Have i made the right move?

I Shoot distant subjects and will never ever be able to afford a 600mm eqv lens, so i decided to sell my 7d/250 STM Zoom, and get the latest super zoom from Lumix in the shape of the 300/330 with its very very good 600mm f2.8 eqv lens, very fast and accurate focusing, good latest eddition of venus chip, and 12mp.

In the area of 1/2.3 sensor its supposed to be the current king, have i done the right thing?


P.

For what you shoot, probably yes.

Just add a tripod so that you're not trying to handhold that angle of view if you want clear, sharp images.

Very best,

The IS in them is very very good with 5 way optical stabilization, that combined with a constant f2.8 ap, should help keep my sh speed up with low Iso, so hand holding should be as good as my 250 STM on my 7D.


P.

Pagman wrote in post #17894243
The IS in them is very very good with 5 way optical stabilization, that combined with a constant f2.8 ap, should help keep my sh speed up with low Iso, so hand holding should be as good as my 250 STM on my 7D.


P.

You assume it is in your hands.

The difference is the angle of view. To track a subject, you will be moving that lens more often and faster than you did with a 250mm on APS-C. It does matter. IS will not help this at all. This is a new technique you'll have to master at this tight of an angle of view. Try it out obviously, but if you have issues, I would suggest you consider a small mount & gimbal, it does make a difference.

Very best,

If Panasonic is still using the excellent Leica glass in the superzooms, you will get better results from that than a 250mm lens on apsc, for what you are shooting. Focal length matter. A lot. Of course, you still have to do your parts of the equation. The camera is only a tool.

I had a FZ72 bridge with its massive 1200mm eqv lens for a little while, i took these two on quite a poor day for air quality - hence the air pollution and the image noise, these two were hand held at the max optical length 1200mm, hand holding even at that range is not bad if the subject is moving smoothly and contstantly.


P.

You have to remember that these are not shot with a 1200mm lens, and the new camera will not have a 600mm lens. The lens on the new camera you are getting will actually give the same FoV as a 375mm lens would have done on your 7D. I'm not sure what the crop factor of the lens will be, but I'm guessing that it is somewhere between 150mm and 200mm of actual focal length. You are relying on using a very high resolution sensor in an effort to resolve incredibly small details from the lens. I think you will still be very disappointed in the results that you will get. There really is no substitute for optical magnification.

Alan

BigAl007 wrote in post #17894371
You have to remember that these are not shot with a 1200mm lens, and the new camera will not have a 600mm lens. The lens on the new camera you are getting will actually give the same FoV as a 375mm lens would have done on your 7D. I'm not sure what the crop factor of the lens will be, but I'm guessing that it is somewhere between 150mm and 200mm of actual focal length. You are relying on using a very high resolution sensor in an effort to resolve incredibly small details from the lens. I think you will still be very disappointed in the results that you will get. There really is no substitute for optical magnification.

Alan

Alan i think you are wrong regarding the F.O.V i have been over this subject on here a few times in the past, and the general understanding is that the F.O.V after taking into account the different sensor crop factors, and when using the same aspect ratio, will be the same -

600mm on a full frame = 600mm
300mm on a 4/3th mirr less = 600mm
400mm on a 1.5 crop = 600mm
108mm on a 1/2.3 bridge = 600mm 5.6x crop factor

They will all have give or take a few mm the same F.O.V

P.

It doesn't matter if the sensor is trying to resolve the fraction of amount of detail from the lens, so you might have the same FOV but IQ will take a major hit. You can't expect a 1200mm focal equivalent perform like an actual 1200mm on a FF sensor.

panicatnabisco wrote in post #17894460
..You can't expect a 1200mm focal equivalent perform like an actual 1200mm on a FF sensor.

Yes but a 1200mm lens on a FF body is going to set you back the cost of a house. The real question is, is it better than 7D with a 250mm cropped to the same FOV.

gjl711 wrote in post #17894482
Yes but a 1200mm lens on a FF body is going to set you back the cost of a house. The real question is, is it better than 7D with a 250mm cropped to the same FOV.

It will be interesting to see how 600mm un cropped with the Lumix FZ-300 12mp bridge will compare to the 7d mk1 and 250 zoom, but cropped to 600mm, diffarence in tech as well - 2009 with the 7d and 2015 with the FZ-300.


P.

I've just roughly looked at the numbers. What you are doing is putting a approx 6.4mm wide sensor that is able to resolve an impressive 312 LP/mm behind an 108mm lens and hoping that the lens is capable of providing the full 312 LP/mm to it. I really think that this is going to be unlikely. The very best lenses for the 35mm/APS-C format, lenses like some of Canon's latest MK II L's or the Zeiss Otus models, lenses costing many thousands of pounds, are able to resolve about 120 to 130 LP/mm to the sensor. Do you really think that the lens in a camera costing only several hundred pounds is going to be able to deliver 2.5× more resolution to the sensor? To get what you want from a bridge camera you will need one with something like a 1500mm or even 2000mm lens. It's not just FoV that matters, but the actual size of the detail that you want to resolve, in relation to the resolving power of the sensor and the lens.

Alan

panicatnabisco wrote in post #17894460
It doesn't matter if the sensor is trying to resolve the fraction of amount of detail from the lens, so you might have the same FOV but IQ will take a major hit. You can't expect a 1200mm focal equivalent perform like an actual 1200mm on a FF sensor.

The pics above shot at 1200mm were an old cam and just to show it is possible to hand hold and still get a good shot without to much motion blur, i will not be buying a 1200mm bridge.

P.

BigAl007 wrote in post #17894544
I've just roughly looked at the numbers. What you are doing is putting a approx 6.4mm wide sensor that is able to resolve an impressive 312 LP/mm behind an 108mm lens and hoping that the lens is capable of providing the full 312 LP/mm to it. I really think that this is going to be unlikely. The very best lenses for the 35mm/APS-C format, lenses like some of Canon's latest MK II L's or the Zeiss Otus models, lenses costing many thousands of pounds, are able to resolve about 120 to 130 LP/mm to the sensor. Do you really think that the lens in a camera costing only several hundred pounds is going to be able to deliver 2.5× more resolution to the sensor? To get what you want from a bridge camera you will need one with something like a 1500mm or even 2000mm lens. It's not just FoV that matters, but the actual size of the detail that you want to resolve, in relation to the resolving power of the sensor and the lens.

Alan

The LMA Test of the lens shows at 100ISO and at full zoom and center frame it scaores over 2600, that looks very very good, and the detail from the lens even with very heavy cropping, with online/flickr pages look amazing.


P.