I'd like a lighter weight zoom camera than my SX60 HS (includes photos)

n00b opinion here; I've had a SX720 for a year and I have to say I'm a bit disappointed, and from what I've read and seen most pocket superzooms IQ disappoints.

NOT because those can't take quality shots, rather because they're not designed well-enough so that the quality would be consistent.

I mean without major preparation and hassle, only about 10% of your pictures will look the best your camera can technically produce.

The other 90% will look slightly off focus or blurred, lacking the details, contrast and colors you would wish for, VS. your relatively recent smartphone now curiously nailing all that better for a much higher success ratio and without hassle (sure "no optical zoom not the same deal" blah blah, but still the comparison is irritating)

The reasons are multiple and complicated IMO;

- the stabilizer can work great for long distances but will still miss its best most times. tripod and even remote shutter are super important if you want the best. unfortunately something like remote BT or NFC shutter isn't a thing at this level whatever the name brand (forget smartphone apps that devour both the camera's and the phone's batteries so fast it's hilarious). You can only delay then hands off if you want to be sure.

- the AF won't always best adjust at the right time, no matter how you tweak its settings you can't rely on it too much, and the assist options are a joke. BTW the person who invented halfway shutter button pressure will definitely go to Hell.

- whatever PASM some settings you'd better think about before picking a mode will get in the way, and ruin it if you chose wrong forcing you to go back all the way, but on those little cameras proud of their menus-heavy firmwares and fancy names features, what the settings really do in practice feels borderline esoteric.

- trying to go full manual means dealing with tiny ill-placed controls, sometimes lacking detailed-enough info on the display, and several settings would be much better with additional physical controls.

- the tiny display doesn't translate what's going on nor how your picture will turn out well-enough. The right exposure? focus? you won't know that just looking at that display. I'm not sure the Pana/Sony models featuring a small EVF would be so much better for that, it seem their main purpose here is to help in broad sunlight period.

- yeah so after a while you realize the truth: your camera has hidden sweet spots which are the only occurences when you'll get actually good quality pictures...but they're very elusive, hard to identify and it's preposterous to think anyone can easily find and master them, those pocket cameras were not thought for that purpose, before everything they're point-zoom-shoots.

To conclude I'll say this is a poor product segment whispering "tumbleweeds, man! tumbleweeds..."

Canon SX7**, Panasonic ZS/TS**, Sony HV**, all three series appear on the same level IQ and design-wise, all making you think they only give their best like 10% times and not thanks to your efforts with their half-baked controls and features, but mostly by luck.

I've looked up (1") but there's not much choice, the Panasonic ZS100 and ZS200 don't provide a significant-enough increase in IQ to justify the much shorter zoom, and the design/controls seem barely improved over the other lesser sensor compact superzooms.

The only actually good one seems to be the Sony RX100 VI, of which you can apparently trust the IQ and overall performance, and think only 8x/200mm isn't too much a sacrifice there if you can rely on that.

But then you see the price....ugh

Compact Superzooms, it doesn't look like manufacturers have made any real efforts in the (sub?)category, surely they must have though for several years already that smartphones will take the lead. Well, while they're not wrong they're not right either, good superzoom photophones are still fantasy.