Nikon CoolPix P900

[Rich Z]

OK, I just got this thing, and still learning the ropes with the settings, but I wanted to show a pic that I took last night with it...

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/pics/moon_2016_07_19_A.jpg

This thing has a lens on it with the 35mm equivalent of 24 to 2000mm. With a modest digital zoom boost of 4x, you now have a handheld camera package with an 8000mm lens on it. For only $600!!!

That is just outrageous!

I'll post more as I take more pics and feel I have the settings the way I want them. But initial impressions are that this is one darn impressive piece of equipment.

[Dragonling]

Digital zoom is basically just an image crop though, doesn't actually increase quality. If you want to include that, though, I can go up to 1764mm with my telephoto extender. :) I don't think it was expensive.

I should try and get some night sky photos. Love that shot, though it almost kind of sucks that the moon never changes.

[daddio207]

Great pic Rich !!!
I'm assuming you snapped that shot from the space station right ?? :crazy02:

[Rich Z]

Here's a pic at the highest magnification the camera could muster with the digital zoom.

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/pics/moon_2016_07_19_B.jpg

This one is not cropped from a larger image. That is "as is" from the camera.

And here's one when I backed off a bit even from the optical zoom.

http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/pics/moon_2016_07_19_C.jpg

I ordered a beginner's astrophotography package which includes a tripod and motorized head to track the motion of the Earth and keep celestial objects in the center of the camera lens. Theoretically anyway. The package was only $170, so it's certainly not anything top of the line. I'll have to see how difficult it is aligning the thing and how accurate it is. If it's too time consuming and I have to stand out with the skeeters chewing on me for too long, then I'll have to figure out something else. But if it does work, I think I'll get a lot better pics using it. I did try a 1080P video with this P900, but it was obvious that my hands are introducing a lot of shake. So I at least need something that will allow me to take pics "hands off".

At least these initial photos I took showed me that I'm in the ballpark to getting some really nice photos if everything falls into place.

I've often though off an on that I wanted to get a decent telescope, but in reality I am in the middle of the woods and have a very limited view of the skyline. Pretty much straight up is all I've got. Fortunately I was able to get a view of the moon right over my house by standing in a small spot in my front yard. But it's a matter of being at the right place at the right time. Most of the time the moon is obscured by trees. Unfortunately, I don't think I will have another opportunity for a good moon view after that astro package comes in till maybe next month. The moon will be waning, and the spot it needs to be for my viewing will be in the wee hours of the morning till the next cycle.

[Rich Z]

From a practical standpoint, and showing what this camera can do with more mundane subjects, the following pics were taken HAND HELD from my porch.

This one is at 24mm and I was just shooting off hand to get a feel for the camera.
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/pics/anole_in_palm_tree_01.jpg

Then I tried out the zoom and spotted a "subject" that I didn't see earlier.
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/pics/anole_in_palm_tree_02.jpg

How about an even closer look?
http://www.faunaclassifieds.com/pics/anole_in_palm_tree_03.jpg

All the pics are "as is" from the camera without any cropping or other post processing. I just shrank them down to a more manageable size and put my copyright notice on them.

You can definitely see softness creeping into the pic at higher magnification, but I think at least some of that will be from the slight camera motion being hand held. The camera seems to have pretty decent optical stabilization, but still, probably nothing beats a tripod for those long shots. Still, not bad, all things considered.

[Dragonling]

I'm not saying you're cropping the image. The camera is doing it digitally, just cutting down the image it's seeing to a smaller area. That's all digital zoom is. It reminds me a lot of the magical "ENHANCE" on cop dramas like CSI. I wish it worked that way...

[HerpsOfNM]

Rich, a number of users over at Nikon Rumors we raving about this camera. I've been contemplating picking up one myself in the near future to use as a turtle and flighty lizard super-zoom.

[Rich Z]

I'm not saying you're cropping the image. The camera is doing it digitally, just cutting down the image it's seeing to a smaller area. That's all digital zoom is. It reminds me a lot of the magical "ENHANCE" on cop dramas like CSI. I wish it worked that way...

