Would a mirrorless be better than the P1000

[SmgUk]

Was hoping someone could talk sense to me,

I currently have a Nikon P1000 and my main interest is Aviation and Wildlife Photography.

I have had a Nikon Z50 which i loved because the image quality was top notch but i personally cannot afford the longer Z lenses like the 100-400 etc and therefore because of what i like to take photos of it was no good for me.

I have been thinking again now that the airshows will start again soon should i try to go for a mirrorless set up that i could afford with a longer lens and will it give me better images than the P1000.

Some options i have looked at is the old Nikon 1 cameras with the 70-300 CX which is like a 800mm lens or a Sony e mount camera quite a few telephoto lenses avaliable for them. I would go for a canon R mount camera but i think the lenses will be too expensive for me like the Nikon Z.



Here are some of the photos i have taken with the P1000:

 

[OpticsEngineer]

I think the Sony RX10IV would be the likely camera to beat a P1000 for those kinds of photos. It ain't cheap though.

The one inch sensor in the Sony has more dynamic range than the 1/2.3 inch sensor in the P1000 so better to handle the fact that one side of airplanes or helicopters in bright sunshine and the other side is in shadow.

I have both the RX10IV and the P1000. The AF in the RX10IV is better. But the P1000 has about 5 times the reach of the RX10IV though. So if you are using the P1000 near the end of its zoom range, you will find that hard to match.

 

[Fujiuseruk]

If you’re looking a Nikon 1 then you might as well get the rx10 mk4 with the same size sensor but faster read out , faster af and 600mm f4 lens .
Otherwise look at a Sony a6000 series with thev70-350 or a Fuji with its 70-300 ( Fuji can take a 1.4 or 2 times converter as well )

 

[Craig Gillette]

I think it depends on a couple of factors.

You can't really get completely around the differences between the sensor sizes.

The smaller sensors in some of the bridge cameras, like the P1000, will not perform as well in lower light when compared to the 1" sensors in the RX10V, nor as you move up to aps-c and/or ff. A bright sunny day? It may not be apparent. But, if you use the cameras for other subject matter, say nature/wildlife and trying early mornings or late afternoons, it will be rougher. Or if traveling and trying for interiors in a dark old cathedral or museum, etc., again, likely problematic. I don't know how well recent advances in noise reduction will work with these bridge cams. I found they did well when I revisited some older aps-c shots.

I've never tried these really long focal length bridge cams. One is going to have to consider shutter speeds needed to deal with camera and subject motion. So, I wonder as light diminishes, just how long the brightest sunny day conditions will last if trying to handhold or deal with fast moving subject matter.

Some might find the smaller sensors depth of field helps with focus responsiveness or some subject matter.

The smaller sensor bridge cameras can have great focal length ranges, but you can't swap to a lens with different characteristics which might be better suited to some subject matter. (Sometimes screw on auxiliary lenses?)

If you can work with those factors, the bridge cameras are substantially less expensive than comparable aps-c or ff when trying to get the same angle of view and are also going to be lighter and smaller.

 

[Bob A L]

Just all kinds of choices here. First off, nothing else will match the total function of the P1000, but it is a really big bulky camera. I would suggest keeping it under whatever else you choose. As to the 1" sensor cameras, for my money, they are better image quality than the run of the mill point and shoot cameras, but I can't really say they are enough better than some of the best point and shoots and superzooms. My experience shows e that for my uses, the 1" sensor may be slightly better, but the APSC sensor DSLR'S are night and day better yet as long as you don't need really long telephoto for your needs. A Nikon D3500, D5600 or Zfc with a compact model 18-300 lens is almost identical in physical size to the Sony RX10, and Panasonic FZ1000 or 2500 and lighter in weight. That gives you 27 to 450mm in FF equivalent and for computer viewing and web sharing you can easily crop to an effective 550-600mm equivalent.

But then there are fantastic cameras like the Panasonic FZ300 that will give you images that the average person will never tell the difference between them and those from an APSC or even FF sensored ILC camera. It is weather sealed, physically smaller than 1" and apsc zoom models with 25-600 mm FF equivalent Leica lens that is f2.8 max all the way to 600mm. I can't say enough about this camera. Go over to the Panasonic compact camera web site and see lots of birds and air show photos that are fantastic from the FZ300.

l am sold on it enough that in spite of all the other cameras I own and use I just could not resist any longer and bought one last week.

