would you trade your 18-250 travel zoom for Sony's 30x High-Zoom cam?

[Amateur Sony Shooter]

I just looked the news about this new all-in-one high-zoom camera ( http://www.dpreview.com/news/1102/11020110sonyhx100vhx9v.asp ). I am just wondering for list price of $450, would I be better off with one of this for everyday family/vacation/video, instead of bring my dSLR or SLT with 18-250 lens? Just a thought, what would you do?

 

[RJD79]

for me absolutely not. since switching to DSLR 3 years ago i find it hard to look at pictures take with compact cameras, especially superzooms.

on the other hand i do believe that such a superzoom can easily replace a camcorder. it has better wideangle, a larger sensor and hey, it can take decent pictures too

 

[Kodakrevisited]

To replace a camcorder yes definately, for family days out in good light, I would expect the stills would be good too, I havent tried one, but I would imagine its pretty good. The only prob with such cameras is that the images always have massive Depth of field (everything in the frame is in focus), I dont mind that as a camera for everyone to use it makes them easier to get an acceptable shot, but some people find that is a bit boring...I wouldnt mind one if I had the spare cash

 

[Dazboot]

My father just bought a Canon SX30IS (35x optical zoom, 24-840mm). He couldn't be happier. He no longer has to change lenses and carry the weight.

I've used his Canon SX30, and I really enjoyed it. I could not believe how well the IS optical stablization worked at 35x. I was able to get less blurry handheld 840mm shots then I ever could handheld with the SS on a Sony DSLR w/300mm zoom lens. As well, the digital zoom of 140x is surprisingly very good.

The image quality is quite good. It's not DSLR quality, but very good. I also noticed there was no purple fringing from the shots I took. There are people using the SX30 with Nikon/etc teleconverters bringing it to 60x or 1440mm! The quality is still very good. Check out samples online.

 

[Dazboot]

See these Canon SX30 samples:

Moon at 140x
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lR9NlJ2a6g
Wildlife at 35x
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu_UNFTeDZI
Birding Photos:
http://kenn3d.smugmug.com/Nature/SX30/15050225_a88Zy

Those bird photos look sharp as heck. Hell, I should attempt BIF shots with this 840mm camera.

 

[Amateur Sony Shooter]

See these Canon SX30 samples:

Moon at 140x
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lR9NlJ2a6g
Wildlife at 35x
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu_UNFTeDZI
Birding Photos:
http://kenn3d.smugmug.com/Nature/SX30/15050225_a88Zy

Those bird photos look sharp as heck. Hell, I should attempt BIF shots with this 840mm camera.

Holy crap! These bird pictures are better than what I can do with 70-400G, and look at that moon. Your links really got me thinking...

 

[Mike CH]

Reach isn't everything.

There is also control over DoF, eg. Although the 18-250 is a bit limited there, too.

Regards,
Mike
--
I'd prefer my DSLR without video, thank you.
I know it has uses, but not for me.
I like the NEXes, but they are too small for my hands.

 

[Chimere]

About a year ago I bought my daughter a Sony HX1, compared the results with shots of my A550 (& Tamron 18-250mm), via a HD TV screen. To my disappointment, and my daughters delight, the HX1 won hands down: IQ in regards to sharpness, contrast and color was identical, however the HX1 pictures had less artifacts. Close-ups were better with the HX1.

Mind you, the tests done was nothing which would compare to DP standards, but reflected only the practical application of the cams in the field.

Have recently upgraded to the A55, since I have already 4 lenses. Otherwise I would have no concerns travelling light with a super-zoom compact P&S, of the HX1 quality. Too bad that Sony seems to have given up building it, without replacement.

Ideally, I think, one should use both concepts. With my heavy bag I lost many good shots, because I do not feel always bringing it along - and many good opportunities get lost.

Chimere

 

[phototherapy]

It depends on many things, this new camera is useful in very good light, it's a to small sensor to use it over ISO 200, so to me you can only use it in good light, and than it's zoom is nice, and even better than a DSLR with such a reach.

 

[AntonyJ]

These super zoom bridge cameras can take suprisingly good photos, and I think for many people would be all the camera they need. I used a Panasonic FZ18 to good effect for a number of years. In good light (so you stuck to the base ISO) and with stationary subjects they work well. It's small but they're not that much smaller than a A55, and comparing it to a NEX or m4/3 there's nothing in it.

The thing to remember is that the image quality will always be limited by the sensor size, despite the continuing improvement there's been. Further, the control and speed of use is limited. Zooming requires pushing a lever rather than twisting the barrel, so it's slower. Focussing is slower and there's no predictive AF for moving subjects. While most of these cameras offer manual focus (with a viewfinder magnifier like the A55) again this uses a switch on the body so it's much slower.