I wasn't saying that you were. I just put that in the earlier post in case anyone thought that it was just a cropped image.

I didn't buy this camera for the digital zoom, I bought it for the optical zoom. The fact that it has digital zoom will have it's own uses. Enough so that it can be just considered as icing to the cake. But having 24-2000mm OPTICAL zoom in a single package is something that I don't think ANY other camera or separate lens can provide at this time.

And I agree with you. As far as I know, computer technology hasn't advanced to the point where information in a photo can actually magically be created out of thin air. All such things do is to basically extrapolate a pixel between two or more others, and make an assumption about what it THINKS it is. So if you have a black dot and a white dot being spread apart by digital zooming, and the algorithm fills in, it will likely put in a gray dot. If in reality there was a green line there that TRUE optical magnification would show, there is no way for the algorithm to know this and put it in there. That's a simplified explanation, anyway.

To show yourself an example (for those that aren't familiar with this sort of thing) load up a graphics package and choose an image. Most graphics packages have a zoom tool, so zoom in till you have passed 1:1 and keep on going. Notice how blocky the image becomes? That is basically digital zoom. Of course, a lot depends on how the algorithm has been written as to how coarse that digital zooming looks to the eye.

The digital zoom on the P900 actually looks pretty decent in that the image does get softer, but I haven't noticed any particular blockiness yet the few times I have tried it. So all in all, I would have to say that quite likely more people will like it than people who will not. Or at least find it acceptable enough.

[Rich Z]

Rich, a number of users over at Nikon Rumors we raving about this camera. I've been contemplating picking up one myself in the near future to use as a turtle and flighty lizard super-zoom.

Can't say I have ever been to Nikon Rumors. If it's a Facebook page, I KNOW I haven't.

I'm curious to know if any upgraded models of the P900 have been mentioned. I'm really hoping a newer model will come out with 4K video. 60fps would be wonderful, but I would settle for 30fps. I have heard that Nikon filled a patent for a compact super zoom with 100x optical, but haven't heard much beyond that. I think Canon is breathing hard down Nikon's neck in the super zoom arena.

I'm kind of glad now that the D500 Nikon body I was looking hard at does so poorly with video autofocus, otherwise I never would have looked further for something else. Luckily I did a LOT of research before just placing an order for one. That would have been a pretty expensive disappointment for me.

[HerpsOfNM]

Can't say I have ever been to Nikon Rumors. If it's a Facebook page, I KNOW I haven't.

I'm curious to know if any upgraded models of the P900 have been mentioned. I'm really hoping a newer model will come out with 4K video. 60fps would be wonderful, but I would settle for 30fps. I have heard that Nikon filled a patent for a compact super zoom with 100x optical, but haven't heard much beyond that. I think Canon is breathing hard down Nikon's neck in the super zoom arena.

I'm kind of glad now that the D500 Nikon body I was looking hard at does so poorly with video autofocus, otherwise I never would have looked further for something else. Luckily I did a LOT of research before just placing an order for one. That would have been a pretty expensive disappointment for me.

Nikonrumors.com ...it's a blog-based forum basically. You can comment using Disqus and other means, probably FB too. I know they have a FB page, but I have been FB free going on 5 years now I believe.

I hadn't heard about the autofocus performance on the D500. I'm more after it from a stills aspect though, even though I'm in my mid-30s I still don't find the need to have video within an SLR body. The larger disappointment for me on the D500 is lack of pop-up flash to trigger my SB-800 and SB-600 remotely. I have to now dump more $$$ into a new creative lighting system (CLS), either in getting the new equipment to keep my flashes going or snag another sb-800/600/700 and pop my current sb-800 on the hotshoe to use as the commander. Either way, Nikon's milking me for more money, so for now I'll keep playing with my D300 - nevermind the lenses I still want/need.

[Rich Z]

Here's a video that shows pretty much what I am referring to concerning the video autofocus problem with the D500.

