# I want a SIMPLE, Long Range, Digital, Camera! HELP!



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

This is my first post in the camera forum and this may have already covered, but here goes. I want a Long Range, SIMPLE to operate, Digital, camera. I am not looking to do photography as a intense hobby (at least not yet) or profession, I just want a camera to take pics at long range of deer on our lease. I am not in anyway familiar with Hi-tech cameras and any of the extremely nice long range cameras my friends have are quite technical. I basically want a point and shoot camera with minimal input from me. I understand their are some adjustments I need to do like focusing with a long range lens but thats about as far as I would like to take it. I am not looking for professional or even semi-professional quality pics just be able to take pics of deer for management evaluations. Is this just a pipe dream or is there a camera out there for me? Any help would be greatly appreciated!


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

Not a pipe dream at all. Most of the major manufacturers offer Ultra Zoom Digital cameras. Add a telephoto lens and you can shoot the moon...as well as the deer.

Its been a few years since I bought one. They are/were offered by Canon (S3 and S5); Sony had the H series; Nikon introduced one; along with Olympus and Panasonic and probably everyone else, too. Now, a UZ with a telephoto won't give you all of the detail that a good single lens digital reflex (DSLR) plus a high quality telephoto lens would...but you will be spending under $500.00 for 90% of the results. 

You can set most of those cameras on the AUTO setting and get fine results. You will get better results if you simply learn how to use the -A- (Aperture) setting as time goes on. 

I'd do a web search for Ultra Zoom cameras and then come back here with more questions. regards, Rich


----------



## TX CHICKEN (Jun 4, 2004)

I have the Canon S5 and added a 1.5 teleconverter to it and it takes pretty good pics 200 yards out. You can probably get a good used one for under $300 and the extra 1.5 for another $60 or so.
Mike


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

If you go the Ultra Zoom route..please DO NOT make the mistake of buying a cheapy teleconverter junk lens for it. Buy a quality Canon/Sony etc. teleconverter. .The extra $50 or even $100.00 that you spend on the teleconverter will be well worth it. 

I have a $39.95 teleconverter sitting on my desk back in Houston acting as a paperweight! 

You will have to also buy a fitting to add the teleconverter lens in most cases. That is normal.
I would also expect to buy an inexpensive ($30.00 or so ) mono-pod to steady your shots. Wal-Mart; and many other places have them .

regards, Rich


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Thanks for the information, fellas!


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Is this one (http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...&fcategoryid=144&modelid=15207#ModelDetailAct) of the ones you guys mentioned? And is this the teleconverter lens(http://www.usa.canon.com/consumer/c...egoryid=144&modelid=15207#SNAModelSuppliesAct) you guys are talking about?

So what does a teleconverter lens do exactly? Does this camera have a removeable lens so that you can get a longer zoom lens? Thanks again for the information.


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

What about this one (http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1450)? Also, is there any one brand you guys prefer over another? Thanks, Jason


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

Yes, the first LINK is the camera. The second LINK shows the teleconverter lens below the pix of the camera itself...I believe. I , personally, used the Canon S-3 with the Sony 1.7 teleconverter. The other poster used this one I believe. Either will be high quality and do a good job, IMHO. 

The Canon teleconverter MIGHT attach directly without an adapter. That I do not know, but it would be a good thing.

The teleconverter ADDS ONTO the original lens. Ultra Zooms normally do NOT have removable lenses, but do easily accept the addition of the T/C. 

You may read where T/C's, when used with DSLR's are not very good. Something is different about the layout of the UZ with a teleconverter. It works very well, and does NOT lose as much light ( f-stops) as a similar device on a DSLR. Don't ask me why.

I have a Flickr site that has many pix taken, prior to May of last year...(when I bought a Sony A350 DSLR).....with a Canon S-3 and a Sony 1.7 teleconverter. You can probably find it by going to FLICKR and searching for richg99. Lots of shots with the the combo mentioned above. regards, Rich 

The t


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

Here is the LINK to the Flickr site. Rich
http://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

Since I haven't purchased a UZ camera in the last couple of years, I do not have any knowledge of the OLY that you showed above. I would not hesitate to buy an OLY, though.

I, personally, have little or no brand loyalty when it comes to UZ cameras. 

I am, however, cognizant of the support groups and add-on products that are available. Even though I owned a Sony H-2 and then a Sony H-5...and later bought a Sony A350 DSLR.. in the middle I bought the Canon S-3 and was completely pleased with it. I still own it and use it for special situations. 

Every camera manufacturer has some feature or benefits that sets them out. The Sony H-5 had very bright and wonderful screen...but only had two batteries and was SLOW to flash. The Canon had a dim screen, but had four batteries and was quick to flash.....and the beat goes on. 

