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

Wugzz wrote:

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.

That's the complete opposite of my experience with the SX730 and I have 3 copies of that camera. I would say the number of blurry shots is less than 5% and that is being conservative it's probably less if I actually measured it. Now of course if one is not using it right any camera will give you over 90% blurry images. Don't let the camera pick the AF point is biggest factor. Also use proper exposure and never use auto with any point and shoot camera. Make sure stabilization is turned on, etc. etc. Even the first time I ever used the sx730 I was getting over 95% sharp shots at 960mm in poor lighting conditions/light rain (shown in first picture set below).

A common mistake for beginners is trying to shoot long range at slow shutter speeds. That is not going to work well on any camera (except with a tripod and self timer and no wind or ground vibration).

Image stabilization on this camera is incredibly good and way beyond any DSLR plus OS/VR/VC lenses I've shot. As a case in point look at the handheld 960mm photos above. Those are not 1 good shot in a string of photos but represent every shot in the string of photos. Maybe one blurry one in a big shot string but I doubt it. AF is really good (will not catch BIF though which is to be expected) and IS is incredibly good.

Bridge un-zoomed in the rain, handheld

Bridge fully-zoomed, in the rain, handheld

Ship at middle right, un-zoomed, handlheld, in the rain

Ship fully-zoomed, handlheld, in the rain

Ship fully-zoomed, you can almost read the two dials in the center right (two round dials above the medium sized window on the bridge) which is nuts, even in good weather, much less in the rain, much less handheld

No-zoom. Focus is on the left side of the little round tower. Handheld

Full-zoom. Focus is on the left side of the little round tower. Handheld

Full-zoom. Focus is on the left side of the little round tower. Handheld