Nikon P900 or P1000.
Jul 29, 2018 20:25:17 #
Ok. Can anyone imagine how noisy a P1000 will be? I shoot with a RX10M4 and after years of small sensor bridge cameras I am getting images I am proud of. Any one with any ideas. That amount of zoom is exciting but not if it is unuseable. I know it is a question that may not have an answer yet. Thanks
Jul 29, 2018 20:36:02 #
RWR
Loc: La Mesa, CA
seagull5 wrote:
Ok. Can anyone imagine how noisy a P1000 will be? I shoot with a RX10M4 and after years of small sensor bridge cameras I am getting images I am proud of. Any one with any ideas. That amount of zoom is exciting but not if it is unuseable. I know it is a question that may not have an answer yet. Thanks
If it’s too noisy, one can always turn their hearing aid down.
Jul 29, 2018 20:48:41 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
My wife's P900 takes a very acceptable picture given enough light and up to larger than our monitors can display without compression. The stabilization allows her to shoot sans tripod even though her hands are in very poor shape. Since the angle of view is so extreme, when used for birds or other small targets, her 3x+ advantage over my RX10m4 zoom levels the playing field a lot. Since the P1000 will have essentially the same sensor but with the added new ability to shoot raw I would expect that for the uses intended it will be an excellent camera. In order to get this size image with my RX10 I would have to do some cropping. This is an example of why when we are birding we always have the P900 along. This shot is SOOC. They are not all this good, of course, but many are quite good. As the EXIF will show, the equivalent focal length on this was 950 mm. Many of hers are at full 2000 mm equivalent with comparable results.
Jul 29, 2018 21:23:38 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
The P900 has a focal range to 2000mm and only shoots JPEG. The P1000 has a focal range to 3000mm and shoots JPEG and RAW. I don't think the newer model would be any quieter than the previous one?
Jul 30, 2018 00:03:10 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
OK, which is it? Audible noise or pixel noise? The camera is silent in my experience and I've been near it for literally thousands of shots. What was the actual question?
If it is about picture noise, why would the new one be any worse with essentially the same sensor (other than a slightly slower lens)?
If it is about picture noise, why would the new one be any worse with essentially the same sensor (other than a slightly slower lens)?
Jul 30, 2018 00:22:21 #
I think if you are getting good results with a similar camera, the Nikon will not disappoint.
But if you are able to rent, borrow, or steal one for a test, (return the stolen one after the test), then that would be a good way to know for sure.
But if you are able to rent, borrow, or steal one for a test, (return the stolen one after the test), then that would be a good way to know for sure.
Jul 30, 2018 05:48:45 #
riscpc
Loc: Lincoln UK.
Your main problem going to 2,000 to 3,000 will be Haze especially on a hot humid day.
This could degrade the final shot.
This could degrade the final shot.
Jul 30, 2018 07:04:21 #
a6k wrote:
My wife's P900 takes a very acceptable picture giv... (show quote)
This is a stunning photo!
Jul 30, 2018 08:55:54 #
I could not help but chime in on this subject. I just acquired my P900 last winter and discovered Eagles. Never had so much fun. This picture is handheld and from an unbelievable (to me) distance to still be this clear. To top it off, the camera is relatively lightweight. I am anxiously awaiting the P1000 reviews. I have been a Canon shooter (T4i or SX50), but my P900 is my new favorite camera. Takes good close-ups too.
Jul 30, 2018 09:39:27 #
peterg
Loc: Santa Rosa, CA
seagull5 wrote:
I can imagine many things, but I can't predict P1000 noise. Ok. Can anyone imagine how noisy a P1000 will be?
I suggest waiting for impartial reviews after the camera is released.Jul 30, 2018 09:41:51 #
a6k
Loc: Detroit & Sanibel
riscpc wrote:
Your main problem going to 2,000 to 3,000 will be Haze especially on a hot humid day.
This could degrade the final shot.
This could degrade the final shot.
And the visible motion/distortion of the air. Trust me on this. It's already a telescope and now it will be a longer one.
Jul 30, 2018 15:39:32 #
"As the EXIF will show,"... Where is that shown?
RWR wrote:
If it’s too noisy, one can always turn their hearing aid down.
Jul 30, 2018 16:06:06 #
I took a screen shot of your P 900 shot and super-sharpened it in Photoshop to see if it could be enhanced in post any. This is that comparison. Original is on the left. But I don't know what your EXIF on that shot was to begin with.
a6k wrote:
My wife's P900 takes a very acceptable picture giv... (show quote)
Aug 3, 2018 21:47:28 #
Mr Bill 2011
Loc: southern Indiana
my P900 makes acceptable pictures as long as I don't go over ISO 800; keeping it at 400 or less is better. The camera really begins to suffer in low light.
Aug 3, 2018 22:03:31 #
Mr Bill 2011
Loc: southern Indiana
riscpc wrote:
Your main problem going to 2,000 to 3,000 will be Haze especially on a hot humid day.
This could degrade the final shot.
This could degrade the final shot.
a lot is going to depend on how far you're shooting; a couple hundred yards or so, no problem. If you want to shoot cityscapes at 5 miles, you'll have problems. Just because you have a 3000mm lens, or a 2000mm lens, you are not required to shoot only distant subjects.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.