When the FZ1000 clearly outshines the FZ300 ..

be228efb97a64f6ca87541bc12d17e1d.jpg
I believe I've cropped some 600mm images with my FZ300 that equal or exceed your image's IQ.

To each his own.

Best,

Den
This was taken in lower light at ISO1000 ..I was referring to image detail at higher ISOs ..this is where I would rather have the FZ1000. If you are able to crop the FZ300 to match the 1000 then your's is better than mine or possibly others ..12MP/1/2.3" sensor if only shot at similiar zoom with very decent light may come close to but not equal to or certainly not exceed the 1000's 20MP/1 inch sensor output ..even over the 300's 600mm optical and into cropped ranges.
As I said "to each his own". I know after considerable comparison, there are many instances that my FZ300 certainly equals the output of my good friend's FZ1000, bigger sensor or not. And being a photographer for many, many years it is my sincere belief that creative ability and skill is far more important than pixels. And peeping is not what I consider a part of photography.

Stay well and enjoy every day photographing,

Den
 
Last edited:
That's more like it. Noise reduction is really taking quite a toll here. ...
More likely the the combo of iZoom 'and' the Pany in camera JPG NR.

From my experiences to get the optimum IQ from the FZ1000 (& ZS100) need to shoot RAW. (EXIF Data in images).
Ya shooting RAW+jpg here and PP later woulda been better for sure ..I think I did have the in-cam NR set to -1 but -3 to -5 would preserved detail a bit more although not as good as working with RAW file conversion.
FZ1000; PP RAW 1600 ISO,
FZ1000; PP RAW 1600 ISO,

FZ1000; PP RAW 1600 ISO
FZ1000; PP RAW 1600 ISO

With RAW in low/ poor lighting 3200 ISO pushing the 1"-Type Sensor
With RAW in low/ poor lighting 3200 ISO pushing the 1"-Type Sensor
... still needed considering that it can go to F2.8 here compared to the FZ1000's F4.
The 1 f-stop difference not enough for the FZ300/ FZ200 12MP 1/2.3" sensor to come close to compensating for the 1"-Type Sensor's 4X larger surface area, pixel larger surface area, and 20MP resolution.

Other item to keep in mind, the FZ1000 with 10MP crop has a 560mm EFL. Of course for best IQ shoot at 20MP and crop the images to taste while PP.
Those examples certainly show the 1000 can be decent even in those higher ISO ranges ..certainly helps with the amount you have to work with in the RAW file.
Cheers,
Jon
 
I believe I've cropped some 600mm images with my FZ300 that equal or exceed your image's IQ.

To each his own.

Best,

Den
This was taken in lower light at ISO1000 ..I was referring to image detail at higher ISOs ..this is where I would rather have the FZ1000. If you are able to crop the FZ300 to match the 1000 then your's is better than mine or possibly others ..12MP/1/2.3" sensor if only shot at similiar zoom with very decent light may come close to but not equal to or certainly not exceed the 1000's 20MP/1 inch sensor output ..even over the 300's 600mm optical and into cropped ranges.
As I said "to each his own". I know after considerable comparison, there are many instances that my FZ300 certainly equals the output of my good friend's FZ1000, bigger sensor or not. And being a photographer for many, many years it is my sincere belief that creative ability and skill is far more important than pixels. And peeping is not what I consider a part of photography.
I can respect that ..and I agree the FZ300 certainly does surprisingly well for a smaller sensor ..and pixel peepers certainly seem to be prevalent here but ultimately (while a decent cam rig helps) the person holding the camera is the most important factor in final output.
Stay well and enjoy every day photographing,
You as well ..stay safe.
 
That's more like it. Noise reduction is really taking quite a toll here. ...
More likely the the combo of iZoom 'and' the Pany in camera JPG NR.

From my experiences to get the optimum IQ from the FZ1000 (& ZS100) need to shoot RAW. (EXIF Data in images).
Ya shooting RAW+jpg here and PP later woulda been better for sure ..I think I did have the in-cam NR set to -1 but -3 to -5 would preserved detail a bit more although not as good as working with RAW file conversion.
FZ1000; PP RAW 1600 ISO,
FZ1000; PP RAW 1600 ISO,

FZ1000; PP RAW 1600 ISO
FZ1000; PP RAW 1600 ISO

With RAW in low/ poor lighting 3200 ISO pushing the 1"-Type Sensor
With RAW in low/ poor lighting 3200 ISO pushing the 1"-Type Sensor
... still needed considering that it can go to F2.8 here compared to the FZ1000's F4.
The 1 f-stop difference not enough for the FZ300/ FZ200 12MP 1/2.3" sensor to come close to compensating for the 1"-Type Sensor's 4X larger surface area, pixel larger surface area, and 20MP resolution.

Other item to keep in mind, the FZ1000 with 10MP crop has a 560mm EFL. Of course for best IQ shoot at 20MP and crop the images to taste while PP.
Those examples certainly show the 1000 can be decent even in those higher ISO ranges ..certainly helps with the amount you have to work with in the RAW file.
Does not take me any longer to PP RAW than PP tweaks to JPG.

I mostly shot RAW with al my cameras (that have RAW) for the past 15 years.

