jmcgloth Loc: Ocean Park, WA

"they're always very good."

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Herb, welcome to the Hog!
SS

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

It is superior - but only goes from 1.1-2X !

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

I can't really choose which. The Nikon B700 has RAW, which for me would be a major advantage. These superzooms all have small sensors. It is the laws of physics which make that necessary in long zooms. I do love my Sony a6300, but don't know much about the Sony superzooms.

Don't know if the B700 or any of them is available as a FACTORY refurb. but that would drop the cost considerably. My last four cameras purchased were refurbished. They all came with the "new car smell." That is to say, they looked and felt new. Refurbs are often returned purchases which then cannot be put directly back in "new" stock. They are sent to Nikon which puts them on a testbench and "tunes them up" to spec. That's actually better in my opinion than a camera coming off the assembly line. I've purchased three refurbs from Cameta and I have had great service from them.

I bought my last camera from Cameta. It was a Sony a6300. It had some focus problems. I returned it. They put it on a bench and discovered that there was an errant menu item preventing it from focusing. Otherwise nothing wrong. Never the less, they replaced it with a brand new one. (Not that Adorama or B&H have ever treated me badly.) So cheers for Cameta.

mffox Loc: Avon, CT

I am very happy with a Nikon P600, bought factory refurb. Good quality, more than adequate zoom, less costly than P900.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Robert Kincaid had a fair amount of success with a bridge camera. It was a Nikon.
--Bob

ballsafire Loc: Lafayette, Louisiana

HERB, I won't read the other answers before I give my opinion: first, I have experience with Sony DSC-HX 100v --Sony DSC-HX400 is more advanced and I do recommend that one. Welcome to the forum. You will find many characters here with worthwhile information -- just ask.

one_eyed_pete Loc: Colonie NY

Welcome Herb, one thing I've learned on here is to be careful what you ask, least you get more than bargained for. You're right, the majority on here are focused on high end advanced photography and may not understand why anyone would want to purchase a "DECENT" point & shoot camera. Some will murder me for saying this but except for "birds" and "long telephoto" a current cell phone camera w "pro mode" settings may meet your needs. You don't mention "sports" so fast action doesn't appear to be a priority. Firstly you need to consider what you plan to do with the photos you capture. If you only expect to post, email or view photos on screen the micro size sensor may be adequate. You won't see the blood vessels in aunt Bessie's eyes but you probably don't want to anyway. If you expect to make enlarged prints up to 16x20 you probably want a camera with micro 4/3, 1", APSC or FF sensor. Keep in mind cost (and size/weight) goes up w sensor size.

Since you didn't mention anything about being interested in spending hours learning and performing digital darkroom edits I don't think RAW capabilities would be important (current cell phones can save in RAW).

If I were in your shoes I would be coveting a Nikon P900. I don't have one because I already have a bridge camera w 40X optical zoom (80X w digital). I've seen many sample images on here from the P900 and they are impressive. The bridge cams may not allow you to create huge prints or satisfy pixel peepers but don't under estimate them. I made a 50% crop 11"x14" print of a honeybee in a flower and you can see the fur on his thorax and individual pollen grains on his head.

SharpShooter Loc: NorCal

Herb, welcome again!
LoL, read my current topic on "if it fits in your hand"! LoL
Very timely!!!
SS

Silverman Loc: Michigan

Check out the Nikon D3300, very good reviews for a newbie first DSLR camera,
That was my choice as a newbie, check out You Tube videos on this camera too.

rdubreuil Loc: Dummer, NH USA

Why not go with a DSLR, Nikon D3300 with kit lens under $500, then you can later get glass to meet your needs.

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

My opinion is that if the budget can afford it, the Sony RX10iii is the best way to go with a bridge camera. It's shortcomings are, of course, its size and weight, but it's no heavier than one of the lighter DSLR cameras, and, given its 600mm reach, eliminates the need for lugging around several lenses. Based on reviews, both professional and the real-world comments posted on UHH, it seems to be a very good camera. The 1" sensor is a decent size, and a big advantage over the 1/2.3" sensors on most of the other bridge cameras. Even though it's expensive, I think it's a good value for the money.

BebuLamar

For the types of photography in your list I think it would need a highly skilled photographer and one or more very good cameras plus lenses and accessories. But I do understand that you are new to photography and I found most new photographers want to take all types of photos possible. What I would want to tell you is to set your expectation lower just to start. The things you list in your post is a very tall order.

rbfanman

Try a Nikon 1 V3. It is point & shoot in size, and weight, and mirrorless, but has many great features. With the FT-1 lens adaptor, it can use larger format Nikon DX, and FX, lenses...which gives you a great stable of: wide angle, ultra wide angle, normal, telephoto, zoom, macro, and other, lenses to choose from. It can be great for: birding, portraits, landscapes, travel photos, action photos, and more.