Tom Kelley Loc: Roanoke, Virginia

I'm considering getting one of these and would appreciate some advice from actual users please. Other than the difference in focal length, does anyone have any preferences on either over the other? I had the Canon SX50 about a year ago and sold it. I just somehow couldn't get the hang of it for some reason. I have the Sigma 150-600, 18-250 and i just want a really good smaller camera so i don't carry all the weight around.

Thanks
Tom

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

The Sony HX400V has a focal length to 1200mm and has a hot shoe for an external flash. The Nikon P900 has a focal length to 2000mm and does not have a hot shoe for an external flash. I suggest that you check DP Reviews to check which features suits your type of photography. Good luck.

tramsey Loc: Texas

You might have a little trouble with this one; finding some one who has both will be a stretch. I don't, I have the 900s older brother the Nikon Coolpix P510. I went to a camera comparison site and had them compare the two. Don't pay attension to the scores, they are biased to Nikon and if they don't like a camera they will leave scores out for that one. But they do a pretty good job or comparing features, what one camera has or doesn't have, Good luck in you search and I hope some one does have those two cameras. Here's a link to that site

http://snapsort.com/compare/Nikon-Coolpix-P900-vs-Sony-Cyber-shot-DSC-HX400V

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

From what I have seen, the Sony has a much better I.Q..

Tom Kelley Loc: Roanoke, Virginia

Thanks for the reply. I didn't expect to actually find someone that had both though, just maybe people that have had one or the other. Sorry if my post was confusing.

ArleneE Loc: Bend, Oregon

I have the Nikon P900 and I love it. Its easy to handle, focal and zoom. I am think of getting a tripod.

Tom Kelley Loc: Roanoke, Virginia

Thanks Arlene, is it reasonably steady at it's longest zoom?

ArleneE Loc: Bend, Oregon

Not for a very long period of time. It Gets heavy and and I get shakey. Just for walking and snapping pics I love it.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Reviews I have seen say that it is quite good. But I don't know why they don't offer RAW. I do have the Canon SX50, which does have RAW and I find that it makes quite a bit of difference to shoot in RAW. There was someone that posted a comparison of the P900 to the SX50 with pictures and I don't remember what to search for to find it again. For their testing, the JPEG P900 image was noticeably better than the JPEG SX50 image. But I would have liked to have also seen the P900 JPEG vs the Canon SX50 RAW just to see if it could close the distance.

What I don't like about the SX50 is the EVF compared to my Sony cameras. It certainly reminds you that it is an EVF. The Sony looks more like an optical viewfinder. And the thing that drives me real buggy is the lack of auto sense when the eye is brought up to the viewfinder. You have to cycle through using a push button to get what you want -- who was the brilliant one who thought of doing it this way!

I also find that the range of ISO, Aperture and Shutter Speeds is somewhat lacking and it only gets me in trouble to use aperture mode or shutter mode since something is bound to reach its limit and cause the image be severely under/over exposed. I have found 'P' mode safer on this camera for those reasons.

Also, with these small image sensors, doing much cropping is not such a good idea. Too much detail goes away. Better to use the zoom as your cropping mechanism.

uaeluor1949 Loc: Polk City, Fl

My wife and I both have the P900. She does very good hand held and I have to use a tripod for many long shots. She's steadier than I. Not good for low light. I have some excellent moon shots hand held pushing it into the digital lens area to 4000mm. Focus is slow for birds in flight. It is really great for still shots. Zoom is amazing, we have taken photos of Eagles where others who have 500mm with 1.4 teleconverter won't try. Great price for what it can do. We love this camera. No camera does it all.

nicksr1125 Loc: Mesa, AZ

I've had the HX400 for almost 2 years. My wife uses it more now than I do. Took it on our vacation to Disneyland in September. Very happy with the image quality. The only changes I would make are recording in RAW format & reduce the lag time between pressing the shutter release & live view returning. The 35mm equivalent is 1200mm at full zoom. The digital zoom goes out to 2400mm. Here's a link to my super moon shots. http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-423222-1.html

Calsnap Loc: Seattle/Montana/San Diego

I'm a Sony HX400 shooter. I started with the HX50 went to the HX300 and then when the HX400 came out got that one. I gave my camera and all my lenses to my nephew and can't imagine ever going back. I love the super zoom and I'm very pleased with the photo quality and do a lot of prints with good results. We spent the month of October in Turkey and I literally put the camera (with a Fastfire sling) around my neck first thing in the morning and took it off at night. I took 4700 photos. Nearly the same thing recently in Utah taking 1400 pictures in a week of hiking the parks. I could never have carried enough lenses to cover the varying conditions we found. I have no basis for comparing to the Nikon, which I've heard and read is very good but I am a serious fan of the Sony HX400v and super zooms. The lack of ability to shoot raw may be a deal breaker for some. As I am starting to play more in post I can see where this could be a major factor. Good luck and enjoy.

grillmaster5062

I love my P900, but it it hard to get a ARCA style quick release plate that fits properly. The base of the camera is flat in the back, but seems to be slightly rounded in the front. When the lens is zoomed out to any great length, it tends to drift downward. Even though I use a tripod, I have to use my hands to counteract the drift.

Bugfan Loc: Toronto, Canada

I have a Nikon P900 which I've had over a year now.

Generally it's a point and shoot so there aren't as many controls on the body as with my SLRs but I have mastered accessing the menus for adjustments I need to make.

Overall the camera performs well and it's images are a good quality.

The only complaint I have is the long lens. I actually bought it for its long lens thinking it would be ideal for travel and general scenery shots and it's great for all of those and more. But when you zoom all the way out the image stabilizer can't keep things steady which is not its fault, the focal length is too long for the size of stabilizer that's built into that small lens.

I have learned how to keep it steady most of the time and I've learned to carry a small tripod too. And of course the sharpest pictures are at high noon when you don't have to boost the ISO in dim lighting.

I would buy this camera again, not something I have said of my other point and shoot cameras from Nikon. It simply has a steep learning curve and requires a lot of practice holding a camera steady.

One other complaint I have is charging. Ihave to plug the camera into the charger to charge the lens. It doesn't not have a stand alone charger. Nikon lists one as being available but after back ordering it for over a year I eventually gave up. I prefer using a charger so I can charge two batteries at teh same time, something that can't be done with a camera alone.

uaeluor1949 Loc: Polk City, Fl

We both have a P900 and we don't understand what you mean by charging the lens. Both our cameras came with a stand alone charger. May I ask where you got your camera?