KAtsm054iBw

In a way I agree with you about using a DSLR body for video work, but honestly, I have found taking stills with a camcorder to be disappointing. So I figured I would look at this from a different perspective. Why not take video from an actual CAMERA instead? Originally I thought having a DSLR that could do excellent video would be a boon with removable lenses. Would provide a whole lot of flexibility with lens choices. Heck, I was particularly keen on trying time lapse star field video, and thought using an f1.2 lens would allow a lot more stars to show up. Moreso than what I am seeing with the GoPro camera I have been playing with this function. So I guess this will just be on hold for a while. The best these two new cameras I have can do for light capture is f2.8. Which, I believe is the same as the GoPro can provide.

Of course, since I have a bunch of Nikon lenses, I was looking for a Nikon body. I thought the D500 was THE ONE, but after some intensive research on my part, turned out to fall short of my expectations. So I'll just wait for technology to come to the point I want it to be before pulling out my wallet for an upgraded Nikon body to go with my lenses.

Of course, I could just decide to buy a body ONLY for photos and let other devices handle the video stuff. Like what I am doing now with my FujiFilm FinePix S3 Pro body (yeah, I know it's O-L-D) for photos and my Panasonic camcorders and GoPro Hero4 Black doing the video stuff. But if I can get one device to do double duty and cut down the amount of stuff I have to take on trips, well heck, why not?

Maybe waiting it out for the Nikon D510 (or whatever the upgrade model will be) will be worthwhile, or the Nikon D810 maybe getting a 4K upgrade (with video that actually works) with it's larger sensor might be worth just waiting for.

I've got some new camera toys to play with in the meantime. :)

[Rich Z]

Saw some birds at the bird feeder today, so I took out the P900 and shot some video from the porch.

ZusHz2m3D4U

Too bad this camera doesn't do 4K, but I guess the 1080P/60 does an OK job.

[Rich Z]

Last night the clouds broke apart at the right place and right time, giving me a really good clear shot at the moon right over the house. The place I needed to be in the front yard was extremely obvious since it was so much brighter there than where the shadows of all the trees were obscuring the moon. So I dragged out the tripod and set the P900 up on it to take some video of the moon. Seems to me that the "scene" option on the camera for "Moon" does nothing more than just delay the start of video and photos a couple of seconds to allow the movement of the camera after pressing the button to die down. Of course, this does nothing at all for trying to work the zoom lever or when you are trying to shut down the video. I did leave one instance of this out of the edited strips to show the motion.

Except for me having to swat the mosquitoes it was very easy getting these video clips. I left the audio in because of the nature sounds all around me at that time of night. Or maybe the microphone picked up aliens conversations on the moon. Who knows? :grin01:

Anyway, made a couple of passes of the moon by trying to position the camera so it would pass where I wanted it to be in the frame. Seemed to work out pretty well even when I zoomed to the max setting.

n-C6huJFyNo

Still can't get over the fact that I can get videos and photos like this from a relatively inexpensive hand holdable camera. I remember trying to get a good pic of the moon with my old 35mm stuff many years ago and I never could get anything very satisfying. This P900 makes it as easy as falling off a log.

[Rich Z]

A couple of weeks ago when the moon was getting near to being full again, and there was a break in the clouds, I mounted the P900 onto the Sky-Watcher Allview mount/tripod I bought to see how well that combo would work for panning the camera in a steady fashion while viewing the moon. All in all, it seemed to work pretty well. The Allview has 9 levels of movement speed for both the horizontal and vertical planes, and best I could tell, there was no backlash problems when motion was started or stopped. The would have been exhibited as a noticeable wobble at the beginning and the end of motion.

Of course, there is vibration evident transmitted through the tripod when I was trying to get the hand held controller off of the tripod, or actually touching the controls on the camera itself. And unfortunately the wireless remote I bought for the Nikon only works for triggering still photos (as far as I have been able to figure out), and doesn't work for initiating video. Nor does it work the zoom or anything else that would be nice to have so I wouldn't have to lay hands on the camera during video. But panning is really smooth with the Allview while I am doing it manually with the controller. Haven't figured out how to do actual tracking yet with it, mainly because the alignment procedure requires that I KNOW what stars I am using for reference, and I don't have a clue about that kind of stuff. So that is something I need to figure out first, I suppose.

