The Nikon Coolpix P610 Superzoom Bridge Camera for Birding and Wildlife - Video and Stills In the Wild

I can now report on how the P610 performed over two weeks in the state of Gujarat, India. In short, I used it for 95% of my video and 95% of the still photographs. Originally, I was intending to use the camcorder for video plus the odd still and the Nikon for stills where I needed a focal length of greater than 500 mm (in full-frame 35 mm equivalents). The longest focal length I can manage on my Sony camcorder with the awkward screw-in extender fitted is 300 x 1.7 = 510 mm.

I only used my Sony Camcorder for 5% of the footage. The reason for this was two-fold. Firstly, the large mammals (Asiatic Lions, Blackbuck and Asiatic Wild Asses, for example) in the national parks and sanctuaries of Gujarat were far more wary of vehicles than similar mammals in Africa and photography was therefore at a greater distance. I needed more than 500 mm, and so the Nikon, being used for stills was pressed into service to see if I could get video footage that I would have been unable to get with the camcorder. Secondly, the outrageously high camera fees charged in the parks and sanctuaries of Gujarat. Camera fees, payable in rupees, were GBP12.50 per camera per visit. Since we had six visits to Gir, the camera fees for that park alone were £75. The charge is per camera not per photographer so one unfortunate in our party was spotted with a second camera in her bag (which she had no intention of using) and dragged off to pay another fee. I was not going to pay for a second camera in order to add support to the bureaucratic lunacy of the ministry responsible for running the parks so carried only the Nikon to use for everything.

To cut to the chase, I could not distinguish the quality of the full HD video between the two cameras. If anything the Nikon had the slight edge (it has a larger sensor, 1/2.3 compared with 1/2.88 of my now obsolete Sony). Stabilisation also seemed similar. I was able to take video, sometimes at the full 1440 mm equivalent focal length by pressing the camera against the side of the vehicle or by pressing the camera into the flesh of my attractive assistant who received the simple instruction: ‘Stop breathing’. Of course, there were the usual problems of taking video from a vehicle with other people on board, with their slightest unintentional movement causing me and the camera  to move. The Nikon seemed slower than the Sony in changing focus. However, at focal lengths equivalent to the range available on the Sony, I had no problems at all and it may be the effect of a larger sensor and the long focal length that made the Nikon seem slower. The depth of field at a distance of 50 metres and an aperture of f/5.6 is only a couple of metres and a lion walking quickly towards the camera would need the autofocus to shift quickly. The only disadvantages of using the Nikon compared with the Sony were the recording of the noise of the zoom motor and of the wind whistling past the microphones. I have a Micromuff fitted to the Sony which helps with the wind problem. On the Nikon the stereo microphones are mounted on the top of the flashgun. Had I thought I should have tried raising the flashgun to change to angle of the microphones in relation to the direction of the wind.

I also made full use of the built-in GPS (as I did with the camcorder also).

Before leaving, I bought a package of a battery charger and two cheap batteries, so that I also had two fully charged spares with me. I did not take the supplied Nikon in-camera charger. I did not have to change a battery in the field but replaced the battery after each morning or evening session. The cheap batteries performed just as well as the original Nikon.

So can the P610 replace my camcorder for video?  For most purposes, my answer would be ‘yes’. However, the Sony does have the edge in two respects: its low lux capability and night shot (infrared). The capability of the cheap P610 does leave me with a problem for the not-too-distant future: what do I buy to replace the Sony camcorder; another Sony camcorder and if so which sensor size and output or a compact system camera with an added microphone, the Panasonic Lumix with a 4K video option, for example? I have already discounted an SLR for wildlife video since I do not want to have to use live view through the screen as a viewfinder nor do I want the very restricted depth-of-field for wildlife shots on the fly (desirable as that narrow depth of field would be in certain circumstances). I am putting off making that decision.

