Reading mode: Light Dark

I notice owners of P1000 always want to upgrade to an ILC

  • Thread starter Thread starter jackwelch
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
J

jackwelch

Guest
Why is that? You'd think that the P1000 gives you the maximum focal range and quality but I always notice one trend, having tried a P1000 an owner will want something better like an ILC or even a Sony RX10 series.

I'm not here to belittle, I just want to understand the reason. Why?

You'd think maximum focal range is everything, but that doesn't seem the case here.

Note: the reason I'm asking this question is because I myself is considering a P1000/P950 purchase.
 
Own the p950 which was a first initial purchase at that price level. Then indeed went ILC, and spent way more. Then went with a point and shoot, but one of the best ones.

These three cover all my needs. Long focal range. Taking advantage of those moments in life that most people can only recall verbally (by having a capable camera with you and knowing how to use it immediately regardless of the situation).

Then the ILC for everything else.

As life goes on there are times and seasons and events where one or the other or the third is just right. But have yet to find something that one or two of these three can't handle. The 3rd camera is with me at nearly all times, the p&s, while one of the other two come along based on activity.

Definitely cases where the p950 doesn't fit well. Definitely cases where the p&s won't perform well. And cases where the ILC lens would just be too costly for the few use cases for it.

Bottom line is the purchasers of these cameras are very impressed by the results, but realize they're mostly about the zoom, though these cameras are also versatile in the sense that a riding lawn mower can tow a wagon, it's just that's not what it is really all about.

So being dazzled by the results from these cameras, the owner walks deeper into the waters of photography having liked that first splash, in order to get cleaner, deeper waters ...

Oh, someone will mention GAS. A common affliction for these people.

Edit: GE may survive yet, even though you left, Jack.
 
Last edited:
TechnologistdotLive said:
Own the p950 which was a first initial purchase at that price level. Then indeed went ILC, and spent way more. Then went with a point and shoot, but one of the best ones.

These three cover all my needs. Long focal range. Taking advantage of those moments in life that most people can only recall verbally (by having a capable camera with you and knowing how to use it immediately regardless of the situation).

Then the ILC for everything else.

As life goes on there are times and seasons and events where one or the other or the third is just right. But have yet to find something that one or two of these three can't handle. The 3rd camera is with me at nearly all times, the p&s, while one of the other two come along based on activity.

Definitely cases where the p950 doesn't fit well. Definitely cases where the p&s won't perform well. And cases where the ILC lens would just be too costly for the few use cases for it.

Bottom line is the purchasers of these cameras are very impressed by the results, but realize they're mostly about the zoom, though these cameras are also versatile in the sense that a riding lawn mower can tow a wagon, it's just that's not what it is really all about.

So being dazzled by the results from these cameras, the owner walks deeper into the waters of photography having liked that first splash, in order to get cleaner, deeper waters ...

Oh, someone will mention GAS. A common affliction for these people.

Edit: GE may survive yet, even though you left, Jack.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the thorough reply.

As for GE, it is expected. You can't always be on top. I've only seen one company that is the exception to Law 41 of the 48 Laws of Power: Avoid Stepping into a Great Man's Shoes.

That's Apple with Tim Cook.
 
AF system that works for fast action shooting. Pcams Do not have AFC and eye tracking etc. if they had an AF system like sony or canon or Z9 and a fast read out and good buffer then would be very usable for fast action and one could most any kind of shooting with them. But You have to go to higher end cameras to get these features.

DA
 
No idea what an ILC is but P950 is my choice. Love the camera and I get good shots with it.
 
jackwelch said:
kathiemt said:
No idea what an ILC is but P950 is my choice. Love the camera and I get good shots with it.
Click to expand...
Interchangeable Lens Camera - Mirrorless or DSLR
Click to expand...
Oh, thanks for explaining. I have 2 DSLRs - my P950 is STILL my preferred choice of camera for 99% of my photography - lightweight, easy to carry at my hip, easy to use, can easily take videos with it too and I love the zoomability.
 
