High-end bridge cameras: Sony RX10, Panasonic FZ1000 etc

some shots taken over the weekend with the fz1000mk2 . incredible a/f as the bag knocks the cans down
 

Attachments

  • 1.jpg
    1.jpg
    143.9 KB · Views: 13
  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    140.5 KB · Views: 12
  • 3.jpg
    3.jpg
    148.2 KB · Views: 11
  • 4.jpg
    4.jpg
    130.7 KB · Views: 13
  • 5.jpg
    5.jpg
    123.6 KB · Views: 13
Hi everyone.
prompted by the foxes and cubs in my allotment ,also come into back garden,I’ve got The urge to focus on wildlife photography.
im looking at the options with not a big budget and am considering something like the all in one Sony rx10 iv or similar (panny?) or something like nikon d7200 with 70-300 .
in anyones experience in decent light would the larger sensor on the Nikon post cropping,be much of an advantage versus the xtra length on the Sony.
thanks
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
Hi everyone.
prompted by the foxes and cubs in my allotment ,also come into back garden,I’ve got The urge to focus on wildlife photography.
im looking at the options with not a big budget and am considering something like the all in one Sony rx10 iv or similar (panny?) or something like nikon d7200 with 70-300 .
in anyones experience in decent light would the larger sensor on the Nikon post cropping,be much of an advantage versus the xtra length on the Sony.
thanks
Click to expand...
Hi - you can probably guess my answer! I would try and find a second hand RX10iii (£900 on MPB but I guess you could pick one up for £700ish if you shopped around) They are great - sharp at 600mm equiv at f4... downside is poor high iso performance (I don't tend to go over iso800 but the images clean up nicely with Topaz Denoise).

If you went for a 7200 and 70-300 the results after cropping would probaby be pretty similar I guess - I don't know the lens but it would have to go some to be as sharp as the RX10iii (or RX10iv - I don't find much difference between the two). The bigger sensor would be better at high iso I guess but you wouldn't get f4 at the long end either so it's pros and cons as always...

Cheers
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
Hi everyone.
prompted by the foxes and cubs in my allotment ,also come into back garden,I’ve got The urge to focus on wildlife photography.
im looking at the options with not a big budget and am considering something like the all in one Sony rx10 iv or similar (panny?) or something like nikon d7200 with 70-300 .
in anyones experience in decent light would the larger sensor on the Nikon post cropping,be much of an advantage versus the xtra length on the Sony.
thanks
Click to expand...
A major advantage of an APS-C DSLR will be better dynamic range. The 1" sensor's relatively poor DR has been one of my irritations with the RX10 range. Don't overlook micro four-thirds for wildlife use - have a look at the cracking results being posted in the Olympus thread.
 
Before I put on eBay, I have my rx10 iv in the classifieds. Sad to see it go, in my opinion it is the best all in one wildlife camera out there. I was constantly amazed by what it could produce.
But since I got my hands on an om-1 the rx10 has been unused so needs to go.
 
thank you for your replies which I am digesting,Johnathan,yes I am certainly considering the M4/3rds also.

What's your experience/opinion on Panasonic V Olympus? and what is considered the ideal camera for wildlife etc, from each company?

Mike interesting that the 3 v 4 IQ about same, so is it mainly the sort of perks that are improved in the 4?

Peat,could you expand a little on your experience since changing to the OM-1 (which version)? etc

thanks again to you 3
 
I upgraded from a Mk3 to a Mk4 and to be honest have not noticed anything significantly better about the 4 - it's meant to focus faster/better but only if you use continuous I think (not sure). I'm a point and click kind of guy and for me the two are almost exactly the same so I wouldn't worry about getting a Mk3 if that suits your budget better :)
 
dibbly dobbler said:
I upgraded from a Mk3 to a Mk4 and to be honest have not noticed anything significantly better about the 4 - it's meant to focus faster/better but only if you use continuous I think (not sure). I'm a point and click kind of guy and for me the two are almost exactly the same so I wouldn't worry about getting a Mk3 if that suits your budget better :)
Click to expand...
I appreciate your honesty on this.cheers
 
dibbly dobbler said:
I upgraded from a Mk3 to a Mk4 and to be honest have not noticed anything significantly better about the 4 - it's meant to focus faster/better but only if you use continuous I think (not sure). I'm a point and click kind of guy and for me the two are almost exactly the same so I wouldn't worry about getting a Mk3 if that suits your budget better :)
Click to expand...
I've been looking at some of your photos taken with the rx10's on Flickr and they are far and away better than anything I would be really happy with so it gives me confidence to really consider this system. what do you use to process ?
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
thank you for your replies which I am digesting,Johnathan,yes I am certainly considering the M4/3rds also.

What's your experience/opinion on Panasonic V Olympus? and what is considered the ideal camera for wildlife etc, from each company?

Mike interesting that the 3 v 4 IQ about same, so is it mainly the sort of perks that are improved in the 4?

Peat,could you expand a little on your experience since changing to the OM-1 (which version)? etc

thanks again to you 3
Click to expand...

