New Superzoom

[donaldsc]

I need to buy my wife a new superzoom to replace her ancient Canon S2IS. It has to come from Amazon because I have several coupons from them.

 

I have narrowed it down to 6 cameras:

1) Canon HS300

2) Sony DSC-HX260V

3) Nikon D510

4) Fuji HS30EXR

5) Panasonic DMC-FZ150K

6) Fuji SL300

 

I know that there is a bit of a price difference between the lowest and highest of the bunch but the differences are acceptable. I can afford the most expensive of the bunch (probably the Sony) but I do not mind saving if the tradeoffs are not too bad. My wife basically does not care.

 

My significant selection parameters are:

1) I can accept a loss of telephoto to get a better wide angle. You can always post process crop in to get a tighter picture but there are often times when you can not step back any further to get more in the picture. The S2IS is a 12x zoom so anything will be better than that at the telephoto end of the range.

2) I would like to have RAW but it is not a deal breaker. My wife will never use RAW and I have other cameras that shoot RAW.

3) A good EVF is more important than a good LCD. My wife never uses the LCD and I rarely use it.

4) It would be nice to have a hot shoe for my external flash but it is a minor wish and certainly not a deal breaker.

5) Video is not important. She will never use it and I use it rarely and I have other cameras that shoot video.

6) When I use the camera, I may use manual mode and even manual focus so convenient manual operation would be nice. She does not care and it is not a deal breaker.

7) Good low light performance would be nice.

8) A good panoramic mode would be very nice.

 

I have checked all the camera review sites and all of the cameras have pluses and minuses. However, feedback from people who have actually used them in the field are as important as the review sites.

 

Any ideas, suggestions, pluses or minuses will help.

 

Thanks

 

DON

[awboater]

You are probably not going to like my answer, but just realize that it is an opinion - and at least if it gets you to thinking of other approaches - well then I guess that is what opinions are for.

 

I really dislike bridge cameras. So much so that I have refered to them as point & shoots in clown suits.

 

My main issue is the superzoom lens. As you increase the lens power, you generally reduce lens quality. While some people realize this and are willing to accept the tradeoff, others just blindly figure more is better and look for those silly 30x lenses.

 

In my view, 4x to 7x is ideal, and 12x is maximum. Anything more than 12x and there are going to be significant sharpness issues - in general.

 

While this is a general comment, and I am willing to concede that a particular design may be better - but given that $900 superzoom DSLR lenses have issues, I have my doubts that compact cameras are going to fare nearly as well.

 

You did make some requirements that also should bear comment. Seems that low-light performance is paramount to you. The #1 best thing that can be done to improve low-light performance is the sensor size. And if you consider a larger sensor (physical dimensions - not megapixels) has more surface area to gather light - it makes sense.

 

And now the favorite topic of many photographers - more megapixels is not always better. Since some manufacturers have gone on to stuff as many megapixels they can into a sensor, realize that the more pixels in a given area means they have to be smaller. And while the resolution is improved, the low-light performance is reduced.

 

And with today's cameras, marketing forces have taken megapixel counts too far in my view, and low-light performance has suffered.

 

So of course a DSLR will be superior in all of these things, followed by mirrorless cameras, and there are even a few point-and-shoots that bear mentioning.

 

As it seems you are in the market for a compact camera, I will just comment on those.

 

Notable cameras in this regard are the Canon G12, Canon S100, Nikon P7100, and Nikon P310.

 

The first three cameras have larger sensors - 1/1.7". While they are nowhere near the size of DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, they are still some 40% larger than the typical compact.

 

Larger sensors typically means better low-light performance.

 

While the P310 has a standard compact camera size sensor, it does have a fast f/1.8 lens, so at the wide angle end anyway, it will also have better low-light performance than your typical compact.

 

Next, the Canon G12, Canon S100, and Nikon P7100 have reasonable size megapixel sensors, which offers a good balance between resolution and low-light performance. Unfortunately, the Nikon P310, with it's 16 Megapixel sensor in my view is too much. Still, that f/1.8 lens does help.

 

And all of the cameras have reasonable size lenses, not those ridiculous 30x zooms.

 

And finally, they all have manual exposure controls, and in the case of the Nikon P7100, has a DSLR-like feel and function to it.

 

All and all, it is my opinion that these four cameras present the best of the compact cameras that are available today.

 

And the G12 and P7100 have optical viewfinders. Some will criticize that they do not offer 100% coverage, but that is not always necessary. What is necessary - at least if you are taking photos in the Caribbean with the bright sunlight - is an optical viewfinder so you can actually see what you are taking a photo of.

 

You don't get the fancy high power zoom, or the DSLR look-alike clown suit with these cameras, but you get a solid, reasonable performing compact camera.

[dileep]

I am very happy with my Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ40 and would highly recommend the FZ150 which has some interesting faetures that I do not have - full HD, tiltable LCD viewfinder and Dynamic Range Optimization mode.

 

I would buy the FZ150 in a minute if my FZ40 was not just 18 months old!

[tommui987]

I need to buy my wife a new superzoom to replace her ancient Canon S2IS.

5) Panasonic DMC-FZ150K

 

Don:

 

The Panasonic does not have an electronic viewfinder. However, in all other respects, it seems to fit your other needs.

 

I had a FZ-150 - switched to a NEX - and I found it to be one super camera. Comparatively light-weight and took extremely good sharp pictures.

[c230k]

I just bought the Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ150 12.1 MP Digital camera, Panasonic Lumix - Point & Shoot - 12.1 megapixel - Electronic Viewfinder - Compact Sensor - 24 x optical zoom - Pop-up Flash - ISO 6400 .

Thought for it's size.rating and zoom power, was a good choice for me, what to carry less and still take pictures. Also great to change between LCD view and Electronic. LCD can have glare problems and like I can change to viewfinder. Like the ability to shoot RAW if I want.

Go to DPREVIEW.COM they have a good review of this camera.

 

Also have the Sony NEX-7, my new mini DLSR. Used when photo detail really counts.

Good Luck, it's always fun to look and reseach online.

Tom :cool:

[donaldsc]

You are probably not going to like my answer, but just realize that it is an opinion - and at least if it gets you to thinking of other approaches - well then I guess that is what opinions are for.

 

I really dislike bridge cameras. So much so that I have refered to them as point & shoots in clown suits.

 

My main issue is the superzoom lens. As you increase the lens power, you generally reduce lens quality. While some people realize this and are willing to accept the tradeoff, others just blindly figure more is better and look for those silly 30x lenses.

 

In my view, 4x to 7x is ideal, and 12x is maximum. Anything more than 12x and there are going to be significant sharpness issues - in general.

 

While this is a general comment, and I am willing to concede that a particular design may be better - but given that $900 superzoom DSLR lenses have issues, I have my doubts that compact cameras are going to fare nearly as well.

 

You did make some requirements that also should bear comment. Seems that low-light performance is paramount to you. The #1 best thing that can be done to improve low-light performance is the sensor size. And if you consider a larger sensor (physical dimensions - not megapixels) has more surface area to gather light - it makes sense.

 

And now the favorite topic of many photographers - more megapixels is not always better. Since some manufacturers have gone on to stuff as many megapixels they can into a sensor, realize that the more pixels in a given area means they have to be smaller. And while the resolution is improved, the low-light performance is reduced.

 

And with today's cameras, marketing forces have taken megapixel counts too far in my view, and low-light performance has suffered.

 

So of course a DSLR will be superior in all of these things, followed by mirrorless cameras, and there are even a few point-and-shoots that bear mentioning.

 

As it seems you are in the market for a compact camera, I will just comment on those.

 

Notable cameras in this regard are the Canon G12, Canon S100, Nikon P7100, and Nikon P310.

 

The first three cameras have larger sensors - 1/1.7". While they are nowhere near the size of DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, they are still some 40% larger than the typical compact.

 

Larger sensors typically means better low-light performance.

 

While the P310 has a standard compact camera size sensor, it does have a fast f/1.8 lens, so at the wide angle end anyway, it will also have better low-light performance than your typical compact.

 

Next, the Canon G12, Canon S100, and Nikon P7100 have reasonable size megapixel sensors, which offers a good balance between resolution and low-light performance. Unfortunately, the Nikon P310, with it's 16 Megapixel sensor in my view is too much. Still, that f/1.8 lens does help.

 

And all of the cameras have reasonable size lenses, not those ridiculous 30x zooms.

 

And finally, they all have manual exposure controls, and in the case of the Nikon P7100, has a DSLR-like feel and function to it.

 

All and all, it is my opinion that these four cameras present the best of the compact cameras that are available today.

 

And the G12 and P7100 have optical viewfinders. Some will criticize that they do not offer 100% coverage, but that is not always necessary. What is necessary - at least if you are taking photos in the Caribbean with the bright sunlight - is an optical viewfinder so you can actually see what you are taking a photo of.

 

You don't get the fancy high power zoom, or the DSLR look-alike clown suit with these cameras, but you get a solid, reasonable performing compact camera.

 

Thanks for the long reply. I appreciate the thought you put into it. I should have included the cameras we currently have in my post. I have a G12 which is my pocket camera (for largish pockets) and a D300S with multiple lenses including the Canon 18-210 zoom in addition to other lenses. I have also rented long zoom telephotos for the D300s when I have gone on wildlife trips but there is no way that I can justify the very high cost of these lenses. My wife has a small pocketable Canon that she can drop in her purse.

 

We bought the S2IS years ago when it was state-of-the art superzoom because we went on an Alaska trip and I was one of the 3 photo-nuts on the trip. One of the other nuts was able to get decent pictures of wildlife but with my camera at the time, all I got was a 1 or 2 pixel dot. However, the S2IS is now totally obsolete I we are looking for something to replace it.

 

I do know that the low light performance of all P&S cameras in inferior to my dSLR. I also know that the optical quality will be inferior to the other lenses and even to the G12. However, a slightly inferior picture of an eagle sitting in the trees or a bear that (thank God) is not too close to me is better than no picture at all.

 

Feel free to add any additional comments. Thanks for the thoughts.\

 

DON