You've got to do some serious shopping. Be mindful though, that your goal is to take seriously long shots. That means that your final choice had better have a good teleconverter lens available. Some do... some don't. regards, Rich


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Rich,

You have been so very helpful, thanks so much!! Whats a good estimate for how far I can shoot pics and still make out good antler detail with one of these cameras mentioned above with a teleconverter attachment? Again, thanks for all the help.


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

"good antler detail"...now there is a subject matter that I know NOTHING about. I cannot help you with that judgment call. I can offer you, however, if you don't need to buy your camera in the next two weeks, an opportunity to try my Canon S-3 at a couple of hundred yards. 

Right now, I am in the Frozen North ( Illinois/Wisconsin) and will return to Houston by September 26 or so. When I get back, if you want to take a ride way up North to FM1960, you can shoot my camera and see what it does. 

Another option would be to go to a good camera store; get them to put the camera and the t/c together,...and shoot distance shots across their store, or even out the front door. 

Sorry but I cannot help any more than that. Rich

p.s. if you browse through my Flickr site, you may find some long distance shots that show detail.


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

I checked my Flickr (richg99) site. on Page 12...image 7391; was taken of a high jumper at 105 yards or so. I used the Canons S-3 and the Sony 1.7 teleconverter to take those shots as best I recall. 

I used Google Earth to do the measuring from where I stood to where the kids were jumping. Don't know if this information will help or not...but??? regards, Rich


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

richg99 said:


> I checked my Flickr (richg99) site. on Page 12...image 7391; was taken of a high jumper at 105 yards or so. I used the Canons S-3 and the Sony 1.7 teleconverter to take those shots as best I recall.
> 
> I used Google Earth to do the measuring from where I stood to where the kids were jumping. Don't know if this information will help or not...but??? regards, Rich





richg99 said:


> "good antler detail"...now there is a subject matter that I know NOTHING about. I cannot help you with that judgment call. I can offer you, however, if you don't need to buy your camera in the next two weeks, an opportunity to try my Canon S-3 at a couple of hundred yards.
> 
> Right now, I am in the Frozen North ( Illinois/Wisconsin) and will return to Houston by September 26 or so. When I get back, if you want to take a ride way up North to FM1960, you can shoot my camera and see what it does.
> 
> ...


Thanks so much! Thats a very generous offer and I will try and make it up that way to meet and to try it out and that would also allow me to possibly learn a thing or two about photography, Although, I cant promise anything about the learning part though LOL. If you get a chance could you look at the specs of this camera http://www.olympusamerica.com/cpg_section/product.asp?product=1450 and tell me what you think. I mentioned it in one of the above posts. I have been reading over reviews all night while here at work and all of them have said that none of the Ultrazooms that have been reviewed have great picture quality. The Canon website doesnt even list the S-3 or S-5 as being currently produced. Theyer newest ones they have listed that I might be interested in are the PowerShot SX1 IS and the PowerShot SX20 IS. I have found the S-3 and S-5 for sale on a used basis. So if you could look at these cameras (PowerShot SX1 IS, PowerShot SX20 IS, S-3, S-5 and the olympus SP-590UZ) and tell me your thoughts. I would be greatly appreciative of your time. Thanks so much, Jason.


----------



## dicklaxt (Jun 2, 2005)

I got a question ,curiosity based so not trying to get in your business but????

If you are wanting photos to study population,antler growth and developement,this is going to take many hours of sitting and waiting on your part with one camera in daylight hours.

I envision you spending at least a $1000 to get this started not to speak of your time and expenses.

How about taking the same $1000 and getting anywhere from 5 to 10 Game Cams that will operate 24/7,unattended.

I see at this point a lot more images at closer range and a lot more area coverage with Game Cams.

Just a thought,don't forget to post up your resultant pics which ever way you go.,good luck,

dick


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

As usual, Dick Laxt has a very good point. I, not being an "antler guy", wondered about the logic of trying to shoot a pix of a relatively small object at 200 yards or so. One would have to wait around the the deer to appear; be sure that you had good lighting and no fog or haze...etc. 

I can be comfortable in that the replacement cameras for the Canon S3 and S5 ( no longer being produced) are better in quality and speed and have features that my 
S-3 does not. Olympus makes a good camera, though I know nothing about the one you noted. The big question is "does it have a good teleconverter available?" is still a big item.

If you look at the Flickr site that I posted...and at the particular pix that I shot at 105 yards...you will have to determine if that kind of shot will give you the detail that you need. Remember, that was shot in bright sunlight from a comfortable post..with the ability to time the kid's running to catch the action. 

If the shot doesn't produce the detail that you need, under excellent conditions.. then you will have to go the DSLR route, and spend more money to get a far better picture. What do you think?

