Bridge Camera??

[Sal&Syl2020]

Hi,

I really want to downgrade from my 'much loved', but hardly taken out as I find it a bit too heavy (I also can't really justify keeping all my kit as we need some spare cash for other important stuff right now) D7200, 16-80 lens (Which I absolutely adore!!) and 70-300 lens, to exchange for a decent bridge camera. I only have a budget of around £400 though and do realise that no bridge camera (Unless I want to pay over £1000, which I can't afford!) will have the image quality of an SLR.

It's such a minefield to search for a decent camera nowadays, when there's so much choice (I even considered getting a 'decent' point and shoot at one point!!), so after spending absolutely ages looking on Amazon for the one with a price tag I could afford and which had the best reviews, I found the Panasonic Lumix DMC Fz330 Bridge camera, which sounded really good, both on the reviews on Amazon and on independent camera sites. BUT.....When I decided to look at some of the images taken with this camera, on Flickr, I was very disappointed as they mostly looked pretty terrible, especially when zooming in. So, now I'm back to square one.

I started my photography hobby back in around 2008 and started with a bridge camera (A Panasonic, but can't remember which one, just that it had an amazing zoom!) and then upgraded to Nikon D40, then gradually upgraded to the one I have today and have always loved the quality. I'm not a professional photographer though and actually rarely take my camera out now, so I thought to myself if I get something with the best image quality I could get, was much lighter than what I currently have, has a pretty decent zoom (All built in, so I don't have to keep carrying a heavy zoom lens everywhere with me) and decent video recording capabilities, I would be pretty happy, as I at least I could take it out with me much more often, instead of leaving it at home all the time.

Any suggestions, please??

I did actually post about this a few months ago, but then changed my mind about selling my camera, but have now decided to again!

 

[stickytape]

While the smaller sensor Panasonic bridges are amazing, I’d steer towards a 1 inch. If Panasonic is your choice (and tbh, apart from the Sony RX10 mark 4) there is no competition.

I’ve Got the Leica VLux 114 (FZ1000 equiv.) and the FZ2000 (up for sale, haha!) and these are generally the best of the bunch. If you can afford it the RX10 iv is the best, but depends on end use really. Not as user friendly, whereas Panasonic/Leica have brilliant usability. Take a look tan the bodega camera thread on here!

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

While the smaller sensor Panasonic bridges are amazing, I’d steer towards a 1 inch. If Panasonic is your choice (and tbh, apart from the Sony RX10 mark 4) there is no competition.

I’ve Got the Leica VLux 114 (FZ1000 equiv.) and the FZ2000 (up for sale, haha!) and these are generally the best of the bunch. If you can afford it the RX10 iv is the best, but depends on end use really. Not as user friendly, whereas Panasonic/Leica have brilliant usability. Take a look tan the bodega camera thread on here!

Thanks for reply. I'm not really pro any particular brand, as long as it meets the criteria I need.

Think I 'might' go for the Panasonic FZ2000.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

if I get something with the best image quality I could get,

That's where it becomes difficult to advise, because what you think is good may be different to what I think is good.

For example, I found this Fuji SL300 in a charity shop for £5 a few years back and I got a lot of fun from it. I think the image quality is just fine but how would you rate it?

 

[stickytape]

That's where it becomes difficult to advise, because what you think is good may be different to what I think is good.

For example, I found this Fuji SL300 in a charity shop for £5 a few years back and I got a lot of fun from it. I think the image quality is just fine but how would you rate it?

View attachment 343489
View attachment 343490
View attachment 343495
View attachment 343492
View attachment 343493View attachment 343494

It's a tough one, I agree but generally - and this is widely backed up, the larger the sensor, the more advantage you have. The 1 inch bridge cameras really were the first to offer truly impressive files, that allowed shooting at higher ISO that you'd normally expect. Granted, you may not think you'll ever need to shoot at ISO 3200.. but things change, and you never know! The traditional sizes sensors in bridge cameras really do leave a lot to be desired when you move up from any of the lower ISOs for example, or check out detail a bit too much. I speak from having the Lecia V Lux 4, which actually has the same sensor as the Lumix FZ300/FZ330 and while it's certainly "good".. not a patch on the 1 inch model above. As an example. just head over to DPreview and download a sample image from the Lumix FZ330 (considered to be the best of the smaller sensors) vs one from the 1 inch sensor of the Lumix FZ1000 or FZ2500/FZ2000 and you'll definitely notice a big difference.