So, having found the P610 excellent for both stills and video (and a major improvement on the P510, as I explained in my previous post) were there any niggles? There were three; one was on performance, the others ergonomic. At full zoom and on a little of the hand-held, pressed-against-the-flesh video footage there was some ‘shimmering’ down the edges. Was this the result of the in-camera stabilisation fighting against or trying to help my keeping the camera still? Somehow, I found I had the electronic as well as the optical vibration reduction turned on, so that may be the reason. More testing will be done—not, sadly with a desert fox cub as the subject but a garden chair.

The catch that closes but does not
lock the battery compartment

Ergonomically, I found the video start/stop button in an awkward place. That is probably because I am a partial left-hander and hold the camera to my left eye. The rest of my face prevents my right thumb from gaining easy access to the video button. Finally, and despite all the plaudits, a real demerit for the Nikon designers. This is what happens. Binoculars are permanently welded to wildlife watchers and the camera dangles above them. Unfortunately, the catch that closes the battery compartment snags the top of the binoculars and the flap springs open. A fellow traveller had noticed this with here P510 (soon to be swapped for the P610) and had actually lost the battery because the tab holding the battery had also been pulled across by the binoculars or their strap after the compartment had flipped open. Nikon really do need to redesign the battery compartment catch; simply pushing it to one side to open it is too easy. At present a piece of sticky tape seems the most useful precaution.

It is very difficult to illustrate how good video or stills are on screen. However, here is a video shot at focal lengths beyond 1000 mm equivalent of parakeets seeing off a marauding rat snake.

Examples of still photographs (more on shown on my Flickr page). Nearly all are crops from the full-size (4608 x 3456 pixels) photographs, with processing in Aperture with Nik Software plug-ins.

So, to conclude, buying the Coolpix P610 shortly before we went to India paid off, enabling me to get video footage and still shots that would not have been possible with my Sony camcorder with its very limited (x10) zoom. Having tested it in action, I am extremely pleased that it did more than I asked.

There will be more information on the wildlife of Gujarat on my other blog, Zoology Jottings.

The New Nikon P610 Superzoom Bridge Camera for Birding and Wildlife - First Impressions

Nikon Coolpix P610

As an early buyer of the first superzoom bridge camera, the Nikon Coolpix P510, I was keen to buy a replacement with a better digital viewfinder and a longer zoom. Of all those now available I chose the newly-released P610 and it arrived as soon as Wex had stocks.

I should say I chose it over the also new P900 which has an even longer maximum focal length (2000mm in full-frame 35 mm terms). However, the P900 at 899 g is much heavier than the P610 (at 565 g virtually the same weight as the P510). For tropical trips I am usually carrying 10 x 42 binoculars and a camcorder as well, so weight is important to me.

My first impressions are very favourable. Nikon seems to have listened to what birders want. For example there is a dedicated Bird-watching setting in the Scene dial setting. This setting is held after turning away from it to Auto, Programmed, Shutter-priority, Aperture-priority or Manual modes so that when returning to Scene the Bird-watching setting appears there without having to turn the dial to select it afresh.

In the Bird-watching setting, there is a small centre-dot focus point and the shutter is silent.

One key difference is the increased maximum focal length (24-1440 in 35 mm terms). A major improvement compared with the P510 is the viewfinder resolution (921k vs 201) and there is eye detector to flip automatically between screen and EVF. The build is far less plasticky with a more robust feel. The Fn button is useful and I have set it to change the vibration reduction function quickly if the camera is mounted on my Trekpod or tripod. The speed of focus, although still based on contrast detection as would be expected, seems faster. One very useful feature has been added. It can sometimes prove difficult to find the target with the lens fully extended. In front of the telephoto/wide lever on the lens barrel is a button; when this is pressed the lens zooms to a shorter focal length so that the target can be found, and when it is released the zoom returns to its previous telephoto setting.

There are lots of other features, either new or improved. I am pretty sure this camera will prove a hit for birders and other wild-life watchers. The built-in GPS is very useful. I may well use the time-lapse function and the wireless link with my iPhone to fire the shutter without shake. The video seems to be of higher quality than that from the P510.

