ILFarmer

The first digital camera I bought is a Leica V Lux 3 with a zoom lens from 24 to 600. My first trip with it was an Alaskan cruise. I took pictures at both extremes of the lens on that trip.
I have since bought a sx50 and when the sx60 came out, I thought it was an improved camera and had to have one. I use them both. The range finder on the 50 is not great and the 60 is generally thought to be inferior to the 50.
I have wanted to upgrade the Leica. The Panasonic FZ1000 is a better camera, but I refuse to buy anything with less range than the Leica.
Some of the hoggers say you should not to tripping without a back up camera. I thought if I buy a Canon G3 as my main camera and sell the SX60 and buy a P900 I would have a good package. In getting advise from 2 different experts at B & H, they see no reason to trade the 60 for the 900. I think if I do make the trade, in a couple years. somebody will come out with a camera with the range of the p900 with a larger sensor and I will have to have that. What to do?

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Just some comments. There was a post on this site a few months ago where someone compared the either SX50 or SX60, I forget which, against the P900. The P900 had a much better image. The comparison was strictly JPG to JPG. The Canon didn't zoom out as far but when you compared the Panasonic max zoom results with the P900 at its max zoom, the P900 was the clear winner and the image was noticeably sharper.

What wasn't tried was to use RAW for the Canon. I have the SX50, and I find the RAW results are better than the JPG results. The P900 does not shoot in RAW. Don't know why Nikon left this out? Perhaps the Canon in RAW vs the P900 in JPG might have been a better fight?

As for someone coming out with the same 2000mm focal length in a larger sensor, the laws of physics dictate that the lens has to grow in size to maintain the F6.5 at that extreme end. There is just no way around this. The bridge cameras can achieve these enormous focal lengths only because the sensor is extremely tiny. I believe it is something like 1/2.3 inch. If the sensor were to double in size, the objective lens diameter would have to double also. And now its not such a tiny camera.

Where these bridge camera fall short is when you need to heavily crop or to enlarge the picture very much. The small sensor just doesn't stand up to this very well. But with the extreme zoom, the idea is to crop with the zoom while you are taking the picture.

I don't know as much about the Panasonic. I have an older Panasonic and it takes real good 8M pixel pictures. But I haven't tried a newer one.

Leicaflex Loc: Cymru

I do not understand why you need a back-up camera when you have a Leica?

ILFarmer

I would like the idea of the spare camera to have, for all practical purposes to have unlimited range. I can't think of a time when a travel camera ever needs more telescopic range than an SX50, Sx60, or the P900.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Because it's probably made in China by Samsung!!
Then again, some say Samsung are the best cameras made!! :lol:
SS

Mr PC Loc: Austin, TX

Nice shot!
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

bull drink water Loc: pontiac mi.

when you are a hobbiest, there is no such thing as enough.

lukan Loc: Chicago, IL

Check out the new Lumix FZ300 and the Canon G3X. Both are worth a look and one might be perfect, depending on what you shoot. One has 4K and an EVF, the other has a great touchscreen and great IQ.

medavis43 Loc: Folkston, GA

I have a Panasonic FZ200 - same range as new FZ300 - and like it very much. Also have a Sony H400 - something like that - with 50x zoom. Panasonic FZ70 has 60x but lens is noisy when extended and quality of photo not as good as FZ200.

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

Yay

Get another hobby! You have too much GAS!

photodad34

I have the Canon SX60 and the G3. The G3 is so far superior to the SX60 that there is no comparison. The G3 has a much larger sensor and gives excellent quality photos even when zoomed to the 25X. The resolution is good enough that even when 25X photos are severely cropped, the cropped photos are very good. The one drawback that I don't like is that when the G3 is zoomed out, the aperture goes to f6.3. In low level light conditions when I tried to take photos of hummingbirds at 1/1250 0r 1/2000 shutter speed, that forces the camera to go to a high ISO which makes highly cropped pictures on the grainy side.

TommiRulz Loc: Corpus Christi, TX

Ok - so let me get this right... you have 2 super zooms (the leica and the sx60) And you want to change that to 1 Super zoom and 1bigger sensor?? That makes total sense to me!
So your thinking Canon G3 and maybe trade the SX60 for the Nikon p900 -- hmmmmm
WHY NOT!!! Sounds like fun !!
I love trying new cameras -- And that Nikon sounds awesome.
But instead of Canon G3 - consider the Sony RX100 m4. At least then you will have one that is smaller and it really packs a punch!!! Have Fun!!

zigipha Loc: north nj

You are looking for level headed hedge hoggers....might slim pickin...

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

I've been looking, for years, for a shirt pocket camera every bit as good as my big, heavy expensive DSLR. Although I have bought a few over many years, I have never found exactly what I want. In this arena I think one gets to pick from Good, Lite, Cheap, but you get only 1 item. All of these devices have their limitations! Best of luck.

ILFarmer

Thank you. I agree. Someone suggested I look at the Sony RX100M4. It is blazingly fast and a very good low light camera, but the zoom lens is very limited for a travel camera. To get something I seem to have to give up something else.