Gb sd card and camera bag for 99. It’s becoming custom nowadays to have the 720P to 1080P Hd recording feature but the 42x zoom beats out the 5x zoom. Ridiculous zoom ratio that 42..
Isn't the sensor size crucial for great pics, especially with a high amount of pixels?
Mit out a tripod, you ain’t going nowhere, boy!
I’m not a big picture taker myself.
I like the idea of taking awesome pictures, I’m just not willing to keep a camera on hand, nor do I have the patience to look for hours for that one perfect picture.
If you can put filters and a lens hood on it without a lot of extra hardware it may do well. A cpl filter and a lens hood are vital for field work.
A smaller sensor will be limited. Really you get a different type of image but it can be pretty good. You can’t mess around with DOF effects and there will be more noise.
I shoot 450mm equivalent handheld all the time.
Thanks for posting. Looking to upgrade from my Lumix. This might be the one I’m looking for.
The cheap digital cameras of today still outperform professional digital cameras from just a few years back.
With that kind of zoom, it better have a superduper optical image stabilizer...
Hard to imagine that was only 16 years ago.
16MP and 42X zoom could be the finest camera for the price in history. Wow.
One big problem with 42x is the stabilization.
If you really tried to take a picture, without a tripod, every picture would look like you’re in the middle of richter 9.
I would appreciate an unbiased opinion from someone who knows more than I do about older 35mm film type SLRs. I have a couple, and they both cost four or five hundred way back. Are they boat anchors now because of digital technology, or are the lenses still worth anything?
In some conditions. A camera like this Nikon needs a lot of light, they can be hard and slow to focus in dim light. They are usually slower to focus in all conditions. A DSLR with a fast lens is still the winner. Go try to take some shots of flying birds close up, a good DSLR will grsb focus when a lesser camera won’t.
It depends on what they are and condition but most aren’t worth much now.
I’m a novice at photography. In fact, I’m pretty lousy at it. We have a bunch of family functions going on this spring and it would be great to have a camera like this....but only if it doesn’t take a phd to operate it.
With a stabilizer system it isn’t much of a problem now.
Thanks. One is a Minolta 5000i (autofocus) with one extra lens and the other is a canon EOS rebel XS. I was wondering if the lenses were still usable?
Two things can make these features work. Image Stabilization and the ability to use very high ISO equivalents due to improvements in the sensors.
My D7000 does amazing things handheld.
I used to never shoot without a tripod if I was doing anything serious, now I rarely use one.
I wonder how fast the lens is. Not too, I’d guess....
If you can sit down for a few hours and learn some basic principles things start to become really simple.
As for family functions, superzooms are not really indoor cameras, they need more light to focus and you might not always like the results of using flash.
If the lenses have been stored properly and aren’t full of fungus or have the aperture blades frozen up they are worth a lot more than the camera bodies. The Minolta lenses will fit most Sony DSLRS and the EOS lenses also work on some newer cameras.
Look at the arms on that guy.
I had no idea that being able to bench 200 was a requirement for a professional photographer.
On another note,unless the lens described above is capable of bending the laws of physics as well as bending light (a lot), how many photons are actually going to hit the sensor at that f ratio. The subject might have to stand still for a minute or two. That’s why those sports photographers have those light cannons.
Going through a Comp USA I spotted a package with an IXLA digital camera, webpage and photo editing software on sale for maybe 60-70 bucks. It was .3 megapixel, plastic lens no doubt and a pretty basic point and shoot camera.
But I got it and she loved it! We had more fun with that little thing! She began taking more pics because there was no film expense and the pics were actually pretty good. On the web they were outstanding. They still look fine.
A couple of years later we got a small Fuji digital with maybe 1-2 megapixels. It was nice because it was smaller but the IXLA was still just as good.
A few more years passed and I got a Kodak 650 6MP digital for our youngest son. That is now our fall back camera. It has a decent zoom, is very easy to use and has never let us down.
Since then a few cheap digitals have come and are mostly relegated "keep in the car" cameras.
Recently Mrs p6 bought a camera on QVC. It's a Pentax but I don't recall the model. Fits in her purse and takes nice shots but the learning curve is pretty steep at least for us.
Meanwhile the Canon AE film cameras with bags of lenses, tripods and other stuff are my favs but anymore even the cameras in our phones and tablets take better pics. Plus it's getting hard to get film unless you order it on line.
When I get home I think I'll dig around and see if I can find the old IXLA. It would be a hoot if it still worked!
I had an idea that that might be the way it is, thanks.
It is nice to have a “junky” camera...it defeats the purpose of having only a “good” camera if it’s too expensive to take it anywhere or to use it anywhere where it might get dirty.
It’s also good if you work on cars and you want to document what you took off so that you can put it back!
What camera model did you take those photos with?
Sony A-200 with a Minolta 35-70 f4 lens. The lens was a Minolta kit lens for the Maxxum cameras, they are common but a lot of bang for the buck.
Here, for example, is a photo of some coots taken with a Canon EOS 7d and a 100-400mm lens set at 400mm. The Canon EOS 7d multiplies the focal length by 1.6, so the effective focal length of this photo is 640mm. I've read that you can divide the focal length by 50mm to tell how magnified the image is compared to a picture taken with a 50mm lens. By doing that I get a magnification of 12.8 compared to a 50mm lens of a full frame camera that doesn't multiply the focal length. A 1000mm lens like that Nikon camera you posted about would give a magnification of 20 compared to a 50mm lens.
Here's the photo:
I noticed that the coot in the middle was more or less in focus, so I cropped the image such that it was about 1/9th of the area of the original 640mm picture. Here is the resulting image blown up to the same size as the picture above:
If my calculatons are correct (always questionable), the magnification on this cropped image is 9 times 12.8, or 115 times that that a 50mm lens would give. Keep in mind I'm dealing with area of the image here, not its height or width, which would both be multiplied by a lower adjustment figure than I used in the area calculations above.
A little trick Mr. Bunk taught me: get a pile of those plastic stackable food tubs and as you take stuff apart, put everything in the tubs, one by one, in layers. No need to use caps. Pretty soon you’ll have a little tower of nuts, bolts, washers, etc, layer by layer in the stacked tubs. Then, when you go to put stuff back together you just work your way down the tower. It really works... No more mystery bits.
The figures released with point and shoots usually don’t correlate with DSLR ratings, there is some hype involved. To find out how this Nikon really rates you’d have to compare it side by side with a known lens and see which one gets “closer”.
It's been invaluable for stuff like that and documenting where things go!
Yup it gets dirty and beat up but it still works!
Doesn’t look like it’d fit in my pocket. Is it still considered Compact?
Do you give photography classes? I have a really nice Nikon, a gift from a few years back, and I still have yet to learn all its functions. IF I knew how to post some of my pictures I would but I have not master that either.
We’ll be outside....the main things are a high school graduation and party, and softball games. A super zoom like that would allow me some really good shots. I’ll have to do some practicing first as you say or it won’t matter what camera I use. :)
I just happen to be in the market for a new camera. Have been loking at the Canon G12, but this looks interesting.
It’s what they call a bridge camera, not a compact.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.