Unfortunately, I am going to be "out-of-pocket" for three days. I'll look back at this thread when I return. regards, Rich


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

I took a quick look at the specs on Oly. 590 UZ. They are impressive. I'd want to read some additional reviews etc. check www.dpreview.com and others on the net for more info.

Interestingly, the 590 UZ has a --in-body-- 676 mm effective lens. My S-3 ( only a few years old) only gets out to 432mm and with the add on teleconverter out to 734mm effective. That means that the Oly 590UZ does, in camera, almost what my older one does with an added on teleconverter.

Additionally, it has a 1.7 teleconverter available in the accessories section. If one added the teleconverter on.... that would boost the effective long range out to 1150 mm. WOW. I've never owned an Oly, but those specs sound great. Rich


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

dicklaxt said:


> I got a question ,curiosity based so not trying to get in your business but????
> 
> If you are wanting photos to study population,antler growth and development,this is going to take many hours of sitting and waiting on your part with one camera in daylight hours.
> 
> ...


Dick,

I really do appreciate your input and didn't think of it as stirring or getting in my business. I will have a few of them around and plan on using them for that very thing. I just wanted a camera for taking pictures of deer that are on other parts of the ranch while I was driving around or sitting in other stands that don't have the cameras. Additionally, the better trail/game cams are quite pricey.

I very much thank you for the comment and didn't take offense in any way.



Rich said:


> As usual, Dick Lax has a very good point. I, not being an "antler guy", wondered about the logic of trying to shoot a pix of a relatively small object at 200 yards or so. One would have to wait around the the deer to appear; be sure that you had good lighting and no fog or haze...etc.
> 
> I can be comfortable in that the replacement cameras for the Canon S3 and S5 ( no longer being produced) are better in quality and speed and have features that my
> S-3 does not. Olympus makes a good camera, though I know nothing about the one you noted. The big question is "does it have a good teleconverter available?" is still a big item.
> ...





richg99 said:


> I took a quick look at the specs on Oly. 590 UZ. They are impressive. I'd want to read some additional reviews etc. check www.dpreview.com and others on the net for more info.
> 
> Interestingly, the 590 UZ has a --in-body-- 676 mm effective lens. My S-3 ( only a few years old) only gets out to 432mm and with the add on teleconverter out to 734mm effective. That means that the Oly 590UZ does, in camera, almost what my older one does with an added on teleconverter.
> 
> Additionally, it has a 1.7 teleconverter available in the accessories section. If one added the teleconverter on.... that would boost the effective long range out to 1150 mm. WOW. I've never owned an Oly, but those specs sound great. Rich


Rich,

I very, very, much appreciate your time, *patience*, understanding, and your wealth of knowledge. I know, I may be beating a dead horse by asking SOOOO many questions on the subject or being redundant. I just want to try and draw from yours and others knowledge in this department and try to make an educated or informed decision. I am quite the novice in this area so please take that into account. I understand that most of the conditions during the most active hunting times are not going to be ideal and thus one of the reasonings that I ask so many questions.

Thank you, also for looking into the other cameras, you have gone above and beyond. I did look at the pictures (actually have looked at them many, many, times!) and the detail in that one pic should be OK for judging most of the animals.

Again, thank you all for your patience and understanding, it is appreciated.


----------



## I have no bait (Sep 3, 2009)

i say a d40 with a 55-200 lens or maybe the user friendly d 3000


----------



## dicklaxt (Jun 2, 2005)

True enough on some Trail Cams being expensive but for count and management criteria a good clean pic is not a must......so cheapies can be used.

I've often wondered about the value of Trail Cams as they are only telling you of the big boys who are usually 100% nocturnal and you are not going to see them during legal hunting hours unless they make a mistake during the rut,anyway good luck on your venture.

dick


----------



## Huachele (Apr 19, 2009)

I second the Nikon D40 recommendation.

Here is a site with everything you will ever want to know and a lot of info that you won't ever have know about a D40 and how to use it. Complete with lens recommendations: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d40.htm

For shooting in low light you will want an f2.8 lens but they start at $1000.

If you start reading this guys articles you will need to sift through all of the esoteric info and focus on the things that are important to you. He also has reviews and users guides for other brands of cameras.

Good luck.


----------



## Arlon (Feb 8, 2005)

You could invite me over and I'd bring my big lens, save you hundreds of dollars.. (-:}


----------



## TXDRAKE (Jun 24, 2004)

Thanks for everything and I do appreciate all the advice!


----------



## richg99 (Aug 21, 2004)

If you wish to still consider the Ultra Zooms..here is a good disucssion about the merits of the Canon SX10 vs the Canon SX20 cameras.... you may have to register to see them, though. rich

http://www.s5users.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13457


----------



## captinharry (Dec 31, 2004)

do consider the canon sx10 or sx20, my son has the sx10 with 20x lens & I have been very impresed with it, also less than 400 most places,


----------