It’s simple really, these cameras are all about the zoom but they need lots of light and have slower contrast AF.
So those that get hooked will start looking for better lowlight performance, image quality improvement and auto focus that keep up with a moving object.
 
These are certainly fun cameras to own, and could suffice for an only camera, but they are not going to produce the ultimate image quality in most situations. I consider the P900/950 to be the most fun camera you can own.

But there are so many other considerations that make these cameras less than ideal for many uses. An old old term used to be "jack of all trades, but master of none" maybe with the exception of extreme telephoto range in a manageable physical size.

But if you want the best quality photos over the widest range of situations, this will require something else besides the 900/950.
 
Bob A L said:
These are certainly fun cameras to own, and could suffice for an only camera, but they are not going to produce the ultimate image quality in most situations. I consider the P900/950 to be the most fun camera you can own.

But there are so many other considerations that make these cameras less than ideal for many uses. An old old term used to be "jack of all trades, but master of none" maybe with the exception of extreme telephoto range in a manageable physical size.

But if you want the best quality photos over the widest range of situations, this will require something else besides the 900/950.
Click to expand...
Yes I agree and that’s why I added the RX10mk2 to my kit with its 24-200 f2.8 and 1” sensor it was just as capable as my D7200 with its 18-140 kit lens . Just wish Sony would update it with phase detect AF found in the mk4 .
My favourite hybrid camera is the fz2000 it has a bit of everything you might need in an all in one camera .
 
I have both, one has the range and the other can be cropped more successfully. On safari I use both

Kim
 
The P1000 works best when the subject is still and there is absolutely no wind. Even a breeze, especially in an open area (e.g. a lakeside, seaside or an open field), can ruin your shot.

So when there is wind or the subject is moving or you want to handhold the camera (instead of fixing it on a tripod), a DSLR/mirrorless with a long-zoom lens comes into mind.

But I haven't decided which mirrorless + lens to buy, and I don't have the money yet, either. Maybe those photo contests can sponsor me some money...

I know Sony mirrorlesses are the best in AF, Canon ones in zoom range (e.g. the RF 800 F11 lens plus the 33MP APS-C R7 body), and Nikon ones probably in IQ?
jackwelch said:
Why is that? You'd think that the P1000 gives you the maximum focal range and quality but I always notice one trend, having tried a P1000 an owner will want something better like an ILC or even a Sony RX10 series.

I'm not here to belittle, I just want to understand the reason. Why?

You'd think maximum focal range is everything, but that doesn't seem the case here.

Note: the reason I'm asking this question is because I myself is considering a P1000/P950 purchase.
Click to expand...
 
I don't find wind a problem with my Nikon P900. Why would that be a problem? And hand holding the Nikon P super zooms is easy easy, they have great is.

Birds in flight are a different story though, but tough no matter what you own.
 
Fz2000user uk said:
Bob A L said:
These are certainly fun cameras to own, and could suffice for an only camera, but they are not going to produce the ultimate image quality in most situations. I consider the P900/950 to be the most fun camera you can own.

But there are so many other considerations that make these cameras less than ideal for many uses. An old old term used to be "jack of all trades, but master of none" maybe with the exception of extreme telephoto range in a manageable physical size.

But if you want the best quality photos over the widest range of situations, this will require something else besides the 900/950.
Click to expand...
Yes I agree and that’s why I added the RX10mk2 to my kit with its 24-200 f2.8 and 1” sensor it was just as capable as my D7200 with its 18-140 kit lens . Just wish Sony would update it with phase detect AF found in the mk4 .
My favourite hybrid camera is the fz2000 it has a bit of everything you might need in an all in one camera .
Click to expand...
Many people dive into the DSLR (and now mirrorless) water, buy lenses of all focal length segments, and end up selling them all, finding owning so many lenses cumbersome.

The smart guy will buy an RX10M4 to cover all focal length segments between 24 and 600mm. Also, the RX10M4 is the only BIF gear a 90+ years old person can physically accommodate.

The even smarter guy will find a Samsung S21/S22/S23 Ultra enough to cover 13-720mm stationary targets, and if he wants better IQ, an additional Nikon A1000.

