I disagree quite a bit with the statement "The G3 X is a premium superzoom camera that sounds great on paper but, sadly, falls short in a few areas in real-world use"

Mainly because I've used the G3X for 2 years now, in addition to an FZ1000 (often) and RX10 III (seldom use).

It's quite the opposite really, on *preview* papers (like dpreview hands on) it sounds a little bad. No EVF. No 4k. Soft lens. Older processor.

In reality, not quite, and here's why:
- it's small. Like really small. The RX10 and FZ1000 are huge monsters in comparison. The G3X is easy to pack so you bring it actually everywhere.

- its weather sealed, so you .. actually bring it everywhere. I've taken it with my for a 4 days moutain bike trip, attached to the outside of my bag. It rained 3 days straight, I descended rock gardens, took jumps and drops on UCI downhill mtb tracks (Fort Williams) and the camera still works fine.

So despite being (truly) technically inferior, I end up using the G3X all the time.

I don't think I will ever buy one of these camera. There is a serious discrepancy between the obsolescence timeframe between the optics and the electronics. This is quite wasteful.

It just seems to me that all of these cameras - each and every one - can be used to take pictures. But like Boris Steigner always said, "The wild horse in the mason jar is always the user." As for me, I come from Westchester. Born and raised. They said during childbirth there was a brief period where there was not enough oxygen. I still feel that way sometimes. So I usually buy the family sizes, even though I'm a bit overweight. (I know, I know!) So anyway I got the FZ1000. And I think these guys are right. It's a very good camera. (And don't forget the video!) Because many times now I've been a Doubting Thomas, but went ahead and took a chance, and let me tell you, these guys were right! Because remember that pretty girl on the train? Pretty girls almost never start conversations with me! But she saw the FZ1000 and said, "Hey, what kind of camera is that? It looks like a good one!" So consider me happily well-steered! Thanks for reading and now I pass to the next guy!

The lens on the rx10 iii is worth more than the price. The camera it's attached to is gravy.

Very puzzled by this 9 June 2017 reposting of what just looks like a round-up from more than a year ago.

Has there been any new material included ?. If so, it would be helpful if it could be made clear.

I was genuinely surprised to see the FZ1000 top this list. Which is strange, because I bought one a few months ago after considering all these options (and waiting for no-show Nikon)!

I now find myself in the odd position where my "little" take-everywhere camera is much bigger than my serious "big" camera (EM1) but the thing is I CAN take it everywhere and it does everything and does it well. A tip for other FZ1000 users: when using the macro setting, zoom the lens precisely to "46mm" for maximum magnification. That gives surprisingly good magnification. Second tip: use the "precise" focus setting at long focal lengths and the lens will suddenly seem a lot sharper...

I absolutely would have picked the G3X if it had a real viewfinder. Much better size and shape and more weather resistant. I may also have picked the RX10/3 if it hadn't been two and half times the price. Dunno though. The Panasonic is pretty intuitive to use, the Sony needs some learning.

Embarrassingly, I've owned 2/3 of this list. The RX10 III is, all-around, maybe the single most impressive camera I've ever owned. For the price, it probably should be. Incredibly sharp lens throughout the range, awesome video features. Still can't believe they couldn't include an ND filter and a touch screen, and AF could be quicker, but... maybe in the next version.

FZ1000 and ZS100 are both pretty good cameras. If the RX10s didn't exist, I think everyone would be impressed with the sharpness of the lenses from both. The one issue that I've had with these two, and all Panasonic cameras, is the greenish-yellow tint to the files. In some cases, it looks okay (especially landscapes with greenery), in other cases it can really be distracting, and difficult (if not impossible) to correct in post.

Out of everything, the one 1" sensor camera that I've actually held on to? RX100 - Mark II. Several years on and it's the best compliment to my a6300 system. Something for everyone, I guess.

Sony RX10 III is close. If they can bring back the ND filters, and add on-sensor phase detect AF in the mark IV, I would buy one. None of these cameras are quite there yet.

Price should never be involved with considering one product against another, especially when DPreview specifically groups the reviews by price range and then makes another price range within that price range.

Something often missing in these reviews is that most of these cameras (if not all, have not read the specs for all...) allow for high-speed flash sync (1/2000 for the RX10s, 1/4000 for the FZ1000/2000/2500, no idea for the others).

In some situations this gives a great advantage vs DSLR or mirorless regardless of other specs. It adds to the completeness of the package. Reviewers should not overlook this, ditto for consumers.

>>>> "This [FZ1000} makes it an excellent travel camera, particularly for those once-in-a-lifetime trips".

It is not. A best travel cam should have some kind of weather sealing.

How the heck does a camera with such a soft lens get a "82% Gold Award" ??? That Panny TZ-100 shouldn't be in this list.