 

[stickytape]

And you're coming from the Nikon D7200, so you'll 100 percent be disappointed with the FZ300 whereas the 1 inch size will be much closer. Since I've got both, I'm happy to take a few shots and you can see what I mean!

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

It's a tough one, I agree but generally - and this is widely backed up, the larger the sensor, the more advantage you have.

People keep telling me this but I don't see the evidence.

In my experience, sensor size doesn't make that much difference for the type of photography I do. Please consider that I currently use full frame, APS, M43 and 1/2.3" cameras. For my needs, differences in handling and facilities have always seemed far more important than any differences in sensor image quality.

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

That's where it becomes difficult to advise, because what you think is good may be different to what I think is good.

For example, I found this Fuji SL300 in a charity shop for £5 a few years back and I got a lot of fun from it. I think the image quality is just fine but how would you rate it?

View attachment 343489
View attachment 343490
View attachment 343495
View attachment 343492
View attachment 343493View attachment 343494

I don't like the image quality at all from that camera, sorry, nothing against your photos.

 

[stickytape]

I don't like the image quality at all from that camera, sorry, nothing against your photos.

I thought too they looked very low res and blurry.. personally.

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

I thought too they looked very low res and blurry.. personally.

Do you have any sample images from either of your Panasonic FZs?? I couldn't find any on the DP review site.

 

[stickytape]

Do you have any sample images from either of your Panasonic FZs?? I couldn't find any on the DP review site.

Here's the link to the review and gallery site for the FZ1000.. https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz1000/16

 

[stickytape]

This is the FZ2500 review (and you can compare vs other cameras. Just compare it to the smaller sensor ones and you'lll see!

Fixed-lens filmmaking: Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500/FZ2000 Review

The Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ2500/FZ2000 is now the company's top superzoom, offering the majority of features from the company's GH-series of video-centric cameras. We've put the FZ2500 through its paces to see if it's the B-camera you're looking for. Read review

www.dpreview.com

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

I don't like the image quality at all from that camera, sorry, nothing against your photos.

Don't apologise. The whole point was to let you see what that class of camera produces. If it prevents you buying something that isn't what you really want, then my work here is done.

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

Here's the link to the review and gallery site for the FZ1000.. https://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz1000/16

Hmmm, the pics look pretty good, but just looking through the specs, doesn't seem to have much of a zoom range. Maybe the 2000 is better for that, I think it is.....

Now you're confusing me, adding another camera into the mix with the FZ2500! But, I will have a look into this other one, in a bit and then check out the price etc..

I just want something I can afford, with a good zoom, the best pic quality possible and good video capabilities!!!! But there is just TOO much choice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*Oh and not too heavy*!!

 

[Al1944]

I think the FZ2000 and FZ2500 are the same camera - different annotation for different market?

 

[stickytape]

I think the FZ2000 and FZ2500 are the same camera - different annotation for different market?

Yeah sorry - same model just different branding depending on the region!

 

[Nod]

Chopping the 2 lenses you have in against an 18-200 might be an answer. Only 1 lens, albeit with a shorter reach than the 70-300 but lighter and more versatile. Still the image quality you have from the D7200. Something like an OP/TECH 1501012 Pro Strap would make the camera feel lighter on the neck.

 

[stickytape]

Hmmm, the pics look pretty good, but just looking through the specs, doesn't seem to have much of a zoom range. Maybe the 2000 is better for that, I think it is.....

Now you're confusing me, adding another camera into the mix with the FZ2500! But, I will have a look into this other one, in a bit and then check out the price etc..

I just want something I can afford, with a good zoom, the best pic quality possible and good video capabilities!!!! But there is just TOO much choice!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*Oh and not too heavy*!!

Can’t go wrong with Panasonic - best bang for your buck for miles!

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

Thanks everyone for all the helpful replies so far!
I've not made my mind up 100% yet though.

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

Ok, think I've decided (If I get enough money from selling my camera and two lenses and have a couple of hundred -at least, over for the other important things we need the rest of the money for) to go for the Nikon P900!!! I know it's quite old now and maybe doesn't have the best picture quality (It doesn't look too bad from what I have seen from images taken with it though), but I just got onto looking at other options as I really couldn't decide on a camera, and as I have already had Nikon DSLRs for a few years now, I decided to take a look at Nikon bridge cameras, and then decided I think I actually like the thought of having a bit of fun with such a long lens!

