Hi guys,

I've got a Canon Power Shot SX100 IS.

(8 Mega Pixels, 10X Optical Zoom, 2.5 inch LCD, Read more in article)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/SX100IS/SX100ISDAT.HTM

How do you think this'll fair? Mostly for outdoor aviation. I really want your feedback on what you think. Has it enough mega pixels? You tell me! Will it be any good for aviation photography?

Here are some sample pictures.

IS&sort_order=photo_id+desc&page=2&page_limit=15&sid=bb1a61a941ef73f643fd72b1bf8b2552" target=_blank>https://www.airliners.net/search/phot...d=bb1a61a941ef73f643fd72b1bf8b2552

Cheers,

Alfie

With compacts it's not necessarily about megapixels but the small sensors. Are you going off the idea of a 450D now? Would be by far a better option for aviation, however I appreciate that you want to make the most out of what you already own.

Your compact will be fine for static subjects, however the fiddly zoom and not-in-real-time viewfinder will make moderately fast moving objects trickier.

There are many nice images on A.net taken with compacts, but to be truly serious a DSLR has to be recommended.

Karl

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 1): There are many nice images on A.net taken with compacts, but to be truly serious a DSLR has to be recommended.

Hi Karl,

Thanks for your response. Well, I am still thinking of getting getting a DSLR, but at Christmas when I have more money to spare!

I'll probably get the 1000D, but I may go for the 450D, I don't know.

Cheers,

Alfie

The 1000D is more than capable. Remember, it's all about the person behind the camera!

Karl

I am looking to move to a dSLR myself when I have enough for a decent lens and a decent body, but for the time being I have shot most of my pictures with a Canon S3-IS (your same camera two generations below) and I've managed to get several pictures in the database.

I'd agree with 757MDE. I've got the S5-IS (the model in between the S3 and now SX10), and I have a few shots in the database. Not as easy by any means. Probably easier to get static/ground shots with this camera than airborne, but anything is possible.

-DiamondFlyer

Quoting Pilotalltheway (Thread starter): How do you think this'll fair? Mostly for outdoor aviation.

It's tricky, especially these days when the overall quality and affordability of DSLR cameras has improved. The small sensor (physical size, not megapixels) of a compact camera introduces issues which need to be overcome, mainly noise/grain. Slow response time, both with focus and on shutter activation can also be a problem.

You'd be much better advised to go for a DSLR if you want to make aviation photography a significant part of your photography experience. Even the lowest end budget DSLR should give better results than a compact, at least for here. If you can't afford one today, waiting and saving up might be a good idea if you can.

Nothing wrong with compacts, they have a role to play. Budgets may dictate that you have no choice. We have a Panasonic Lumix which is much handier for general use than a DSLR. My wife even got a photo on here with it (we decided to see if she could get one on, she is not really interested in aircraft generally), but the post-processing work needed to bring it up to scratch needed more care, that's for sure.

It was always tricky to get decent moving shots with the non-DSLR's I've owned and I think that is even more true today than back then. For static shots, they were ok, but you must fill the frame and post-processing demands are higher.

As a little experiment, I recently went back to my 2005 shots from Fairford to see what I could do with some that were not uploaded back then. I've learned more about editing in the last 4 years and I wanted to see what I could do. Back then I was using a 5 megapixel non-DSLR, the Panasonic FZ-20. Going back, boy was it grainy compared to my Canon 350D! I was pleased with the improvement I was able to make with my post-processing compared to back then, but even so, there were a significant number of rejections when uploaded to here. Still, several made it in and I'm even happy with the ones that didn't - they have brushed up nicely for my own collection, so it was worthwhile overall. So it is still possible to take successfull shots for here with a relatively out-classed camera. But, all the shots were of aircraft in static displays, good natural lighting, the original filled the frame (allowing some defects to be lost when resizing for here), significant post-processing was required and you can still see issues that would not appear with a DSLR. Some were good enough, but only just.

Best regards,

Jim

I've got the Canon Powershot S10 IS - 10 Megapixels - 20 x Optical. Remember the higher the Optical Zoom the better your pic will be. This is a great camera and should be great for what you want to use it for.

I upgraded from the S3 and I am 100% happy with the camera's performance.

Vaps

Quoting Vaporlock (Reply 7): Remember the higher the Optical Zoom the better your pic will be

Well I've not heard that one before.....  

Karl

Quoting Vaporlock (Reply 7): Remember the higher the Optical Zoom the better your pic will be.

Wow, I never knew you got to make up your own theories?

Quoting Vaporlock (Reply 7): Remember the higher the Optical Zoom the better your pic will be.

Uhhhhh..................

Quoting JakTrax (Reply 8): Well I've not heard that one before.....

Nor have I.

Quoting Pilotalltheway (Reply 9): Wow, I never knew you got to make up your own theories?

Ehh, sometimes. Only when talking to girls, really.  

But time to be serious(haha!)...
Optical zoom being higher won't exactly lead to the best pics, it just means it'll be easier to get that awesome shot from far away. My 55-200 has a 3.7x optical zoom, but I haven't gotten any A.net worthy pics out of it, but that's probably because of practice. (Or lack thereof.)

So just remember, it's not the camera that makes a photographer, it's a photographer that makes a camera.

Just my   

-Noah