So far, I have only two minus marks. The first is that only an in-camera charger is supplied—useless when travelling so I quickly ordered an external charger and spare batteries from Amazon. There is no raw output which is a shame. However, early indications are that the jpegs are not overly rendered either in terms of contrast, saturation or over-sharpening. In Aperture (soon to be the late lamented) or Nik software I was able to increase sharpness without producing the artificial edge look.

I have only managed a few test shots—still and video on and off the tripod—because the weather has been so poor. But thus far I am very pleased but will report on it when it has seen proper action for the first time—in India next month. In the meantime, I think Nikon have a winner in the Coolpix P610

Images stored for the future: Scan old slides before it is too late

How to make sure digital files are kept safe for the future hit the headlines last week. Some commentators compared the permanence of film photography with the difficult problem of ensuring that digital files prepared using particular pieces of software and stored on a particular digital medium would be accessible hundreds of years in the future. However, film photography is not necessarily that permanent, with a number of colour films showing serious signs of deterioration with age.

Two years ago I described how I scanned 4 x 4 cm Super Slides from 127 size film taken in a 'Baby Grey' Rolleiflex and how some Agfacolor CT18 films had deteriorated after 50 years while others were hardly affected.

The other day, I was wondering if I could get a better quality scan of a very small area of one the CT18 transparencies. On rescanning, I found that the rate of deterioration in the slides from that particular film seems to have increased. The colours had faded more and the magenta tinge that was spreading from each edge of the original length of film was deeper.

I do not know why Agfacolor CT18 films have been so variable in their keeping quality. Was it a property of variability in manufacturing, or some problem with poor processing?

Whatever the reason, my advice to anybody having Agfacolor CT18 slides: scan them now before it is too late.

I see 127 rolls of very outdated CT18 are still advertised on eBay but I have no idea who can still process CT18 or if such old film will produce an image at all.

Has Trek-Tech, makers of the TrekPod, gone?

My TrekPod XL has been envied wherever I have taken it in the world. For those not familiar with the TrekPod system, it acts as a trekking pole and tripod with a quick-release magnetic ball and socket head.  It breaks down into sections for packing (the XL is carbon fibre and came with a case as well a separate table tripod) and it is the bottom section that can easily be splayed out to form a tripod. For video it is perfect since any kind of support is better than no support.

When I bought it a few years ago, the British agents were Johnson-Photopia. I was concerned that it might be a poor trekking pole and a poor substitute for a proper tripod. That proved not to be so and I was very pleased with it from day one. It proved its robustness as a trekking pole in the Simien mountains of Ethiopia; I really put some pressure on it both uphill and downhill. The MagMount system for the Sony camcorder is excellent and although pans and tilts would be difficult, a steady shot is assured, especially when using longer focal lengths for wildlife.

I then saw that the advertisements for the system had disappeared from the British photographic press; then from the range of products for which Johnson-Photopia are agents. A look at the Trek-Tech website showed that nothing had been updated since about 2008; similarly, the company's page on Flickr held nothing beyond early 2010. I found this ominous notice on the website: To our customers: Trek-Tech is working through some corporate restructuring. Please be patient while we work through this process. And that's the way the website has stayed.

I suppose the rise of stabilised cameras has reduced the potential customer base for this type of product but nothing else quite fills the bill. The current crop of video monopods with fold-out feet are not suitable as trekking poles and even the lightest tripods are less convenient to carry and slower to set up than the Trek-Pod. For lighter CSC and bridge cameras it is also excellent.

Whether Trek-Tech will ever be back in some form I do not know. I could have sold a number to photographers, wildlife watchers and travellers impressed after seeing one in action. It would be a pity if the innovative technology disappeared forever.

A Digiscoping Dilemma

My present ‘standard’ digiscoping set up with the Leica apo-Televid 77 is: a B32 WW eyepiece on the scope and a Digilux 1-Televid adapter connected via a 49-46 stepping ring to a Panasonic Lumix LX5 camera. To fill the frame and minimise vignetting with this set-up the camera has to be on maximum zoom (19 mm). This gives me a 35 mm full-frame camera equivalent focal length of 2675 mm. I use an attachment made by Richard Franiec that fits into accessory shoe of the camera and allows a standard cable release to be used to press the shutter button.