A mirrorless + a long-zoom lens is my primary shopping wish in 2023, anyway...
 
Bob A L said:
I don't find wind a problem with my Nikon P900. Why would that be a problem? And hand holding the Nikon P super zooms is easy easy, they have great is.

Birds in flight are a different story though, but tough no matter what you own.
Click to expand...
Wind causes camera shake (if the camera is on tripod) and subject movement (e.g. bird feather movement) which in turn causes motion blur.

Handholding also causes camera shake and in turn motion blur.
 
jackwelch said:
Why is that? You'd think that the P1000 gives you the maximum focal range and quality but I always notice one trend, having tried a P1000 an owner will want something better like an ILC or even a Sony RX10 series.

I'm not here to belittle, I just want to understand the reason. Why?

You'd think maximum focal range is everything, but that doesn't seem the case here.

Note: the reason I'm asking this question is because I myself is considering a P1000/P950 purchase.
Click to expand...
I was coming from a Canon SureShot Digital ELPH (3X zoom) when I first started using Nikon cameras, I became a proponent of more zoom being better than anything...P530 > B700 > P1000 with an A1000 thrown in for good measure. All produced really nice images.

In time, however, I became interested in wildlife photography, particularly critters in motion. I kept my B700 and P1000 but I added a Nikon D5600 and a Nikon AF-P DX 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3G ED VR to my kit. Eventually, I realized that for me at least, very long zoom was no longer a driver and I sold or traded all of my fixed lens cameras and went all in for DSLRs and lenses.

After a while, though, I discovered that there were fixed lens cameras like those from Sony and Panasonic that incorporated features that were found in my ILCs. It turned out that things like being able to select autofocus points, a fast burst mode, and configuring for back button focus, for example, were available on these cameras just like on my ILCs.

In the end, I opted to add two Panasonic FZ series cameras to my gear. The FZ300 has the same size sensor found in my previous Nikon fixed lens cameras but it can maintain a relatively fast f/2.8 aperture over a 35mm equivalent focal length range of 25 - 600mm. The FZ1000 Mk2 has a max. aperture range of f/2.8 - 4.0 and an 35mm equivalent focal length range of 25 - 400mm but uses a much larger 1" (vs 1/2.3") sensor.

BTW, please don't misunderstand me. I'm not saying that the Panasonic FZs are better than my previous Nikon bridge cameras. It just that they are better tools for my photography interests.
 
Last edited:
I don't agree that ILC is "better". "Better" is complicated and prominently includes physical size and why one is shooting a particular kind of picture. For me, I'd rather carry a superzoom than a long lens for my FF ILC, for multiple reasons, principally the larger weight and size of a large lens, the need to change lenses on my ILC, and the speed and versatility of the superzoom.

I have shot with ILC's forever, but for the last 15 years not with any long telephoto. I use ILCs only for my main interests which are landscape and informal family portraits. For those I cannot get the quality I want, particularly in low light, with a small sensor. When traveling I shoot landscape with ILC but take bird and other wildlife photos opportunistically, usually in very good light, with a superzoom. My interest in wildlife photography is only modest. It is a challenge to do really well, but not a challenge that I find at all interesting. I am content to do it as a kind of fun documentation ("look what we saw"). Interesting landscape photos I find very hard to do and a challenge that I like.

Lastly I'll note the following true story behind some wolf photos that I got in the winter in Yellowstone a few years ago. Consistent with the above I was carrying a Canon SX-50 HS and a, then brand new, Sony A7R4 with a wide angle lens on it. We were in the north of Yellowstone, near the meadows. On a ridge, not too distant I saw first one, then three wolves, tracking in a line. I started shooting with the Canon at max zoom (rated 1200mm). A van with some photography tour stopped along the road, below the trail I was snowshoeing on. I kept an eye on them while shooting the wolves with my SX-50. They piled out, aware of the wolves, and started setting up with their immense lenses (600mm f4, maybe, the $12,000 type). By the time they were ready to shoot the wolves had dropped over the ridge. Maybe one of them got a shot off, at least two guys got nothing. I could hear them in the crystal clear frigid air and they were disappointed. Had they gotten some photos, their photos would have been better than mine, slightly, but since they didn't because of their cumbersome gear, my photos were better than their nothings.

jackwelch said:
Why is that? You'd think that the P1000 gives you the maximum focal range and quality but I always notice one trend, having tried a P1000 an owner will want something better like an ILC or even a Sony RX10 series.

