Well said. This is not a specialized birding camera. 400mm is too low for that. But for sports and the "soccer mom", this is as complete a camera as you can get. Who actually needs 500-1200mm? If you're being honest it is only avid birders, and they are a very small proportion of the camera-buying market. This camera on the other hand, has its sights set on a much wider demographic where the greatest strain on its reach will be trying to catch junior at little league (which it will do just fine).
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
The FZ1000 replaces the FZ8, FZ200, FZ70!!!!!
G
Greynerd
Guest
I think DPR should have a special complaint tick and an automatic 1 month ban for use of the term 'soccer mom'.
Pft, I'm allowed because I am the soccer mom demographic (except for being male, and my kid being a bit younger
).
G
Greynerd
Guest
I am afraid that is all a bit meaningless to me. It's football and it is spelt mum.
Pft, I'm allowed because I am the soccer mom demographic (except for being male, and my kid being a bit younger
Last edited:
kkardster
Forum Pro
Huh - I thought it was flopball!
G
Greynerd
Guest
myssvictoria
Veteran Member
I'm afraid you're right, this camera has it's sights on a larger demographic than birders. And that is the case with most cameras - going for the larger demographic, fighting for the same demographic. But the wildlife/birding demographic is growing as baby boomers age and retire. And many have money to spend and are willing to spend it on this hobby. If a camera manufacturer could design a camera with birding in mind, not an all around superzoom, I think they could corner this segment of the market.
richj20
Forum Pro
Hi Vickie,
Yes, and here is one ultimate possibility:
IMG_9826.jpg by romy ocon
www.pbase.com
For some of Romy Ocon's wonderful work see this gallery:
Wild Birds of the Philippines (Photos) by romy ocon
www.pbase.com
regards,
-Richard
And how useful is 500-1200mm if, like most "superzoom" cameras (not the FZ200), the aperture drops to 5.6 and it's backed up by a sensor that requires the use of low ISOs to get a decent picture. At 1200mm, it's hard to keep something in the frame, even if it's standing still. 1/1000 of a second at f5.6 with an ISO of 200 or less requires very good light.
A tripod starts to become a necessary item. Then what happened to the size advantage?
myssvictoria
Veteran Member
12,800mm! I wonder if he actually used it. But I am enjoying going through his pics. Thanks for posting these links!
A thousand people can make this sort of argument a thousand times, and all the while superzoom enthusiasts will be running around having fun snapping birds at 1000mm+ EFLs, partly thanks to exceptional image stabilization mechanisms and excellent continuous shooting performance.
It really is possible, otherwise most of us probably would have stopped trying by now.
He can probably complain about the curvature of the earth ruining his shots with a straight face.
richj20
Forum Pro
You are welcome!
Yes, he has used that setup in bird "blinds."
I haven't been on the Canon forums for a couple of years now, but he used to post from time to time. Thanks to Canon Philippines, he had use of a pre-production Canon 7D and his results were spectacular.
- Richard
Indeed. I routinely shoot airshows with FZ200 and a teleconverter, at equivelent focal lengths up to 900mm or 1020mm, hand-held and with image stabilisation turned off for panning. I get plenty of decent results.
Its down to old school techniques, and lots of practice...
John Miles
Veteran Member
You have to laugh eh Mike.
Listen I'm kind of lost a bit really. It is perfectly clear that the FZ1000 qualifies fully as a replacement as an FZ50 in 1" form. I would not have changed a thing bar added the front control wheel. But genuinely the quest for an FZ50 replacement is over. All I do now is start saving.
Thanks for all the back-up during 'the campaign'. There was many a sticky wicket when I'd be in the thick of an argument and you'd come swooping in. And vice versa. Just great fun.
There is the step change in camera design to watch however, as started by Sony and booster rocketed by Panasonic. All just as Fuji invested heavily in lens changers - ouch. It's going to be one heck of a bun fight; especially when the big players get over being caught with their pants down.
We have ringside seats Mike. Feet up. Break out the popcorn
And thanks again.
--
__________________________________________________________________________
The FZ50: DSLR handling of a bright, non-extending Leica 35-420mm F2.8-3.7 lens. Thank you Mr Ichiro Kitao, Mr Michiharu Uematsu and Mr Yoshiyuki Inoue for having triggered the update to the FZ50.
FZ50 is still great though: http://www.juzaphoto.com/recensione.php?l=en&t=panasonic_lumix_fz50 . Performace diagram here: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3862228415/photos/2623982/fz50-performance-range
Listen I'm kind of lost a bit really. It is perfectly clear that the FZ1000 qualifies fully as a replacement as an FZ50 in 1" form. I would not have changed a thing bar added the front control wheel. But genuinely the quest for an FZ50 replacement is over. All I do now is start saving.
Thanks for all the back-up during 'the campaign'. There was many a sticky wicket when I'd be in the thick of an argument and you'd come swooping in. And vice versa. Just great fun.
