Do you think 60x will be a limit to bridge camera zoom?

[maisatomai]

Normally a bridge camera has 1/2.3" small sensor. If you add a 250mm lens to it, it will be something like SX60, 250mm with 1/2.3 small sensor.

In order to increase the zoom, the camera maker has 2 option,

1) decrease the size of small sensor (which is impossible)

2) increase the focal lens of lens used. Law of physic tell us it impossible to have a 300mm or 400mm focal length that can fit a bridge camera.

Even if a 300mm lens is used (the bridge camera will become very bulky), the zoom will increase to about 70x which is not a big improvement numerically

 

[leno]

Do you think anyone would by it.

 

[trekkeruss]

Even if a 300mm lens is used (the bridge camera will become very bulky),

Well, that's only 53mm more than the current 247mm. Can they make a lens telescope/extend more than it currently does? I don't know, but I do not see why not. Overall, the SX60 is still relatively small, and adding more zoom probably wouldn't make it any larger than say, the Panasonic FZ1000.

the zoom will increase to about 70x which is not a big improvement numerically

It's 1656mm vs. 1365mm. That's quite a difference.

 

[trekkeruss]

Nikon has bridged the gap, so-to-speak, and come out with their 83x P900, sporting a 357mm lens, or 2000mm equivalent!

 

[tedolf]

Why anybody needs more than 10x is a mystery to me.

Once you get out to really large magnifications at long distances atmospheric limits come into play.

Tedolph

 

[leno]

Why anybody needs more than 10x is a mystery to me.

Once you get out to really large magnifications at long distances atmospheric limits come into play.

Tedolph

Because some things will not let you get closer.