1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Bridge camera recommendation

Discussion in 'Photography & Video' started by Noughtboy, 13 Aug 2017.

  1. Noughtboy

    Hitman

    Joined: 18 Apr 2006

    Posts: 585

    Location: Essex

    Hi all,

    Looking to replace my current bridge. I want neither a compact nor a DSLR.

    TLDR
    "So, I suppose, in roundup, between the Nikon and the FZ330 and FZ1000, will I really see any benefit of larger sensor size (and price) over constant aperture lens or rely on the optical stabilisation of the Nikon. Mostly shoot the kids with a mixture of indoors (low light) and outdoors. Do use zoom for some landscape shots so need versatility of low light, zoom and fast AF."

    Having looked around, I think I have narrowed it down to a Panasonic. I like the FZ82, FZ330 and FZ1000.

    I would very reluctantly spend the approx £520 for the FZ1000 based on the 1" sensor assuming that I can always crop the 16x zoom (25mm-400mm) owing to the better sensor. I would prefer to get away with £300 which is the FZ82 offering the 60x zoom (20mm-1200mm) and focus stacking but after reading through this thread everyone bemoans 1/2.3" sensors.

    Which brings me to the middle road FZ330. I think it is overpriced compared to the FZ82 at £419 and "only" £100 cheaper than the larger sensor FZ1000. But, with this, it is about that 2.8 constant aperture 24x zoom (25mm-600mm) lenses but on a 1/2.3" sensor. It is also weather proof (resistant perhaps) and also offers Panasonics Post Focus feature (like the Lytro I suppose).

    So, in the case of the FZ330, is it larger zoom and 2.8 constant aperture with smaller sensor over larger sensor of the FZ1000? Does the lens make up for the smaller sensor or will the larger sensor with 2.8-4.0 lens prevail.

    To throw a spanner in the works, I looked at the Nikon P900. Ii have to admit the 83x zoom (24mm-2000mm) looks fantastic, the aperture range of 2.8-6.5 less so (also 1/2.3"). However, the photos it has taken all look good (or perhaps good enough) and people think that the "excellent" optical stabilisation allows for the full use of the zoom. It falls in between the FZ330 and FZ1000 in price.

    Using this studio shot chart https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/im...1&x=-0.4006983849847229&y=-0.7725981620718464

    they look very similar at the lower ISO's (<800) with the FZ1000 obviously being better at the higher ISO's.

    I am not a photographic expert by any means (perhaps trying to shoot at a lower ISO is the amount of fiddling I do) prefering to rely on the auto mode or scenes to make up for my ineptitude. I may at some point start fiddling around with PASM modes but am unlikely to use RAW any time soon relying on Picasa for any changes that need to be made. As for the video modes, don't have a 4K TV but may in the future but usually use the mobile for video capture anyway.

    So, I suppose, in roundup, between the Nikon and the FZ330 and FZ1000, will I really see any benefit of larger sensor size (and price) over constant aperture lens or rely on the optical stabilisation of the Nikon. Mostly shoot the kids with a mixture of indoors (low light) and outdoors. Do use zoom for some landscape shots so need versatility of low light, zoom and fast AF.

    Thanks for your advice.

    NB
     
  2. uv

    Sgarrista

    Joined: 16 May 2006

    Posts: 8,435

    Location: Manchester

    The FZ1000 is the only one I'd choose to use here - the others are basically phone cameras with optical zoom.

    If you ever thought that your phone pictures weren't good enough quality (disregarding zoom), then you're not going to think much better of the cameras with 1/2.3 sensors. 1" would be the absolute minimum I'd choose.
     
  3. Holst1981

    Hitman

    Joined: 1 Dec 2015

    Posts: 949

    For your use any of them would be ok.

    The 1" sensor will do better in low light, and would be my choice of bridge camera.

    But the fz82 seems like better value.

    How often do you use the full zoom?
    There are "better" cameras if you were willing to compromise on the big zoom.
     
  4. Noughtboy

    Hitman

    Joined: 18 Apr 2006

    Posts: 585

    Location: Essex

    Whilst that is not entirely accurate (the substantially better, faster lenses letting in more light should offer far superior performance) I do understand what you are saying.
     
  5. Noughtboy

    Hitman

    Joined: 18 Apr 2006

    Posts: 585

    Location: Essex

    Whilst my current camera has a 16x zoom and the new ones have 16x to 20x or even 83x on the Nikon I don't think I would miss not having a much higher zoom seeing as I've never had this. That being said, I don't think I want to go any lower on the zoom.

    I suppose the previous questions I would like answered is whether firstly the 16x zoom on the 1" fz1000 can be blown up to equal a larger zoom on a 1/2.3" sensor without quality loss? If so, what do you think I could increase this by? Secondly, whether the better lens or brighter, faster lens on the fz330 makes up for the slower lens on the bigger sensor of the fz1000?

    The FZ330 also has that post focus option which looks very interesting. I think this is available on the fz2000 but I am not willing to spend over £800.

    Thanks as always for your help and advice.

    NB
     
  6. beefybarn

    Mobster

    Joined: 6 Jul 2008

    Posts: 3,801

    Location: Brighton

    I own the FZ1000 and have been very happy with the results, my usage is very similar to yours, 2 young kids running around and a mix of indoor and outdoor shots. The 1" sensor is what sold it to me and I have found the AF extremely fast, the zoom I rarely use but when I have its been long enough for me.