Having watched the video..

That sure is some amazing zoom! Even if it's completely pointless from a photographic point of view, it cannot be denied that it is very cool.

I am almost tempted to buy one. Not particularly for still photographs, but rather for the HD video combined with the amazingly long lens.

My personal view is that wildlife is best captured with video (if your interest is in the wildlife) and an equivalent semi-pro video camera with a lens that long is probably at least 10x the cost of this little device.

As an added bonus it can take high resolution still pictures in good light!

That's the main reason I bought the SX1, OK so it has the shorter lens, but it can do a 2x crop in video and still retain HD quality by using the middle pixels, that gives me a lot of range when shooting video. Looking at this old video I shot, this is utilising the 2x digital tele converter (the video quality wasn't great that I uploaded but it gives you and idea), http://vimeo.com/2785226 the bird at 1.47 was shot from the path in the location of the clip just before, so quite a way up. Also the birds in the clip at 2.16 were taken using it, again the clip before shows the location and the max zoom prior to using the digital TC. Long lenses are great as you say for all this stuff, just use a good tripod and you are fine.

What I like about the SX30 over the SX1 is the sensor (CCD over CMOS), so the jerking that I have should be gone.

Very impressive footage Mark. And the good thing is that if I sold my 70-300 DO I could most likely pay for the SX30 and have some change left!

Given that the only times I have used the DO in the last 3 years were on safari, it sure makes me wonder....

Hehe, you know you want to

I just like a long zoom camera with me, just wish I didn't have jelly wobble (not my big tummy but the CMOS), I can't justify a change, but if I could I would look at the SX30. I don't think they are doing the digital TC though, it seems to have only been an SX1 thing, that would be killer on that lens for sure!!!

I think lack of RAW is a killer though. Pushing that small sensor to such extremes and then limiting the potential of cleaning the image up in PP is terrible.

Actually, CHDK allows RAW on the SX series. That said, they only recently released support for the SX20IS, so it will be a while before we see RAW support on the SX30IS.

...as flawed as the HS10, but I expected more from the FZ100 and have been disappointed with what I've seen of it so maybe the SX30 will be a bit weak kneed, also. That could be a good thing though. If there is enough dissatisfaction with the new superzoom models, maybe the digicam companies will move some of the budget from marketing to engineering.

Hi! I am a new member graduating from point and shoot to little advanced primarily looking for ease of use and bokeh effects. I had looked at SX20is closely as well as Panasonic FZ35, and even though every other review said FZ35 has better picture quality esp in low light, I found it little too manual and lighter. I liked the solid feel of SX20is in hand.
Also read reviews that CMOS sensor and higher MP degrades the picture quality like the Panasonic FZ100. I would be happy if SX30is has same picture quality as that of SX20is with improved low light picture quality for indoor shooting.

Based upon this, would you suggest I buy the SX20is or go for SX30is for its low light picture quality?

When I saw this camera.. considering I was a hardcore Canon user.. I thought of immediately returning my FZ35 but as I look closer there is 1 major flaw in this camera. It doesn't shoot RAW.

I've made so many mistakes with my shots recently that if it shot raw and had good image quality, I would jump ship back to Canon immediately. But thankfully Canon totally gets it that AA batteries are a bad idea and lithium ion ones are the way to go.

VS honestly I can't vouch for the SX30 IS since no one's seen the images yet. But against the SX20, I really tried to like that camera and wanted to stay with Canon but I bought a FZ35 for low light pictures. Here's my reasoning in this post: http://forums.steves-digicams.com/1144087-post7.html and I've been happy with it. But you do end up compromising with an 18x zoom which honestly is fine and I really don't like a camera with AA batteries. I've owned a fuji which gave me nothing but nightmares of running out of charge and having to either carry a lot of spares around or not having any. I prefer a lithium ion with a nice long charge.

However I stipulate I'm not you, my likes and dislikes may not be yours.

Canon has had a sample photo up for a week or two now.

http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consum...s#SampleImages

Of course, 1 photo isn't enough to tell us how the camera holds up under various conditions, but it does give us a clue about general image quality.