Jon
 
Some great advice there stevie boy blue. You strike me as being too experienced to imply that wild animals like foxes should be habituated & hand fed by photographers. I didn’t take your idea of planting dog food to mean anything but a temporary aid to a rare situation. You are simply helping the OP gain a better perspective and giving a photography lesson along with it. In my opinion you deserve thanks for some logical strategy that will have no lasting long term effect on the foxes. For people like me your intent will be pretty obvious but could be misinterpreted by others like sactojim and whoever wrote the article he linked. It takes all sorts. Some will condemn because they think it could lead to habituation of wild animals. But many of these same people will have bird feeders hanging in their gardens, not only giving birds food but providing squirrels rats mice and many other wild creatures with easy meals. Throwing stones when we live in glass houses is rarely a wise move. Your FZ330 shots are super examples of what this camera can do in the right hands at high ISO settings. I own one myself. I am no fan of posting on forums though & wonder if it is okay for me to send you a PM with a few questions you might have answers to? Stay safe and well in these difficult times. The same applies to anyone else who reads this message. Thanks.
 
Some great advice there stevie boy blue. You strike me as being too experienced to imply that wild animals like foxes should be habituated & hand fed by photographers. I didn’t take your idea of planting dog food to mean anything but a temporary aid to a rare situation. You are simply helping the OP gain a better perspective and giving a photography lesson along with it. In my opinion you deserve thanks for some logical strategy that will have no lasting long term effect on the foxes. For people like me your intent will be pretty obvious but could be misinterpreted by others like sactojim and whoever wrote the article he linked. It takes all sorts. Some will condemn because they think it could lead to habituation of wild animals. But many of these same people will have bird feeders hanging in their gardens, not only giving birds food but providing squirrels rats mice and many other wild creatures with easy meals. Throwing stones when we live in glass houses is rarely a wise move. Your FZ330 shots are super examples of what this camera can do in the right hands at high ISO settings. I own one myself. I am no fan of posting on forums though & wonder if it is okay for me to send you a PM with a few questions you might have answers to? Stay safe and well in these difficult times. The same applies to anyone else who reads this message. Thanks.
Post your many questions here.

We all like to read & learn things.

Cheers!
 
Thank you very much for your input, Marv.

I really appreciate feedback from intelligent forum users. It’s especially great to know that not every reader of my previous post has misinterpreted my recommendation to use dog food as a means of encouraging the cub (s) to travel a short distance away from the Den’s entrance and where I would have remained at a safe and tolerable shooting distance away from it.

Clearly you picked up on the fact that photographing something as large as a fox cub at full 600mm focal length means we can stay at least 15 meters away from it and still have the subject fill the frame. Anyone who even remotely interprets that as an implication that any animal can be ‘hand-fed’ from 15 meters away must have exceptionally long arms. Ultimately I would never encourage anyone to hand feed any truly wild creature or to remotely habituate it to become tolerant of humans. After all, arguably, we’re by far the most destructive creatures on the planet. So why would I encourage any feral creature to drop its natural instinctive guard against us? I just wouldn’t!

In further defence against any would-be critics, I could have sworn I’d included a PS clarifying that the idea should only be used on a temporary basis and only until more satisfactory images than the OP had posted had been obtained during three or four visits maximum. At the time of posting, I seem to recall making a small edit, so maybe I deleted the rider in error. Either way, it’s gone now.

Ultimately, though, no other wildlife photographer could possibly hold more respect for any of their subjects than I do, and I hate to think I could possibly have led some idiot to abuse the situation simply because they put their need for a nice photo before the welfare of any animal, be it a fox or any other. I sometimes forget just how many fools are lurking on the internet and it truly pains me to think at least one may have passed through here. Hopefully this will clarify things for those who aren’t quite as astute as you, Marv. And of course you’re right to outline that so many of those who preach how wrong it is to feed wild foxes or other animals constantly supply food to birds and various rodents in their garden. Very well said on that note. :-)

As for your view that I deserve thanks for my efforts to educate, I don’t really see it that way. When I post, I do so in hope that far more than the person I’m addressing will read my contributions and that is enough for me to continue occasionally visiting here. I’m especially pleased that you popped by and then saw fit to respond in the absence of any reply from the opening poster. Clearly he has nothing to add at this time and that’s fine. But responses like yours remind me of when I used to teach photography a number of years ago in a college environment. The reward comes purely from the contribution but responses such as yours are always a welcome bonus, so thanks again so much for creating the opportunity for me to clarify the intentions laid down in my earlier post.

Thank you also for the compliment in regards to the images I included above. And whilst I’m inclined to agree that the right hands are capable of bringing out the better results from any camera, the right tool for the job always comes in handy. Plus of course, the right tool for job so often turns out to be virtually any camera we’re holding at the most appropriate moment.

I’m glad to learn that you also own the FZ330 and I hope it serves you at least half as well as mine appears to work for me. I truly love this camera!

In closing, I’ve no problem at all with your sending me questions relating to the FZ330 via PM, but please be aware that my time is limited and my visits here are spasmodic. Hence it could be days or weeks before I respond, assuming I can be of any help at all. In between time you could always post your questions here, but I respect that you’ve already said you’re not keen on forum participation. Perfectly understandable especially with so many critics around, who of course can always be ignored in the way I normally ignore ‘em. ;-)

Much obliged for your time and input. I’ll look out for your PM when I’m next on line, maybe in a week or two.

‘til then, kind regards and happy shooting to ya.

Cheers for now…
 
Last edited:
The biggest thumb up I can find posted to you, Sir. Animals are much smarter than many of us credit them. They're exploring, discovering, and learning machines in a way that often outstrips that of human beings. Unfortunately, their innate nature makes them remember where they got their last good feeding, and they'll be back for more, even if just once to unlearn what they thought was a good deal.

Trouble is, it might be a gun that does the shooting, or a bow and arrow, this time. Or a terrified civilian who screams into a smart phone for a wildlife control officer to rescue him/her from a rabid fox. It has to be rabid 'cuz...it's right there watching him, and real, real close!!!!"
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top