Nikon should get the (USA) "Homer Simpson D'oh! Award" for releasing the poor selling KeyMission, and killing the promising DL line.

(In this category, Nikon's entry would have been the 1" sensor DL24-500.)

Question remains plain simply: how to compare lenses of fz1000 and some ultrazoom DSLR lenses (18-300 for example)? Is fz1000 much better? Because DSLR lenses have more reach, better eq aperture and the pack sizes quite comparable.
But only comprasion that we have - strictly between compacts, or strictly between DSLR lenses. But what if I already have APS-C DSLR and thinking about ultra-flexible reach?

A surprise to see the FZ-1000 with a Gold. That and the RX10 II were my shortlist. I got the FZ-1000 because it cost half of the RX10 ii (U$520 vs U$1,080) in our country.
I am very pleased with my fz-1000. It has its weaknesses and faults, but 95% of the features and performances, in many ways, erases the negatives.

What would interest me is how Sony, Panasonic would innovate again and introduce something different using 1" sensors aside from the long zoom and the small compact RX100's/LX10-15. I wonder if a medium compact 1" sensor camera with a 24-50mm 35FF equivalent at f1.4 straight (or even f1.8) would sell?! How about an 18-35 f1.8 35FF equivalent? That would be an interesting.

Nikon would have made to the top of the list had it rolled out the DL models, rather than killing them.

When and if the RX100M5's OSPDAF sensor gets added to RX10M4 (which is inevitable, the way Sony upgrades products), wouldn't that be a great camera for shooting wildlife and birds, for less than the cost of even a medium telephoto FF lens?

Very strange. Bot winners are huge. This is not one category. I handheld the Panny 10 zoom 1"sensor. It is just a tad larger than the Sony RX100's but it still fits in your pants with ease. In the showroom I tried and tried to do that with FZ1000. I ended up at the policestation with a what now had become an ILC.

couldn't agree more the FZ1000 is really a mega bargain, i started with it, and i still like the look of the photos now. That RX10III would be great if it wasn't so expensive. Nice article DP and Happy Friday :)

Wheres the Nikon DL? ;)

Sony RX10 III and Panasonic FZ2000 are very tempting to get as travel cameras. Good zoom range, features and quite compact with good IQ.

Some thoughts about my G3 X:
- I think the lens is not that soft. Maybe it was not the best copy which there was tested.
- A lens that extends so much can never be "weather sealed".
- The close-up possibilities are nice.
- AF-Tracking is great, in special related to face detection.
- This camera has a serious problem with the live view. It brightens up the view without any warning or hint, so you should check the taken photos like with an DSLR. So sad about that. Automatic preview does not work when continuous shooting mode is switched on.

I recently bought the FZ1000 for bird photography and I liked the results of this roundup. Although this camera came out in the year 2104 is interesting how it managed to stay in the first place of 2016 between the bridge cameras in different photography sites (techradar, ephotozine, etc.). Put simply, I think the RX10 II may have a slightly better quality but the price is excessively higher and I do not think it will make up for it. The price is important in this type of evaluations and that is why the FZ1000 is the best overall and the RX10 II is the premium choice. With the FZ1000, Panasonic has been able to produce a high quality camera at a reasonable price, which, incidentally, can not be said of the FZ2500.

I own an RX10iii. I have owned several ICL APS-C and fixed lens cameras. My favorite is the RX10iii and price be damned. Calling the FZ1000 the "best" is a LIE. I rejected that camera because it wasn't good enough. It's like saying a D5500 is better than a D5 because it's cheaper.

FZ1000: "The camera has a single dial (two would be better)"

Doesn't it have a clickable dial in the rear for the thumb, and another behind the shutter button for the index finger?

Why do none of the reviews ever mention the noise generated by the FZ1000 ois system which you cannot remove and is redially picked up by the on board mic as well as any hot shoe mounted mic. It makes run and gun video shooting more troublesome than it should be. I have the camera. Love it but this issue bugs me. Hope it's improved on the FZ2500.

Rather bogus judgment I would think. Sony RX10 Mark III is far superior camera then Panasonic FZ1000 in almost every aspects. Sure it cost more but the cost should never be part of the review or else you shouldn't review any camera that cost over a thousand bucks before taking points away. I owned both cameras and without a doubt, Sony RX10 Mk III is superior in all aspects....except one....and that is the Sony weighted quite a bit more. You can take points for that if you wish.

What about the Nikon P900 ? 24X2000mm (X83) the greatest long zoom camera !

Hmmm. Let's see. The RX10M3 has the longest zoom and the best IQ yet you don't give it either the "Best" or the "Premium Choice" because it is too expensive?

Two mistakes in the equivalent aperture chart:
- The FZ1000 should go up to 400mm eq.
- The FZ2500's tele F4.5 translates to F12.2 eq, not F13.1