There is the step change in camera design to watch however, as started by Sony and booster rocketed by Panasonic. All just as Fuji invested heavily in lens changers - ouch. It's going to be one heck of a bun fight; especially when the big players get over being caught with their pants down.
We have ringside seats Mike. Feet up. Break out the popcorn
And thanks again.
--
__________________________________________________________________________
The FZ50: DSLR handling of a bright, non-extending Leica 35-420mm F2.8-3.7 lens. Thank you Mr Ichiro Kitao, Mr Michiharu Uematsu and Mr Yoshiyuki Inoue for having triggered the update to the FZ50.
FZ50 is still great though: http://www.juzaphoto.com/recensione.php?l=en&t=panasonic_lumix_fz50 . Performace diagram here: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3862228415/photos/2623982/fz50-performance-range
Last edited:
Mikedigi
Forum Pro
Maybe I am the only FZ50 enthusiast who never owned one . . . .
But then I enthuse a lot about things I don't own, including money.
Thanks John,
Mike
PS - This thread has turned out to be quite civilized - at one point I thought it was turning a bit edgy.
Last edited:
antoineb
Veteran Member
Hi Mikedigi,
I am a fairly solid long-term Panasonic fan.
Like you I am very impressed by the FZ1000's specs, although of course I shall wait until the camera hits the market, has been out for at least 6 months, reviews have come out, and I have had a chance to play with one in a store (and if I buy it, I'll buy it in the store, too).
Only issue for me, is that my beloved FZ8 (hugely flexible camera, but limited IQ) weighed just 310 grams. And then my beloved FZ18 weighed just 360 grams and still just fitted in some smaller pockets on my backpack or some large jacket pocket.
But the FZ1000 weighs 830 grams. That's of course lighter than my DSLR coupled to a long zoom lens for flexibility) which gets to 1500 grams. But that's also 2.3 times the weight of my beloved FZ18. Of course the IQ should be massively better - but still.
And the FZ1000 is also between 20pc and 50pc larger depending on which dimension you look at.
So, I'm happy and interested and I might still buy one. But I might also end up with a Sony RX100 with same size sensor but much more portable, of course at the expense of less zoom.
I am a fairly solid long-term Panasonic fan.
Like you I am very impressed by the FZ1000's specs, although of course I shall wait until the camera hits the market, has been out for at least 6 months, reviews have come out, and I have had a chance to play with one in a store (and if I buy it, I'll buy it in the store, too).
Only issue for me, is that my beloved FZ8 (hugely flexible camera, but limited IQ) weighed just 310 grams. And then my beloved FZ18 weighed just 360 grams and still just fitted in some smaller pockets on my backpack or some large jacket pocket.
But the FZ1000 weighs 830 grams. That's of course lighter than my DSLR coupled to a long zoom lens for flexibility) which gets to 1500 grams. But that's also 2.3 times the weight of my beloved FZ18. Of course the IQ should be massively better - but still.
And the FZ1000 is also between 20pc and 50pc larger depending on which dimension you look at.
So, I'm happy and interested and I might still buy one. But I might also end up with a Sony RX100 with same size sensor but much more portable, of course at the expense of less zoom.
Mikedigi
Forum Pro
I wrote:
"You may laugh at this, but the tiny FZ8 "needs its own upgrade". I would really love an FZ8 upgrade, under 400 grammes, with a 1/2.3" or 1/2.5" sensor, a 25-400mm lens, a combined manual+power zoom, a free-flight LCD and modern JPEG processing, but with RAW too.
That would be a jewel, a classic, a Mini-Cooper S, a Vespa Sport, an iPad Air . . . . . and I would sell something else to pay the price for it."
In other words, an FZ8 upgraded into a "mini-FZ1000" under 400 grammes would get me buying it at any reasonable price.
"Personally, I am not about to dump my FZ200, 588 grammes, for any camera weighing 831 grammes like the FZ1000. I am much more likely to stay with the FZ200 and, say in a couple of years, buy a used FZ1000 as cheaply as possible, give it a whirl for a few months, then resell it on Ebay. I have been there several times with good DSLRs, they did not stay long, they were too big, too heavy, and a hassle."
In other words, I agree completely with what you are saying.
They say the RX-100 is a great camera, but around 25-400mm EFL is my preferred zoom range. As I mentioned above, an FZ8 upgrade under 400 grammes (or maybe under 450 grammes) could have 25-400 mm.
Of course, the FZ1000 already has 25-400 mm, and I am greatly impressed by it, but as already mentioned, I am not a a natural buyer for it at 831 grammes. I was greatly impressed by the FZ50 (734 grammes) and handled several of them, but I never bought one, as I was sure that I would leave the FZ50 at home and take the FZ8 with me.
My FZ200 is a compromise for me, I would prefer something smaller and lighter, and I have a belt camera, the ZS7/TZ10 (I see you have one too) which is handy when I do not want to carry the "big, heavy" FZ200!
Mike
J
JesseC
Guest
The FZ200, Big and heavy? come on.
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum