I used to be an avid photo taker many years ago and had a pretty nice SLR with a range of zoom lenses. I have become very lazy and usually just use my phone and then every now and then get annoyed with crap photos when the light is anything but easy and/or if i would like to take a photo with some zoom capability. But I am not sure if I really want another SLR. I'd like a camera that has great zoom capability for landscape or Windsurfing picks etc and can handle more challenging light conditions than a phone.

So I stumbled across a Nikon Collpix900 which seems to have some reasonable reviews and an incredible zoom capacity of 83 times or a 2000 mm lens and optical stabilisation and for around $700.
www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1127274-REG/nikon_26499_coolpix_p900_digital_camera.html

So photo boffins would this do the job I am after ? Otherwise it seems that this is the starting price point for a basic Digital SLR.

Razzinator went through this about 6 weeks ago.. either message him or go through the thread.... it got too complicated for me.

Thanks Julian i guess thats a good thread if i definitely wanted a SLR. Just not sure if I need to go down that path.

got a cannon sx50 a coupla months ago. Sub $500 bucks. Good zoom. Dont know much about photography but it seems to do the job pretty well

W

hi Haggar - please excuse the following if you are already aware of it :)

if you are used to using a 35mm SLR and having control over the depth-of-field, you might be disappointed with most of the superzoom styled cameras you are looking at because they generally have quite small sensors, and this is also why they have such huge zoom capabilities

there are a couple that do have bigger APS-C sized sensors more like your SLR, therefore having the potential for creating shallower depth of field when you need it, and generally produce shots with less noise (grain) when used in low light

How good is the range of lenses you have? It seems a waste to not use them, why not realise your investment in glass and get a current digital body to complement them?

Chris my SLR was in the days of film and not auto focus so that kit and lenses are long gone.

Haircut I guess you are on the money that these cameras will never do the complete job of an SLR and will fall short in some areas as you have said. I guess if I got a point and shoot with a big zoom I would have expect that. I did have an older Non SLR camera a Kodak DX6490 which was OK at the time based at what was current.

Thanks Worrier, that Canon looks very similar in over all capability of the Nikon, good to hear that it does the job for you. Whats the image quality like for landscape shots at or near max zoom ? i.e. sporting shots like Windsurfing / Sailing / Surfing ?

Be mindful that a zoom on a camera like that is not just an optical zoom it also has a digital zoom which reduces the pixel resolution of the image.

At first you will be happy with a super zoom camera. Next you find editing software to get more out of the photos. A few months later you realise a crop sensor DSLR is a better option, then comes the range of lenses. Then you work out a full frame is even better. It is just like the windsurfing "just one more bit of kit" mentality.

Haircut has a good point about the depth-of-field issue. If you understand why, then you'll want a DSLR, if you don't, then you probably won't.

As a happy snapper with a mild incline to composition I just bought the Panasonic TX70 for $500. Its in what's called the 'travel zoom' class of cameras.

Its got everything I need and it fits in my pocket.

24 - 720mm optical zoom in 35mm equivalent terms
Full manual control
Optical view finder (the key point of difference for the Panasonic as compared to others)
f3.3 to 8.0 on wide and f6.4 to 8.0 on max zoom

I have been through all that high end camera stuff with bags and lenses but these days I can't be bothered. If it doesn't fit in the pocket, it doesn't cut it for me.

Depth of field is nice but zoom to crop photos right there on the spot is more important to me. I don't have time for photoshop. Manual control is important, as you can stick the thing on a stump with self timer and a 2 sec exposure to catch that speccie sunset or whatever.

My last camera was similar - a Canon a710 powershot - I like this photo that I took on a stump in Portovenere with it (probably crisper with a better camera but then I never would have had it with me to catch the moment):

Thanks Marvin that could be a good option to replace our current Panasonic compact I'll check it out.

Marvin beautiful light, colour, composition - but the noise is letting it down - could be just a low res image for internet? Otherwise some blur/noise removal could actually make it better. This is 5 mins with the free program paint.net, see if you like it. I'm sure others could do better.



Haggar - definitely hard to beat some of those features - you won't get surf, wildlife, etc with a DSLR unless you go big & heavy on lens and $$$s too. Wifi would be very useful too - what makes us grab the phone often is the 'instant shareability'. If your camera could quickly/easily send a few pics to your phone and you could send on to friends/family, that would be a big bonus.

i was under the impression that there were several (lumix, sony etc) full sensor (or close to it) zoom cameras without doing to SLR. what a bout the fz1000 or is 16x not enough. Dont these compact semi or full sensor cameras also have removeable lenses? Sure I have seen them

Select to expand quote

myusernam said..
i was under the impression that there were several (lumix, sony etc) full sensor (or close to it) zoom cameras without doing to SLR. what a bout the fz1000 or is 16x not enough. Dont these compact semi or full sensor cameras also have removeable lenses? Sure I have seen them

www.cnet.com/pictures/compact-cameras-for-advanced-photographers-roundup/

Select to expand quote

myusernam said..

myusernam said..
i was under the impression that there were several (lumix, sony etc) full sensor (or close to it) zoom cameras without doing to SLR. what a bout the fz1000 or is 16x not enough. Dont these compact semi or full sensor cameras also have removeable lenses? Sure I have seen them

www.cnet.com/pictures/compact-cameras-for-advanced-photographers-roundup/

My wife had an Lumix FZ200 and was very happy with it. It can get a good macro and reasonable moon shots, as well as everything in between. The only time it struggled against a low end DSLR was in low light. It also didn't like getting wet. On paper the FZ1000 looks very good with the larger sensor so low light should be ok. It also does up to 12 frames per second and with the 35mm equivalent 400mm zoom would make it suitable for sport photography.

Photography teacher here with some superb kit at my disposal. Yet for convenience I rarely use the DSLR, but either my phone or a very similar camera to what you are looking at. Unless you want the quality - which you reckon you don't - then the camera you are looking at will do the job beautifully.

Weddings and such like the DSLR comes out. Everywhere else are the little portable fellas.

Although a bit more expensive than the 900, you could pre order the Nikon P∞.
petapixel.com/2015/04/01/nikon-unveils-the-p%E2%88%9E-the-first-compact-camera-with-a-1458x-zoom-lens/

Select to expand quote

Glitch said..
Although a bit more expensive than the 900, you could pre order the Nikon P∞.
petapixel.com/2015/04/01/nikon-unveils-the-p%E2%88%9E-the-first-compact-camera-with-a-1458x-zoom-lens/

LOL. I think a 16 x zoom or 400 mm lens would be fine and maybe a 1 " sensor better for low light. I am leaning towards a compact with a good sensor and zoom.

Thanks for all the great advice so far.

a good compromise might be a mirror-less body (penn, omd 1 etc.) with a micro 4/3 sensor and in-body image stabilisation - about the same physical size as a superzoom but with many of the slr advantages, and loads of lenses to chose from

Select to expand quote

Glitch said...

myusernam said..

myusernam said..
i was under the impression that there were several (lumix, sony etc) full sensor (or close to it) zoom cameras without doing to SLR. what a bout the fz1000 or is 16x not enough. Dont these compact semi or full sensor cameras also have removeable lenses? Sure I have seen them

www.cnet.com/pictures/compact-cameras-for-advanced-photographers-roundup/

My wife had an Lumix FZ200 and was very happy with it. It can get a good macro and reasonable moon shots, as well as everything in between. The only time it struggled against a low end DSLR was in low light. It also didn't like getting wet. On paper the FZ1000 looks very good with the larger sensor so low light should be ok. It also does up to 12 frames per second and with the 35mm equivalent 400mm zoom would make it suitable for sport photography.

Thanks Glitch and all with your great advice. After reading lots of reviews of Point and Shoot ultra zooms i bought a Panasonic FZ200 and so far I'm very happy with it. It has a 24 optical zoom and a constant F 2.8 and reviews were very favourable for quality. I found its quite good in low light and you can either use it total gumby mode or full manual. Just using JPegs at the mo but will try using RAW as well when i am used to it. Have taken some sailing snaps at full zoom and the quality is great for my use.