I'm not here to belittle, I just want to understand the reason. Why?

You'd think maximum focal range is everything, but that doesn't seem the case here.

Note: the reason I'm asking this question is because I myself is considering a P1000/P950 purchase.
Click to expand...
 
jackwelch said:
I notice owners of P1000 always want to upgrade to an ILC. Why is that?
Click to expand...
Might be true for those who bought a P1000 as their first camera and eventually realized its limitations compared to ILCs in areas other than long focal length, but I suspect that is not the normal case, so I don't agree with your premise.

I own a P1000 bought for the sole purpose of carrying it on the daily walks to shoot distant wildlife (local wildlife is rarely nearby) that none of my other cameras could come close to reaching. I owned ILCs before and have bought one once since the P1000 purchase, but the P1000 is still the one I carry on the walks, despite its more limited ability to capture BIFs.

That said, BIFs while more difficult, aren't impossible, even small birds with some planning ahead...

Tree Swallow In Flight

Tree Swallow In Flight

While slower flying large birds like herons, osprey, eagles, and swans are much easier...

Osprey With A Big Catch

Osprey With A Big Catch

I generally reserve the ILC for low light situations or when I need the best IQ my gear can produce, but with the coming of Topaz Denoise AI, image noise is no longer much of an issue with the P1000.

For all the different subjects and situations I encounter with the P1000, this is my gallery of those shots.

https://pbase.com/merriwolf/nikon_coolpix_p1000

If I could only have one camera, it would be the P1000 hands down. Happily I don't have to be limited to it.

--
Regards, Gordon
_
Photography since 1950 • Digital since 1999
My online photo galleries
 
Last edited:
There are other cases as well: for instance, I'm not a photographer, just a hobbyist addicted to the zoom cameras. I knew from start the limitations of a phone-like sensor camera, because I have elementary knowledge of photography (like exposure triangle, etc.), but I like to change the FL from 24mm to 3000mm in seconds more than everything else.

Thus I never, ever considered to upgrade to ILC.

All the best and happy shooting everyone,

Augustin
 
Last edited:
Member said:
  • jackwelch wrote:
Why is that? You'd think that the P1000 gives you the maximum focal range and quality but I always notice one trend, having tried a P1000 an owner will want something better like an ILC or even a Sony RX10 series.

I'm not here to belittle, I just want to understand the reason. Why?

You'd think maximum focal range is everything, but that doesn't seem the case here.

Note: the reason I'm asking this question is because I myself is considering a P1000/P950 purchase.
Click to expand...
Actually I'm not. I came from the ILC world (got my first one in 1969), but I've moved out because I greatly prefer the long zoom range and not needing to swap lenses out on the trail. Additionally weight is an issue (the P1000 weighs less than half of a Z9 with 400mm) and there is nothing practical in the ILC world to compare with 3000mm EFL. Really the last ILC I used was an Olympus 4/3. Changing lenses during a blizzard convinced me that a fixed zoom was more practical.

I see it as a successful compromise. Small phone size sensors have improved enormously but are hampered by the limits of very tiny lenses. So the P1000 essentially uses the phone sensor technology with a very effective optical package
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C Sean
50-200 owners! Do you actually need the lens?
2 3
Replies
49
Views
69K
HicHic
HicHic
N
Upgrading from a FZ200
Replies
7
Views
7K
Nerehus
N
T
Let's Speculate! New Epson printers
2
Replies
21
Views
40K
NAwlins Contrarian
N
M
Bridge, compact or something else?
Replies
10
Views
7K
Planterz
Planterz
S
Why am I having to boost saturation to max on my Epson printers
2
Replies
30
Views
8K
ActionPhotoPassion
A

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
n
Next
w
Next unread
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top