Nikon Coolpix P510 any good for youth sports photos?
Has anyone bought the Nikon Coolpix P510 camera and then used it successfully to take sports or other action photos? I realize it won't be as good as a DSLR but at the price I would be happy with photos that aren't all blurred. Mostly interested to hear from someone who owns this camera and there opinion of it good or bad. I hear that it is supposed to be capable of 8 frames per second though the prossessor is only capable of keeping 5 of them. I read about a Sony super zoom camera forget the model that was supposed to be capable of 12 frames per second but the only reviews that I read of people who had actually used the cameras burst mode were negative. The one review that I read on the Nikons burst mode was positive but it was only one review.
2012-08-08T21:23:25Z
Fhotoace that is a great photo. Thanks for sharing. Taking any kind of action photo successfully would be a new experience for me.
?2012-08-09T04:20:08Z
Favorite Answer
The problem with compact cameras is that they are not good for sports due to shutter delay. Using burst mode on a high-shutter delay camera is like patching the Titanic with bubble-gum. Results are not stellar.
If you have to stay with a compact, look at the list below and chose a camera having the shortest delay.
This is not a complete list, and do not make any inference from one model camera to another. For instance, the Fuji 770 has one of the shortest lags on the list. But do not infer that characteristic will be true for say a Fuji S2950 that is not on that list (the S2950 has a 0.8sec lag).
And there are some obvious typos on the list, for instance the Canon SX150.
How serious are you about photography? I'll get to the specs later, but first let's talk about carrying a dSLR around. Are you ready to do that? what about an extra lens? What about just one really good all 'round lens that might cost the same or more than an entry level dSLR? What about a bag? I could go on and on. I suspect a lot of people go into this wanting better quality photos, more control, just a better experience and then end up missing shots because they left the dSLR at home or in the trunk of the car. OK, back to the coolpix vs. a large image sensor, because that's what really gives you the stunning image quality, the potential for clean-ish low light/night photography, the detail, the color, the dynamic range. It's the sensor first, everything else comes second. All small image sensor compacts have horrid image quality, I'll just get right down to it. I've downloaded so many full size photos posted by owners, and in cases where the camera shoots RAW (high end compacts) I've downloaded those too. Even under the best conditions, the images when viewed at full size are of poor quality, there's just no way around it. Of course after lots of editing, and when not viewed at full size, they can look just fine, and they make fine 4x6 prints. Bottom line, it's a law of physics thing. When you cram 16 million pixels onto a sensor that's 6x4 millimeters you just don't have much to work with. But if you want real image quality, you need a large image sensor, and you aren't stuck with just dSLRs. You can get a compact with a large image sensor, they are very popular and selling like hot cakes actually. Lots of photographers that are pros have turned to the Sony NEX 7, you can see their reviews on youtube and google will help you find more. That one mirrorless camera has been a huge seller for Sony. I'm not a fan because of the 24 megapixel sensor, the same sensor that's finding its way to the new Nikon D3200. Other large sensor cameras to look at (and cheaper than the NEX 7) Sony's NEX 5N, forthcoming NEX F3, Samsung's NX1000 and NX210, and Panasonic's GF5. so my advice, no matter what brand or model you go with, ditch the small image sensor compacts, and don't be fooled by their marketing jargon, and by all the cool names for the cool features, don't be fooled by the 500 US dollar high end Nikon and Canon compacts, they offer image quality very similar to a 99 dollar compact when the light gets scarce. Back to the D3200 you are thinking about buying, when comments are made that it won't perform very well in low light, understand it's being compared to other large image sensor cameras. Even the worst performing dSLR image sensor will wipe the floor with the most expensive small image sensor compact. I know that despite the face Nikon will have two advantages over the Sony A65 and A77 (2 other cameras with that Sony sensor) like no fixed mirror robbing light, and Nikon's better image processing, all those pixels jammed into that sensor and something has to give, it will be noise in low light. So it will probably be on par with any entry level Canon Rebel. Nothing wrong with that, but I'd rather get something that has half the pixel count with cleaner images. I have a dSLR, and when I'm not getting paid to use it, I've decided to leave it at home, I'm tired of carrying that whole rig around. I've narrowed my smaller camera choice to the Samsung NX1000 and Sony NEX F3, they arrive next month. I hope this info has helped you, best of luck.