Also, I had the auto-focus set incorrectly (for what I wanted, anyway) on the camera, so you can see the auto-focus struggling a bit during the motion of the moon across the screen. I didn't realize this till the last segment of video. Next time maybe I will try full manual focus since I'm guessing the entire moon should stay within the depth of field and not even need any sort of autofocus. But honestly, it's hard to think of everything when you are swatting at mosquitoes at the same time you are trying to get the camera set up correctly AND maneuver the motorized mount too. At least for this soggy old brain of mine, anyway. I guess it will get easier with experience with this new equipment.

pkcb7PbK4xE

But even with all the warts, I'm still amazed at the video I can get of the moon with this P900. And that Allview mount just makes panning the field of view a LOT easier at that high magnification, which quite honestly can be pretty tough handheld, or even on a standard tripod.

[Rich Z]

Well, I went and purchased a solar filter, figuring it might be interesting to take some pics of the sun. So I did get the pics, but interesting? Hardly....

http://www.corvetteflorida.com/pics/sun_09_2016_01.jpg


http://www.corvetteflorida.com/pics/sun_09_2016_02.jpg


http://www.corvetteflorida.com/pics/sun_09_2016_03.jpg


http://www.corvetteflorida.com/pics/sun_09_2016_04.jpg

[DollysMom]

Still nice and you are ready for the August 2017 solar eclipse.

[Rich Z]

Still nice and you are ready for the August 2017 solar eclipse.

That was one of the reasons that I wanted this solar filter. I'm thinking that tracking the sun while the moon intersects it on video would be much more interesting than tracking the moon. So I needed a way to try to protect the camera from overheating with the sun shining directly down the lens barrel. As it is, that black camera body is still going to get quite hot in August afternoon sunlight.

I should get a nice view of the eclipse from my place, but heck, lots of thunderstorms come through here in the afternoon in August, so I'm not sure if I should try to hedge my bets by planning on being somewhere else. Problem is, the track doesn't seem to go through any desert parts (meaning areas of lesser likelihood of mid August afternoon clouds and rain) of the USA, so my trying to pull a fast one on Murphy's Law would likely just wind up blowing up in my face anyway. And, of course, trying to rely on any sort of weather forecast, even 24 hours in advance, would be a complete waste of time.

Anyway, maybe if there were a bunch of sunspots the photos would be more interesting. There does appear to be a very faint pair of them in the photos, but honestly, trying to focus on the sun was actually quite difficult. I had to try to catch the edge of the sun to get some contrast, but even that didn't work as well as I had hoped. You would think that just manually focusing on infinity would work, but evidently infinity is even further away from the camera than the sun is. Maybe Alpha Centauri? :shrugs:

Honestly, manual focus itself on the P900 is not that easy to do. The control isn't on the lens body. You have to first make a setting from the menu dial, and then use that same menu dial for the manual focus. Not at all intuitive to me, and a challenge to be precise with. Especially with the camera pointing almost straight upwards at the sun.

I guess getting images like this from an Earth based platform just isn't possible?

lpzCSZ7Eerc

[DollysMom]

I'm planning on traveling to Southern Illinois and if it's cloudy drive east or west to clear skies based on the best info for that 24 hour period. I have my eclipse glasses ready in any case.

I hope you get some good sun spots to work with soon and I hope you'll post them here. I don't know what is possible. Wish I had paid more attention when I went to the desert north of Reno to see the annular eclipse in May 2012. The people I went with had all the right telescopes and cameras, but what all it was exactly didn't really stick with me at the time. Sadly, they never sent me any of their pictures, either.

I think that it's very cool in any case, Rich, and I hope the eclipse works out for you!

Nice video, too :D