I’m finding the om-1 with the 100-400 is better at birds in flight . Not by loads. I honestly would say dragonflies in flight is about the same. High iso shooting is a lot better on the om-1. This is handy as I’ve been able to experiment with 1/5000 shots recently.
I have the Olympus 60mm macro so going out with the om-1 makes sense now as I can quickly switch to that lens and get extreme close ups of things which I am enjoying doing at the moment. But the rx10 has really good close focus and you can put a close up lens on it (I used the canon one with good results).
My main reason for the om-1 is I like to shoot 50/50 photography / videography so the rx10 iv only being able to do 4k/30 was a killer, Before getting the om-1 I was having to having to take my gh5 and rx10 iv out and have both ready which was a bit of a pain.
So I’ve tried to combine all that into one.
If you shoot just photos and like shooting insects and other wildlife then the twice the price for the om1 and lens combo would be a bit much . Photos and use is not twice as good as the rx10 iv.
 
Last edited:
peat said:
I’m finding the om-1 with the 100-400 is better at birds in flight . Not by loads. I honestly would say dragonflies in flight is about the same. High iso shooting is a lot better on the om-1. This is handy as I’ve been able to experiment with 1/5000 shots recently.
I have the Olympus 60mm macro so going out with the om-1 makes sense now as I can quickly switch to that lens and get extreme close ups of things which I am enjoying doing at the moment. But the rx10 has really good close focus and you can put a close up lens on it (I used the canon one with good results).
My main reason for the om-1 is I like to shoot 50/50 photography / videography so the rx10 iv only being able to do 4k/30 was a killer, Before getting the om-1 I was having to having to take my gh5 and rx10 iv out and have both ready which was a bit of a pain.
So I’ve tried to combine all that into one.
If you shoot just photos and like shooting insects and other wildlife then the twice the price for the om1 and lens combo would be a bit much . Photos and use is not twice as good as the rx10 iv.
Click to expand...
thank you very much for your most helpful reply. very interesting and im not really that much into video apart from occasional ones so I understand what your saying re the cost per use .
 
SsSsSsSsSnake said:
I've been looking at some of your photos taken with the rx10's on Flickr and they are far and away better than anything I would be really happy with so it gives me confidence to really consider this system. what do you use to process ?
Click to expand...
Nothing very clever I can assure you! I have Photoshop Elements and just some basic knowledge of how to adjust levels, cropping and cloning etc - the only additional thing I would advise is picking up Topaz Labs DeNoise which plugs into Photoshop - it really helps with the noisy higher iso shots and also has a useful sharpening function :)
 
Last edited:
I bought the Sony RX10 IV some months ago as as a slightly lighter alternative to my DSLR and lenses set up. It's a lovely camera but I'm still learning new things it can do. I did do the handheld moon picture too.:)

There are some lovely photos in this thread.
 
Every year the beautiful House Martins return from Africa to their nests in the eaves of our coach-house to lay their eggs and wait for their young to hatch and then fledge.

These three huddled together had flown down and couldn't then take off. A quick hand boost helped them on their way, whilst Mum and Dad circled around wondering what that bloke and a Rottweiler were doing!

Gorgeous little creatures and one handed shots with the superb RX10 iv.
DSC09358.jpgDSC09360.jpg
 
patr said:
Every year the beautiful House Martins return from Africa to their nests in the eaves of our coach-house to lay their eggs and wait for their young to hatch and then fledge.

These three huddled together had flown down and couldn't then take off. A quick hand boost helped them on their way, whilst Mum and Dad circled around wondering what that bloke and a Rottweiler were doing!

Gorgeous little creatures and one handed shots with the superb RX10 iv.
View attachment 361187View attachment 361188
Click to expand...
Fantastic!! :clap:
:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
 
Might be coming back to an RX10. I originally bought a Mk iii when I wanted to stop lens swapping on MILCs. Served me well - partly because I love having a hardware aperture ring. But then I switched back to Fuji - an old X-T2 plus the Tamron 18-300 (27-450mmm equiv) as a sort-of superzooming bridge camera, witht he benefit of APS-C sensor. The combined weight is about the same, although the Tamron is quite long and lacks the aperture ring that I chose Fuji for!

In any case, that lens is now back to e-finity (4-12 weeks!) for a zoom ring problem and I'm looking to buy an RX10 iii or iv to tide me over. Trying to work out if the newer phase-detect AF of the iv would be useful to me.
 
goldtop said:
Might be coming back to an RX10. I originally bought a Mk iii when I wanted to stop lens swapping on MILCs. Served me well - partly because I love having a hardware aperture ring. But then I switched back to Fuji - an old X-T2 plus the Tamron 18-300 (27-450mmm equiv) as a sort-of superzooming bridge camera, witht he benefit of APS-C sensor. The combined weight is about the same, although the Tamron is quite long and lacks the aperture ring that I chose Fuji for!

In any case, that lens is now back to e-finity (4-12 weeks!) for a zoom ring problem and I'm looking to buy an RX10 iii or iv to tide me over. Trying to work out if the newer phase-detect AF of the iv would be useful to me.
Click to expand...
For what it's worth I could never tell much difference between the mk3 and mk4 (but I don't typically shoot birds in flight or similar) :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top