I've had a look at reviews of the camera and most people were/are very happy with it, even though one of the complaints I heard quite a lot was that the image quality was quite soft when zoomed right out, but that is probably to be expected unless you go for a much more expensive bridge camera, with such a large zoom, which unfortunately I cannot afford to do.

Now, just waiting for people to tell me that it's an awful camera.......

 

[stickytape]

Ok, think I've decided (If I get enough money from selling my camera and two lenses and have a couple of hundred -at least, over for the other important things we need the rest of the money for) to go for the Nikon P900!!! I know it's quite old now and maybe doesn't have the best picture quality (It doesn't look too bad from what I have seen from images taken with it though), but I just got onto looking at other options as I really couldn't decide on a camera, and as I have already had Nikon DSLRs for a few years now, I decided to take a look at Nikon bridge cameras, and then decided I think I actually like the thought of having a bit of fun with such a long lens!

I've had a look at reviews of the camera and most people were/are very happy with it, even though one of the complaints I heard quite a lot was that the image quality was quite soft when zoomed right out, but that is probably to be expected unless you go for a much more expensive bridge camera, with such a large zoom, which unfortunately I cannot afford to do.

Now, just waiting for people to tell me that it's an awful camera.......

I want to say something... but I won't!

 

[StuartPearson]

I used the Panasonic FZ82 as a walk around camera at the Brussels tattoo convention, it has the smaller 1//2/3 sensor found in the majority of phone cameras, but I was happy with the quality for indoors.



I have also tried capturing the moon at full zoom.

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

I want to say something... but I won't!

Please say it, be honest.

Actually, I am already reconsidering it, after just reading another 'not too' good review on it. Quite fancy one of these super lenses now though, but maybe not as 'super' as the P900 has to offer, if it means I won't be happy with it's picture taking capabilities. Ok, so time to look at alternatives......Again!

 

[stickytape]

Please say it, be honest.

Actually, I am already reconsidering it, after just reading another 'not too' good review on it. Quite fancy one of these super lenses now though, but maybe not as 'super' as the P900 has to offer, if it means I won't be happy with it's picture taking capabilities. Ok, so time to look at alternatives......Again!

Tiny sensor - slow AF - no Raw - poor lens

 

[Nod]

The best thing about the P900 is the spec sheet...

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

To be honest, I'm no longer interested in really producing 'professional' looking photography, been there done all that over the years and to be honest, where I live now is very boring and there is nothing really to photograph except fields and the flowers in my garden, which I have done to death. I don't travel, due to financial restraints, to find new and interesting things to photograph, but hope this will change in the future and then, I could hopefully get a better quality image taking camera... But for now, I really just 'mainly' want to take photos/videos of my dog and maybe the odd landscape, when we're on a day out and have a bit of fun with photography without having to lug two lenses about!

So, which camera?????????????? I do like the idea of a good zoom still, though (At least around 600mm equivalent would be nice and good to have some fun with).

When I first started photograpy, back in around 2008, I had a Panasonic FZ18 and had so much fun with that as it had a really good zoom, but obviously the image quality wasn't that good, especially back then. I also lived in Bournemouth, so had tonnes to photograph!! Then I had the Nikon D40 which I loved and went absolutely crazy with, taking thousands of images......Ahh the good old days..

 

[stickytape]

To be honest, I'm no longer interested in really producing 'professional' looking photography, been there done all that over the years and to be honest, where I live now is very boring and there is nothing really to photograph except fields and the flowers in my garden, which I have done to death. I don't travel, due to financial restraints, to find new and interesting things to photograph, but hope this will change in the future and then, I could hopefully get a better quality image taking camera... But for now, I really just 'mainly' want to take photos/videos of my dog and maybe the odd landscape, when we're on a day out and have a bit of fun with photography without having to lug two lenses about!

So, which camera?????????????? I do like the idea of a good zoom still, though (At least around 600mm equivalent would be nice and good to have some fun with).

When I first started photograpy, back in around 2008, I had a Panasonic FZ18 and had so much fun with that as it had a really good zoom, but obviously the image quality wasn't that good, especially back then. I also lived in Bournemouth, so had tonnes to photograph!! Then I had the Nikon D40 which I loved and went absolutely crazy with, taking thousands of images......Ahh the good old days..

