GEwart: I've just bought the SX60, I wasn't even tempted buy the P900 even if it was readily available despite it's amazing lens. The images I've seen are too smudged with in camera noise reduction. Now if the Nikon had the Canon sensor.... how often can one say that?
SX60 isn't a good superzoom, that's a fact. Get a cheap refurbished SX50 or better a P610.
electrophoto: Why such massive zooms?Like 1000+mm
I've seen a number of shots taken with these cameras at 800+mm and honestly none of these long-reach photos have much to offer, aside from the massive zoom-reach.
Just look at The P900 2000mm House-Photo here - the lines are all wobbly, jittery, details are completely smeared.it looks VERY artificial.
Even the "cat" at 1200mm, much closer up than the houses - details are oddly lacking, painted over look.
I completely get the appeal of say anything up to 400mm...I can fully understand a good 200mm in a "compact" camera...
but IS or not - beyond 200-400mm it just becomes a gimmick with rather bad photographic results... so why bother at all?
I mean there's bound to be a reason, why you'd need 12'0000$+ for that 600mm Nikkor F/4... and a massive tripod to actually make use of it.
Consider that at f/6.5 and it's tiny 1/2.3 sensor - it behaves like a f/36 lens on full frame... useless.
Please check that SOOC image out:
It's 2000mm handheld! It's a good image, but if you make an effort to visit the forum, you'll see there jaw-dropping images at full zoom. Now you understand what P900 are good for?
Congratulations! I was sure it's a DSLR image :)
Dave C 150: I don't see the point of posting the images on here. I'm sure they were much better than they appear on my screen. If that is how bad they really were I can't really see how it was the fault of the lens because I have seen superb images on Flickr with it. There just has to be a problem with DPR uploads. These look soft and lack contrast. I could get better shots of a bear with my mobile phone than that!
Definitely! Just take a Nikon P900 and you get a better image, even at 2000mm eq. 135 :) :)
Bobcats are very cool! So is your shot too :)
Wow! That's incredible! Congratulations!
Prima, congratulations! I visited that observatory three years ago, by a glorious weather:https://picasaweb.google.com/106913078899624028286/Munchen2012#5789964493052228994All the best, alles gute!
An image of outstanding excellence! Congratulations!
mpgxsvcd: Here is the moon at 3200mm equivalent with a GH2 and a $30 tripod. Try catching a plane in front of the moon at that focal length. It isn’t very easy especially without a tracking mount.
And here is the moon with a $500 telescope and the GH4 at 4K. This did use a tracking mount though. That makes it much easier.
But even more difficult is to get a STILL image, not a video: I have such an image in my gallery at page 19.
All your images are SENSATIONAL! Thank you for showing them and explaining how you achieve them.
An outstanding image, Evan! No wonder you won the challenge :) !
orion1983: IMHO, there is absolutely no reasonable advantage compared to a SX50 which has RAW and is also half the weight and dimensions but with excellent IQ FOR A MEGAZOOM. Unfortunately, it´s not produced anymore....but still available.
SX50 is an outstanding camera and it beats P600 on every aspect, except the lens, which is better at Nikon. In my opinion RAW isn't big deal to such a tiny sensor, it's although a shame Nikon persists in not implementing it, and there is no CHDK equivalent here too (NHDK!)
maxnimo: I'd love to see a camera just like this, but with a 2 inch sensor.
The Canon FF 1200mm weights 16kg and costs $1000000!It's the laws of physics :)
Henry Falkner: 2000mm equivalent permits moon shots without Digital Zoom. With an EVF and an articulated LCD as well as a wider range of settings, it does justify getting a bridge camera again. But after the P600 compared badly against competitors for focus reliability and speed on YouTube reviews (in that time frame) - how much better is the P900? We still get new enthusiast compacts that put grinding zoom noises on videos. Will the P-900 be quiet? And will it save a video and retract the lens before the battery goes flat? I am harping on about this because I have two reliable and quiet travel pocket zooms.
You're right as always, Henry! I have P600 and it's exactly as you said: the lens is outstanding, but the focus slow and unreliable, even compared with SX50, my other usual super zoom. But somettimes I can get excellent images, so I'm rather fascinated by that P900 super gun :) , despite that as all Nikon bridges lacks RAW, filter thread, hotshoe and lens hood.
Jim: Rhetorical Question: I wonder how much better the G3X image quality will be over an SX50HS when compared at 600mm and below? Especially so, since the SX50HS can be had for $200. Maybe it's just me but I am not seeing the value proposition here.
@Lan: I hope you don't mind, but did you SEE SX50? It's an outstandingly good camera, but NOT pocketable :)
whakapu: This may be all the camera I need, if the glass, sensor and general speed are up to snuff. My SX50 (not the crappy new SX60) is an amazing camera. I always seem to get more shots from that than my EOS when I take both. The lens is amazingly effective. The only thing keeping that from being a perfect camera is the tiny sensor (low ISO threshold - limited DOF control). If Canon get this one right they may not sell anything else
sierranvin: I can just imagine this thing at 600mm, my arms extended, outdoors, the screen vague from glare, my image wobbling with the animal or bird I imagined I might shoot, going in and out, in and out of view...in and out, in and out huh huh Where'd it GO!!!
Maybe Canon thinks folks will use it on a tripod through their urban apartment windows as a kind of poor man's peeping Tom tool?
I know a lot of people, myself included, who aren't professional photographers, just passionate to shoot and who doesn't care about the VF. I heard all the time that more than 25X zoom is useless without tripod, than 30X, than... Wel,l I shot 60X handheld and LCD and got nice results. So much for the photo theoreticians, which, strangely, don't have a single example in their galleries. Mario is right.
Now THAT's something quite outstanding! Congratulations to catch so well the moment, but I think the lady wasn't too happy when the bird tried to fly with it's "building material" to the nest :) :)
Augustin Man: Wow! Interesting to say the least, but how big and heavy would be that "grote" zoom? Besides, after the SX60 cold shower, I feel like treasuring my dear SX50, but also like moving away to other brands :(
To wait more than two years for a super zoom worse than SX50.