Soul Dr. Loc: Beautiful Shenandoah Valley

Panasonic's new FZ1000 has some very nice specs and maybe shouldn't be called a bridge camera. Anybody here have one yet, or is planning on getting one?

Features

Experience the ultimate in 4K QFHD/HD hybrid photography
4K QFHD 30p video with hybrid 8MP post capture
Large 1-inch 20.1MP MOS sensor for amazing defocus control

Bright Leica DC Lens 25-400mm F2.8-4.0

Super-fast LUMIX DFD focusing technology
Integrated smartphone WiFi for remote imaging control

And has 5 axis IS.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

Coming out later this summer, I wonder if the Panasonic FZ1000 will really turn out to be a success in the market. In many ways, it will be competing with DSLR cameras - size, shape and price. Certainly it has awesome features, but it has certain disadvantages for not being a true DSLR as well. No interchangeable lenses, for example. With an ever increasing selection, popularity and effectiveness of compact mirror-less cameras flooding the market, do expensive, bulky, DSLR-look-alike bridge cameras really have a future? Why not just get a true DSLR instead?

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Because many people want better image quality (than point and shoot) without the hassle and extra cost of buying additional lenses. Not having the ability to change lenses is not necessarily a disadvantage as I mentioned in the first sentence. The FZ1000 has a max focal length of 400mm, most people considering this camera will never "need" any more than that. I think bridge cameras have a promising future if they continue to have faster lenses and larger sensors, looks like that's where it is heading. :)

amehta Loc: Boston

Yes, the selection of "large sensor non-ILCs" (interchangeable lens cameras) is growing rapidly! It's all about being different from the smartphone camera.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

I'm not disputing the quality or usefulness of this camera, but the lens is not 25-400 mm. That is the 35mm equivalent angle of view based on this camera's 2.7 crop factor as a result of the sensor size. The actual focal range of the lens is around 9-148mm. I think its important to keep the numbers consistent in order to compare lenses properly with those on other bodies such as dslrs with different crop factors.

planepics Loc: St. Louis burbs, but originally Chicago burbs

I went to the top of the Arch 3 days ago and a Chinese tourist had a 4K video camera with him (about the size of my old RCA VS camcorder)...I can only imagine how much that thing must have cost!!!!!

Festus Loc: North Dakota

I have been interested in a bridge camera for some time. However, regardless of how good the specs look on any of them, they all suffer in numerous ways versus DSLRs or P&S cameras. It appears that they all have problems with either the low end or high end apertures, or both. And they have problems with the low end or high end distant image quality, or both. Or they have multiple problems with any of the above mentioned issues. Therefore, in my type of shooting, these common issues lead me to other camera options.

JLO Loc: Southern Califonria

FZ1000 does sound interesting. They advertize it as having 16x optical zoom. How does that work with the zoom lens up to 400 mm?

I still would like to see 50x (1200 mm), maybe Canon with its SX60 HS? With a larger sensor than the SX50 HS?

Will be interesting to see the test results.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

That range is not the actual focal range of the lens only the 35mm equivalent. You multiply the widest 35mm equivalent focal length of 25 with the zoom range of 16x. 25x16 = 400. The actual focal range of the lens on the Panasonic is only approximately 9 -148mm, as a result of the 2.7 crop factor. With a 5.6 crop factor as a result of it's tiny sensor, the SX50's actual focal range is closer to 4-214 mm.

JLO Loc: Southern Califonria

Thank you MWSILVERS for your explanation. I recall that in the film days you would consider a 50 mm as the basis for magnification calculations.

So the 400 mm becomes 400/50 = 8 power, and with a "crop factor" of 2, we have 2 x 8 = 16 power (16x).

So, if I wanted a DSLR with the same "power" as the canon SX50 HS (50x), what lens would it need and with what sensor? Let's say a ASP-C sensor (1.5, 1.6 crop factor),what lens would I need to equate to the SX50 HS?

thank you

tradergeorge Loc: Newport, Kentucky

So, what I am reading here is that this camera has the same 1" sensor that my Nikon 1 has, and pretty close to the same resolution. But, even my Nikon 1 has interchangeable lenses, which is a deal breaker for many. It has a lot of bells and whistles that have little to do with picture quality, which make it attractive to gadget geeks, but of little extra use to serious shooters...For me, this IS a bridge camera. You cannot, in good conscience call it anything else. But for the better part of a thousand dollars, I need to see a bit more from a camera that I am going to be stuck with because it does not allow mods....

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

To get a 35mm equivalent on a Nikon crop camera that will give you an angle of view equal to the 24-1200mm on a SX50 you would need a 16-800mm zoom lens. which does not exist, and would be HUGE and VERY EXPENSIVE if it did exist. 800x 1.5 = 1200. All things being equal it would beg the question: Why use a dslr then? All things are rarely equal. While the tiny sensor on a SX50 and the inexpensive lenses the camera uses provide remarkable results at that price point, the image quality can't compare to a good lens and a good quaity larger sensor. For many, a camera like the SX50 is all the camera they will ever need. For others seeking a different level of image quality, the cost and weight of the equipment they covet goes up exponentially.

I recently bought a Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8 lens that has an equivalent focal range of only 29-56 on a crop body! This lens costs $800 which I consider a bargain, and weighs almost 2 pounds (28.6 ozs). It sits on my Canon 60D most of the time with a combined weight of almost 3.5 lbs! Any one wanting an SX50 as a primary camera would probably never be happy with my Sigma lens.

amehta Loc: Boston

We are not talking about 16x and 50x as "magnifications", but as an indication of the zoom focal length range, from the widest to the longest.

As mwsilvers said, the Canon SX50 is a 4.3-215mm lens. It is very easy to get a DSLR lens to 300mm. With the Nikon D7100, a 24mp DX sensor, cropping to 6mp gives the field of view of a 900mm lens. This would use a sensor area which is still 3x larger than the SX50.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Here are the relative sensor sizes for the OP. It shows how smaller sensors give the illusion of being able to zoom farther. While the actual size is not to scale, it shows the how big a Full Frame sensor is when compared to the medium blue 1/2.3 sensor size of the SX50, the second smallest sensor here.

(Download)

lsaguy Loc: Udall, KS, USA

Probably the one thing the new Pana will do is help drive down the cost of older models.
While I'm sure it is probably a wonderful camera is it so much better as to support the cost? I'm guessing probably not. In the meantime Fuji and others are offering models that are sub $100. Will they do everything the Pana does? No, but are the Pana's capabilities breaking new ground or just plowing up the old with some incremental improvements?

Rick Girard