Panasonic Lumix LX5 with Digilux 1 adapter
stepping ring attached to 32 WW eyepiece on
apo-Televid 77

However, the LX5, introduced in 2010, does not take full HD video and the whole set-up with so many glass surfaces is inclined to flare. Travelling abroad means having to carry another camera, charger and the Digilux/stepping ring adapter. For most distant shots my superzoom Nikon bridge camera (1000 mm full-frame equivalent) is fine. It is only for the really distant shots that the digiscope offers an advantage.

I have been trying the Phone Skope system for digiscoping with my iPhone 6 to see if that would be a better bet for carrying when travelling. The dedicated phone case (only just available in UK from Newpro) and special adapter for the Leica 32 WW eyepiece work very well. The video from the iPhone 6 with its Sony sensor is of high quality and, of course, full HD. The disadvantage of the set-up is the maximum effective focal length that can be obtained: 960 mm and effectively the same as my Nikon superzoom camera. (For incorporating stills into full HD video, I do of course, have the option of only using 1920 x 1080 of 3264 x 2448 pixels of the i-Phone image, thereby gaining extra magnification by what is a ‘digital zoom’.) However, I can see occasions where I shall use the Phone Skope set-up. If the scope and tripod are locked on a bird then it is a matter of moments to attach the Phone Skope, and start the video or take a still using a remote release or the volume control on the ear-phones.

iPhone 6 in Phone Skope case and adapter for 32 WW eyepiece

Without my Lumix LX5 set-up I would lose the capability to go beyond 1000 mm full-frame equivalent focal length. Should I get a new superzoom camera with an even greater maximum focal length which could take raw stills and full HD video, and ditch the LX5 and Digilux adapter, its lack of hull HD now being a major disadvantage? The gain in optical quality and greater depth-of-field might offset that loss of focal length that my present digiscoping set-up can achieve. For travelling abroad that might be the best bet, with the iPhone (which goes abroad with me anyway) and very light Phone Skope to latch onto the Televid if necessary.

Decisions have to me made…

Photograph Taken: Then What?

The photographic press appears to have deserted output. By output I mean the means by which a photograph is displayed and viewed. It is clear that very few photographs are printed, hence the lack of real information on printers in the photographic magazines. But then there is a blank. Just what is the best device for viewing a photograph? A Mac with retina display? A tablet, if so which one? A television, if so what sort of television?

A key element apart from definition is dynamic range. There is a good tutorial on dynamic range, together with information on cameras, scanners  and output devices, from Cambridge in Colour here. My understanding is that televisions were restricted by what was possible on a cathode ray tube. But how do present-day and emerging technologies compare? What improvements are on the way? And do they match the output from the best of still and video cameras?

Output for all the magazines appears to stop with Lightroom. Shouldn't they be providing us with this sort of information by including output to replace some of the endless reviews of cameras introduced with tiny changes from the last model? Oh, but then camera sellers, on whom they rely for advertising income, do not usually sell output devices like televisions and tablets.

Advanced Photographer Magazine

Of all the editors of photographic magazines published in Britain, William Cheung has long been my favourite. He made a very good job of Practical Photography (now sadly dumbed down) in the early days and with Advanced Photographer he has reached 51 issues which at one per month is something over four years.

In the difficult world of amateur photographic magazines, Advanced Photographer is noted for being non-luddite (Amateur Photographer judging by the letters section is the home of both, and perhaps only, the rank beginner and the entrenched luddite) but along with all the magazines it really cannot get to grips with video at a time when all the creative advances are occurring with moving pictures. Filling a monthly magazine (let alone the weekly Amateur Photographer) must be very difficult, but Will Cheung has done a pretty good job over the four years. Yes, there has been an overemphasis on studio lighting which is of no interest to me but overall it is a better read than the numerous magazines in the crowded market. Again, achieving that cannot be easy on what must be a relatively small budget.