Reply to Thread

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TerryMiller" data-source="post: 3771337" data-attributes="member: 7900">Yes.  My last non-SLR camera was a Nikon Coolpix 5700 point and shoot one.  While I liked it that it worked like an SLR in that what one saw in the viewfinder was what the lens itself was seeing, it had the drawback of some optical and then digital zoom.  From what "they" used to say back then, once one passed the upper limit of optical zoom, then the camera "averaged" things internally.After we were on our Alaskan cruise and land tour in 2005, I learned the serious limitation of digital zoom.  The Captain of the ship had taken us back down the coast a ways to see Sea Lions on the rocks.  I had to use digital zoom to see anything and get the shots.  After the cruise, I was looking online for Alaska pictures and stumble upon a site with someone else's photos that was on the exact same cruise ship as we were.  However, he was using a true SLR with a lens capable of 300mm telephoto.  His pictures were nice and clear and mine were CRUD.That's when I decided that I had to get back to true SLR cameras.  That other guy's photo is at this link:  <a href="https://pbase.com/d30/image/46575845" target="_blank">Tornado's Sea Lions</a>Now, to show the really bad, here is one of my better photos of the Sea Lions, even though this one is not zoomed in as much as the other gentleman's.<a href="https://terrymiller.smugmug.com/Alaskan-Cruise-and-Land-Tour-2005/Day-4-Skagway/i-Ps8ZR6C/A" target="_blank"><img src="https://photos.smugmug.com/Alaskan-Cruise-and-Land-Tour-2005/Day-4-Skagway/i-Ps8ZR6C/0/8df0ad39/X2/DSCN3010-X2.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></a></blockquote>

Verification