 

[kli]

... I would go for a canon R mount camera but i think the lenses will be too expensive for me like the Nikon Z.

Well, yes if you're looking at the pro-quality lenses that make up the high-end supertelephoto glass.

But also no because Canon has always had something of a niche among hobbyist wildlife shooters, and they've got three lens options nobody else makes. These are entirely new lens designs and they sound less than impressive, but in practical use with the new R bodies, one of the major issue (fixed f/11 aperture) actually isn't as big a hurdle as a dSLR shooter would perceive it to be.

The three "bargain" supertelephoto lenses Canon makes for the EOS R mount are:

• RF 100-400mm f/5.6-8 IS USM [IS => VR; USM => AF-S]. $549 (B&H price, new)
• RF 600mm f/11 DO IS STM [DO =>PF, STM => AF-P]. $799
• RF 800mm f/11 DO IS STM. $999

Vs., say, the Z 100-400 f/4.5-5.6 VR S being $2500.

That's not to say Canon doesn't also make an RF 100-500mm f/4.5-7.1L IS USM for $2700 if you want to go high-end pro-quality. But they give you the lower-grade/cheaper choices to go long if you want.

Just me. Maaaaybe consider picking an R7 or R10 and the RF 100-400 for airshows.

Now, granted. If you go for an R body, RF-mount Bigmas and Tamron's 150-500 Di III are off the table. But you can still adapt the EF-mount Bigmas and Tamron 150-600.

The R10+100-400 is 2.4 lbs; your P1000 is 3.11 lbs. So this combo is lighter and smaller. It won't have the same reach (600mm equivalence vs. 3000mm equivalence), but I've sometimes felt my 400mm prime was too tight/long for airshow shooting.

However, with your airshow shots, the focal lengths you used on the P1000 are 77-180mm. The lens on the P1000 is 4.3-539mm, with 24-3000 equivalence. So the crop factor is roughly 5.5x. 77-180x5.5 => 423-1000mm equivalency. A 100-400mm lens on Canon APS-C (1.6x crop) would be 160-640 equivalent. So still shorter than what you're used to, but in a similar range.

 

[beagle1]

Was hoping someone could talk sense to me,

I currently have a Nikon P1000 and my main interest is Aviation and Wildlife Photography.

I have had a Nikon Z50 which i loved because the image quality was top notch but i personally cannot afford the longer Z lenses like the 100-400 etc and therefore because of what i like to take photos of it was no good for me.

I have been thinking again now that the airshows will start again soon should i try to go for a mirrorless set up that i could afford with a longer lens and will it give me better images than the P1000.

Some options i have looked at is the old Nikon 1 cameras with the 70-300 CX which is like a 800mm lens or a Sony e mount camera quite a few telephoto lenses avaliable for them. I would go for a canon R mount camera but i think the lenses will be too expensive for me like the Nikon Z.

Here are some of the photos i have taken with the P1000:

a mirrorless and 100-400 will give you a little better airshow pics

e.g. Canon R10 and Canon RF 100-400 (or used EF 100-400)

 

[NikonNature]

In my opinion, buying into yet another camera system is a waste of money. You have experienced the IQ of the Z50, you just need a lens to go with it.

The Sigma/Tamron 150-600mm would be a great option. Yes you need to use the FTZ adapter, but you'd save quite a bit over the Z 100-400mm and you'd be stepping up significantly from your P1000.

Obviously, there can be a variety of opinions on this. My main point is, decide what system you really want to invest in and then move in that direction. It may take patience while you keep saving, but it's better than jumping around and ending up with old used gear you need to sell later. If size/wt is a bid deal, then the M43 system might be the best compromise between size/wt, cost, reach and IQ.

 

[SmgUk]

Thanks for the replys.

I have seen second hand Olympus EM1X cameras that are affordable so i think it might be best to try that because of the autofocus system and the crop factor on M4/3.

 

[Bob A L]

Do you no longer have the Z50? Lenses for it are available very reasonable, and as to the crop factor of the M43, you can easily crop the DX sensor images to the same crop factor as the M43. Or if budget is lower, you can pick up used APSC DSLR's and lenses for next to nothing, and have the advantage for fast moving aircraft of the optical viewfinder. Just some more choices to consider.