Thing is - something with a 1 inch sensor will still be good value and yet yield far better results than the P900 - probably even with cropping.

Something like the FZ1000 or FZ2000 would do you.. someone back me up! Even an FZ1000 can be found for about 300.. the speed of the AF, the zoom and incredible EVF is so good, it’s as good as a DSLR.

 

[AndrewFlannigan]

.. someone back me up!

Why not post a few pictures to illustrate what results they can give, as I did. A picture, in this case, is worth more than a thousand words!

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

stickytape, is this the older version of the FZ2000??

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Panasonic-DMC-FZ1000EB-Bridge-25-400mm-Wildlife/dp/B00M0LQVEQ/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8&th=1

 

[stickytape]

Why not post a few pictures to illustrate what results they can give, as I did. A picture, in this case, is worth more than a thousand words!

Here’s a few imcould
Quickly find - these are with the Leica V Lux (the same as the FZ1000)

 

[stickytape]

stickytape, is this the older version of the FZ2000??

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Panasonic-DMC-FZ1000EB-Bridge-25-400mm-Wildlife/dp/B00M0LQVEQ/ref=cm_cr_arp_d_product_top?ie=UTF8&th=1

Yes that’s the one before the FZ2000!

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

Ok thanks.

Just reading the comparisons between the two, to see if it's worth going for the (Probably a bit cheaper) FZ1000 instead...

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

I'm not sure I will need a lot of the newer editions of the 2000 and may even find some of them a bit confusing.

Thanks for the images by the way!

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

I do like the idea of the built in ND filters on the 2000 though. Otherwise, can you fit any filters on the 1000?? I'm guessing, not..

Another question re RAW......I've never bothered with it much over the past few years, as my Nikon D3200 has been good enough, for me, in JPEG quality and I so, I've never really used much RAW editing and therefore, don't have any. So, if I get the Panasonic 1000/2000, it looks as though I may need to start using RAW for some images, especially if I've taken them in low light and they are a bit noisy, and as my budget is quite limited, is there are any specific cheap/free (But decent and not too complicated, as I have found some to be) RAW software I could download????

 

[Snapsh0t]

I do like the idea of the built in ND filters on the 2000 though. Otherwise, can you fit any filters on the 1000?? I'm guessing, not..

Yes, it takes a standard 62mm filter.

 

[the black fox]

The wife has a Panasonic FZ1000mkii . Lots of improvements over the 1000,2000,2500 models .. I have played with it a few times and it’s even good on b.i.f lightning fast AF . Decent zoom range 400mm in RAW and you can double that up to 800mm in j.peg

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

The wife has a Panasonic FZ1000mkii . Lots of improvements over the 1000,2000,2500 models .. I have played with it a few times and it’s even good on b.i.f lightning fast AF . Decent zoom range 400mm in RAW and you can double that up to 800mm in j.peg

Hi, yes I did look at that one as an option, but I am really now leaning more towards the 2000 'only' because I like the idea of the ND filters that come with, that neither the 1000 or 1000 ii seem to have.

I am used to having a polorising filter on my lens at ALL times on my SLR, so don't think I would like to have absolutely no filter on my lens, even if if it is just an effect rather than an actual physical filter.

Actually I'm really going to miss my polorising filter.

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

Yes, it takes a standard 62mm filter.

Oh that's good to know!!

 

[stickytape]

Oh that's good to know!!

Plus

I do like the idea of the built in ND filters on the 2000 though. Otherwise, can you fit any filters on the 1000?? I'm guessing, not..

Another question re RAW......I've never bothered with it much over the past few years, as my Nikon D3200 has been good enough, for me, in JPEG quality and I so, I've never really used much RAW editing and therefore, don't have any. So, if I get the Panasonic 1000/2000, it looks as though I may need to start using RAW for some images, especially if I've taken them in low light and they are a bit noisy, and as my budget is quite limited, is there are any specific cheap/free (But decent and not too complicated, as I have found some to be) RAW software I could download????

i shoot raw however what you can do is use the excellent in camera raw editing. So shoot RAW and then you can alter shadows, highlights, sharpness, color etc. it’s very very good.

 

[Sal&Syl2020]

Plus

i shoot raw however what you can do is use the excellent in camera raw editing. So shoot RAW and then you can alter shadows, highlights, sharpness, color etc. it’s very very good.

Brilliant to know, thanks!

Now, just to decide between the 1000 ii and the 2000!