Your creativity is limited by the single (but very versatile) lens. You can get tele convertors that screw into the front (I've got the extremely good Nikon TCE15ED and TCE17ED which aren't made anymore and are expensive used).

So a good choice for casual photographers who want more control and flexibility than a normal compact and don't want the hassle of changing lenses, but still limiting for more demanding users.

 

[Mike Fewster]

There is no doubt that smaller sensor cameras have come a looong way in the last few years and that there is much snobbery about them from dslr users who simply haven't bothered to check them out. I've just bought a NEX for travel, but it was a close run decision, and the new Sony wasn't even an option then to make the decision even more difficult.
--
Mike Fewster
Adelaide Australia

 

[Frenske]

Indeed, most compact cameras perform nicely in bright conditions, but often fail completely on dark overcasted days or near sunrise and sunset light settings. Forget about shooting interiors such as churches without flash.

--
http://frenske.zenfolio.com

 

[tbcass]

Absolutely not. A small sensor super zoom will never be able to match a DSLR type camera for IQ, especially above base iso and speed.
--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

 

[tbcass]

Now lets see how it performs indoors in poor light. Let's see how fast and accurately it focuses fast moving subjects. Let's see how well it does at iso 1600. You get the point. I have a Fuji s9000 bridge camera that I never use any more. At base iso it is close in IQ to a DSLR but in every other way it falls short. I could never live with those limitations again.
--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

 

[don1jam]

The problem is that the superzooms 18-200/250/270 etc. do not do a dSLR justice. Those lens combined with a dSLR are really not better than some of today's modern high-end compacts.

dSLRs progress each year with new technology, but those superzooms are not getting any better, and when you really compare prices the cost of the superzoom lens is probably the same as buying a compact. So for those who need a travel camera to shoot shots in the day, the compact meets their needs.

Really, the 18-200+ superzoom lens need to be better and faster, especially for the price they charge for them.

 

[GodSpeaks]

--

The greatest of mankind's criminals are those who delude themselves into thinking they have done 'the right thing.'

• Rayna Butler

 

[tbcass]

The problem is that the superzooms 18-200/250/270 etc. do not do a dSLR justice. Those lens combined with a dSLR are really not better than some of today's modern high-end compacts.

Really, the 18-200+ superzoom lens need to be better and faster, especially for the price they charge for them.

The DSLR will always focus much faster and perform much better in all ways under poorer lighting. If all you're going to do is shoot in sunshine you may be right but I will not restrict myself to those conditions. Two of the reasons I ditched my super zoom for a DSLR was the focusing speed and better poor lighting performance. I am able to shoot in conditions I could only dream about with a superzoom. Last fall someone I know asked me for advice on a camera because their compact failed miserably in keeping up with their daughter's soccer playing. I recommended a DSLR and they couldn't be happier.

--
Tom

Look at the picture, not the pixels

http://www.flickr.com/photos/25301400@N00/

 

[rinkos]

I just looked the news about this new all-in-one high-zoom camera ( http://www.dpreview.com/news/1102/11020110sonyhx100vhx9v.asp ). I am just wondering for list price of $450, would I be better off with one of this for everyday family/vacation/video, instead of bring my dSLR or SLT with 18-250 lens? Just a thought, what would you do?

coming up from bridge camera and one of the best in her time FZ28..i thought to myself at first all i need from dslr is low light good shots and im good... I WAS WRONG

while maybe back two years ago you could argue that the low end dslr is not that higher than bridge super zoom cameras than since this last sony 16mp sensor the dslr branch completely detached itself from the small sensor category ...

the dynamic range alone is worlds apart.....low light shots?? i can get out of 12800 iso shots far better than the 1600iso of the bridge cam..
and ofcourse crop ability of the shots...

but if all that does not talk to you look at it like that..if you gonna shot pictures and print only at the size of your hand ( old style printouts ) ..than the bridge is for you ...anything higher than that and you will see the difference...even if you use the low end 18-250mm

 

[Everdog]

At first I thought that camera would be great. Then I saw the sensor size. It is much smaller than the new Olympus, Panasonic LX5 and Canon P&S cameras.

Also, the lens is F/2.8 to F/5.8 which is OK, but not the others have F/1.8 and F/2 lenses.

My bet is it will be a very nice camera, but 2 steps below inter-changable lens cameras.

 

[Dennis]

The new Sony has a 16MP 1/2.5" sensor and gets to f/5.6 at the tele end; presumably through most of the tele end.

The DSLR combo has a very slightly slower lens but probably matches at ISO 3200 the digicam at 200.

But I've never felt the need to cover so much range in one lens. The 16-80 at 5X is the widest ranging zoom I've ever had. I don't shoot a lot of tele and usually know if I can leave it at home (or in the hotel room) on a given day.

• Dennis

--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com