Best super zoom camera for long distance recording?

[table1349]

Your question was like saying I want a watch that is accurate to 5 seconds +/- a year for $300 or less. Which one? To my knowledge the Citizen CTQ57-0953 Chronomaster is currently the only watch that accurate and it can't be legally had for $300.

Now if you would be happy with a watch that is accurate to 10 seconds +/- a year there are a few that fit the bill. Sometimes what people want in Column A can not be reasonably combined with Column B at the price they want to pay.

My Casio GShock GW50001jf is under $300 and synchronizes with atomic clocks every night.
It is accurate to +/- 0.5s at any given time.

As long as it gets a signal from one of the Atomic Clocks. Not everywhere in the world or the US for that matter gets a signal.

 

[ZombiesniperJr]

So, which one should I choose around 300 bucks?

Actually the answer is spot on. Any camera will take a photo of something 100-500 meters away. I have even taken photos of a subject 238,900 miles away. The issue comes down to Image Quality. A lot of things goes into image quality other than zoom.

Yes, a camera will take a photo of something far away with differing quality. Of course it will. Which is why I am here asking WHICH ONE is best at doing so for the price I am willing to pay. You clearly do not know but perhaps someone here do, which is why I made this thread.

Framing your query correctly from the git-go would go a long way as well. Instead of stating you want to buy 'the best' but only have a $300 budget, it would have been far better to state, "Which $300 lens is better?"

If someone say "I want the best offroad car for $30k, do you say "the best offroad car cost $100k so there's no point responding to your dumb question" or "X is the best offroad car for $30k"?
Do you, and some others, seriously don't understand how stupid your posts are? I never said I wanted the best camera there is, I said I want the best camera I can get for this amount of money.[/QUOTE] The way you were saying it made it seem like you were saying what is the best one. (also it might now be a good idea to join a forum and then start saying peoples posts are stupid good way to make people stop helping)

 

[chuasam]

Your question was like saying I want a watch that is accurate to 5 seconds +/- a year for $300 or less. Which one? To my knowledge the Citizen CTQ57-0953 Chronomaster is currently the only watch that accurate and it can't be legally had for $300.

Now if you would be happy with a watch that is accurate to 10 seconds +/- a year there are a few that fit the bill. Sometimes what people want in Column A can not be reasonably combined with Column B at the price they want to pay.

My Casio GShock GW50001jf is under $300 and synchronizes with atomic clocks every night.
It is accurate to +/- 0.5s at any given time.

As long as it gets a signal from one of the Atomic Clocks. Not everywhere in the world or the US for that matter gets a signal.

the finishing of a watch usually matters more. the much vaunted HAQ Seiko 9F calibers only do +/- 10 a year. My brother has a GrandSeiko Quartz Diver but I shake my head at him because he never even bothers setting it beyond the approximate time *LOL*
oh right..this is a photography forum so ....I borrowed his watch for this shot

back to the topic at hand...a $300 superzoom is going to be woefully inadequate because of the smaller sensor, cheaper processing chip and inferior optics.
If you can afford a better camera without going bankrupt (and you can given your fancy "high end watches") then getting a $300 camera is just wasting good money.

here's my own watch so that you don't think that I'm some yob who knows little about watches.

 

[Derrel]

Let's dig out a yardstick...

 

[astroNikon]

I collected a few watches too.

Keep in mind, the "zoom" ranges are highly dependent upon the sensor size which becomes a multiplier factor in the lens focal length. The image quality is also dependent upon the quality of the lens elements in the lens, and so on and so forth. So when you go "cheap" you do get your monies worth but nothing like each "step" up in quality/costs.

 

[benhasajeep]

I am with some of the others. There are several cameras with amazing optical zooms in terms of how much the lens zooms. But they are all jack of all lens lengths, master at none. There are trade offs when getting these giant zooms lenses. Normally they are ok in the middle zoom area, and gets worse the wider you go, or the further out you go.
And as others have stated a very good tripod is needed without a doubt. The longer the zoom factor the more camera shake will come into play. So much so, that holding it and just breathing will make the camera move! And if your doing video the tripod head is just as important. And since your doing video at a very large zoom, some kind of controlled head is absolutely necessary to get nice fluid movements when panning or moving the camera in general.

To get really good video with any very long zoom, your going to spend quite a bit on a tripod and head. Well more than your camera budget!

Also I don't believe you stated why you wanted such a long range lens for? Birding, or other wild game maybe? That would be a better starting point. What your actually taking pictures of. And can then give better advice on the equipment.

 

[chuasam]

To get really good video with any very long zoom, your going to spend quite a bit on a tripod and head. Well more than your camera budget!

Superzooms aren't that heavy. a $200 tripod will be good enough.
I've seen some amazing Carbon Fibre tripods coming out of China for under $200

 

[benhasajeep]

To get really good video with any very long zoom, your going to spend quite a bit on a tripod and head. Well more than your camera budget!

Superzooms aren't that heavy. a $200 tripod will be good enough.
I've seen some amazing Carbon Fibre tripods coming out of China for under $200

The weight is not the issue. It's sturdiness, and ability to dampen vibrations. With a really long lens you need a rock steady tripod. This is the same reason large telescopes have rock steady tripods, or even pier mounts. The longer you go out, the more vibrations becomes an issue. With a camera you can use shutter speed to stop motion. Video it's not going to happen. Even wind on the camera / lens will cause vibrations to be picked up on video zoomed way out like that.