Yet another question about the SX40

[voodoopenguin]

Almost at the point of going for it and the answer to this question probably won't make much difference to the decision. I know that great photos can be taken by the most basic of cameras but there are some occasions when no matter how good the photographer, the camera is just not capable. The pictures we see from hal of the birdlife by the water, I have set up my Panasonic DMC-TZ7 (not the cheapest point and shoot) on a tripod, full zoom (12x) and delayed release aiming at birds in my own garden but trying varying settings nothing gets close to the crispness of hal's pictures and they are probably on a stronger zoom than I have. I'm hoping for a step up with the SX40.

I saw this photo the other day:



and thought I would never be able to get a shot like that but would I have a chance with the SX40? Ignoring being in the right position and clicking at the right time, if I was and I did, is the SX40 capable?

Paul

[space-time]

I think hal does some minor post processing to get those pictures so sharp, he explain once what he does, not a lot but he does something. maybe you can try some sharpening on some of your old photos? or maybe you can post one or two here and some experts can try to sharpen to see what you can get from your existing 12x zoom.

[WHiiP]

You'll notice the same angle on those three racers pictured above. The all have their kickstands down and are not moving. Easy-peasy shot. :driving:

[Buzz]

trepidation makes the heart grow fonder...

The SX40 does not disappoint (& shoot).
With the zoomy thingy going full blast, it may not deliver quite as shallow a DOF as a DSLR's behemoth fixed focal length tele that cost as much, or more than your old Maserati did when it was new, but it will deliver a nicely exposed shot at any reasonable shutter speed.

Try more test shots in the garden. It's a learning process; you need to know what all the various settings do to impact the resulting photo. As you learn, the photos will keep getting better and better. Somebody will recommend a good book/guide for you that has a bunch of exercises. It will help. FWIW, some lenses, and P&S's are just softer than others, which sometimes is a good thing, and sometimes its a bad thing. I don't think are are many opportunities that you'll come across where the SX40 would ever let you down... other than maybe running out of battery, and I've found some third party batteries that get like 1200 shots on a charge, so even that would be tough to do.

///

[freeradical]

voodoopenguin wrote:


I saw this photo the other day:



and thought I would never be able to get a shot like that but would I have a chance with the SX40? Ignoring being in the right position and clicking at the right time, if I was and I did, is the SX40 capable?

Paul

I would say maybe, depending upon how much you're zooming. The SX40 has a top shutter speed of 1/3200 of a second, which is very good for this type of camera. However, this is very high speed sports, and this shot was probably taken with a pro camera that has a top shutter speed of at least 1/8000 of a second.

To stop the motion of a race car moving across the frame with a "normal" focal length lens, you need a shutter speed of 1/2000 of a second, and head on, you need 1/500 of a second. Every doubling of the focal length requires ever faster shutter speed. So, with a 100mm equivalent focal length, you'd need shutter speeds of 1/4000, or 1/1000 of a second. The photographer who took this show was probably also pretty close.


Since the background is also out of focus (intentionally), this was probably shot wih a camera that has at least an APS-C sensor.

[RAMd®d]

I'm thinking that shot could have been handled a 1/2000s or even 1/1000s.

The bikes are coming head-on, mid turn. They would have slowed somewhat, the amount depending on where they are in the turn, and how they set up for the turn.

And I'm betting there was a fair amount of zoom plus a fairly wide aperture, and that the out of focus background was inevitable, intentional or not.

The photographer probably has really good gear and shot at a much faster speed given that he probably shot other aspects of the race from different angles. And we don't know if there was any post done on that, either.

I think a lesser camera than some real pro level SLR/DSLR could have taken that particular type of shot, including the SX40. Transversing perpendicular the frame, close, or with a lot of zoom would be a different story. Knowing the exact details of the shot would be helpful.

Also, a really big part in catching that shot with a non-pro would be knowing precisely when to push the button. Otherwise, setting up for that shot, it could well be within the SX40's performance envelope.

[hal]

I agree with RAM - I'm pretty sure I could get that shot with the sx40, but would take many attempts to get it right. I don't know if pros use this technique, but I suspect my best chance would be to focus on the area and wait for the riders to enter it instead of panning along with the riders for the shot.

As RAM mentions, the speed isn't really a factor with them coming straight at you.

One common problem with P&Ss - they prefer to focus on green. If you aren't getting sharp images with a tripod and timer, it must not be focused properly.

Here's a reject from the heron eating a frog series I posted on friday. I set the focus on the heron obviously, but the camera saw that green and jumped on it. I check carefully as I'm shooting to make sure that the right object is in focus. I review the picture, saw the poor focus and made sure to get the proper focus. Sometimes, I'll even focus on something nearby if the object itself is giving the camera problems.


ps - and yes, most of the shots I post are at full zoom or close to it with no tripod. I used to use the timer all the time to insure a stable shot, but the stabilization is so much better with this camera than others that I've used that I do most shots without the timer now.

[DP]

voodoopenguin wrote:
Almost at the point of going for it and the answer to this question probably won't make much difference to the decision. I know that great photos can be taken by the most basic of cameras but there are some occasions when no matter how good the photographer, the camera is just not capable. The pictures we see from hal of the birdlife by the water, I have set up my Panasonic DMC-TZ7 (not the cheapest point and shoot) on a tripod, full zoom (12x) and delayed release aiming at birds in my own garden but trying varying settings nothing gets close to the crispness of hal's pictures and they are probably on a stronger zoom than I have. I'm hoping for a step up with the SX40.

I saw this photo the other day:



and thought I would never be able to get a shot like that but would I have a chance with the SX40? Ignoring being in the right position and clicking at the right time, if I was and I did, is the SX40 capable?

Paul

Yes.

[RAMd®d]

but I suspect my best chance would be to focus on the area and wait for the riders to enter it instead of panning along with the riders for the shot.

That is absolutely a tried and true technique used by many pros. Now I don't know if the advent of digital photography has changed that to any degree, but if you go to races, you'll still see a lot of photogs at various turns waiting for The Shot.

And many also have "motor drive" capability.

[RAMd®d]

but would take many attempts to get it right.

The nice thing about racing pics is that shots like the above usually give you a second chance.

And a third.

And a fourth.