1. Reminder: Please user our affiliate links to get to your favorite stores for holiday shopping!

Which would you pick and why -- FZ1000 or FZ300?

Discussion in 'Superzoom Salon' started by demiro, Sep 28, 2015.

  1. FZ1000

    33.3%
  2. FZ300

    66.7%
  1. demiro

    demiro Serious Compacts For Life

    527
    Dec 15, 2011
    I find this to be a tough choice. The bigger sensor of the FZ1000 vs the constant f/2.8 lens, longer zoom, touch screen, and weather sealing of the FZ300.

    If I were choosing my primary or only camera I suppose I'd go with sensor size, but thinking about one of these as a supplemental option is tough. I really like some of the extras on the FZ300, and have other options when IQ is paramount.

    So, please add your voice. What would be your pick and why? Assume that the cost is more or less the same.

    Thanks.
     
  2. Jock Elliott

    Jock Elliott SC All-Pro

    Jan 3, 2012
    Troy, NY
    I guess it comes down to what is more important to you. I really like the long reach and constant f/2.8 of the FZ200. The FZ300 has faster autofocus than the FZ200, approximately 2 times quicker, and the weather sealing sounds really nice, plus the same great lens as the FZ200. I have not been tempted by the FZ1000 because I would be giving up some reach. You can check my posts on the FZ200 and see if the image quality is satisfactory to you.

    Let me know, and I'll drop in some links to some FZ200 posts.

    Cheers, Jock
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  3. Luke

    Luke Super Moderator

    Nov 11, 2011
    Milwaukee, WI USA
    Luke
    As a second camera, I would go for the one with the reach. Really, these superzooms are priced about what a decent telephoto lens costs....... and you get the added benefit of not needing to change lenses if suddenly you see something closer that you want to shoot. I bought an RX10 as a second camera because I wanted some reach. And then, it wasn't ENOUGH reach for some stuff, so I got back into m43 and got a 75-300.

    So now I'm back to 3 cameras again. :dash2:
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  4. demiro

    demiro Serious Compacts For Life

    527
    Dec 15, 2011
    Thanks Jock. I'm not surprised at your answer, as I have followed your threads and seen your pics. And yes, the pics are satisfactory to me, but there is always that little part of my brain that still thinks it can be a great photographer of some kind (despite no supporting evidence) and yells "you gotta go for the bigger sensor!"...
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. dalethorn

    dalethorn Guest

    I'd suggest to anyone to read the Luminous Landscape rave review of the Canon G3x. One inch sensor, 600 mm reach, f2.8 to 5.6 minimum, but most importantly an image quality way beyond expectations for the sensor size, according to Reichmann at the LL site. BTW, we got one, and it's phenomenal.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  6. demiro

    demiro Serious Compacts For Life

    527
    Dec 15, 2011
    Yeah, I've been through the cycle a few times myself.
     
  7. demiro

    demiro Serious Compacts For Life

    527
    Dec 15, 2011
    I'm not considering the G3X. Too expensive for me as a non-primary camera, especially considering I'd want to add the EVF. If I was looking for a primary camera and had a budget of $1200 it would be on the list.
     
  8. Biro

    Biro SC All-Pro

    Aug 7, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    Steve
    Right now, I suppose I'd go with the FZ300 with its extra range and weather resistance. But if the FZ1000 ever gets WR, it would be a tougher choice.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  9. demiro

    demiro Serious Compacts For Life

    527
    Dec 15, 2011
    Part of me just wants to wait until the next iteration of the FZ1000 is announced, for things like WR, touch screen, and who knows what else Panny has up their sleeves. But that part of me rarely gets its way.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  10. davidzvi

    davidzvi SC Regular

    180
    Apr 18, 2014
    David
    I had actually been considering these options to replace my m4/3 system. But in the end I decided to stay with m4/3. Reason? The wide end.

    I have an LX100 to handle fast, low light stuff. So I had been leaning toward the FZ300, reach and the better AF thanks to the DFD mainly. But I couldn't get past the fact that I need something wider than 25mm. And while I could have the LX100, FZ300, AND my GX7 + a few lenses; I'm not sure I want 3 different setups (not counting my event gear).
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  11. Biro

    Biro SC All-Pro

    Aug 7, 2011
    Jersey Shore
    Steve
    How extensive is your event gear? I ask because three cameras - assuming you use them - is not unreasonable. And the Panasonic menu system is shared by all.

    EDIT: I looked more closely at your signature. Two big Nikons and glass. Hard to see it on my iPad. I understand your point. But if you use all the cameras you own, I still don't think you're out of control. Yet. :2thumbs:
     
  12. davidzvi

    davidzvi SC Regular

    180
    Apr 18, 2014
    David
    I know it's not out of control and I'm trying to keep it that way. :2thumbs:

    For events I have the D800 & D750; 16-200mm f/2.8 & f/4; plus 3 SB-900/910 flashes.
     
  13. demiro

    demiro Serious Compacts For Life

    527
    Dec 15, 2011
    Well, with my vote the FZ300 wins 5 to 1. Maybe we'll get more votes, but this forum just ain't what it used to be in terms of participation.

    I'm on board with what Luke, Jock and Biro said, which I'll synthesize in to "go with features and reach over sensor because it is not your primary camera; IQ will be good enough anyway".

    I'll report back after spending some time with the new toy. I might get to check out the weather sealing given the forecast for the near future here in the northeast US.
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  14. drd1135

    drd1135 SC Hall of Famer

    Jul 13, 2011
    Southwest Virginia
    Steve
    The superzoom salon forum is fairly new. I was the one vote for the FZ1000 and I'm clearly not thinking like everyone else.
     
  15. demiro

    demiro Serious Compacts For Life

    527
    Dec 15, 2011
    I was talking bigger picture on the forum (the whole thing). Seems like participation was off before the name change and has continued to go in the wrong way. Maybe stats don't bear that out, but it just seems quiet.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. Ray Sachs

    Ray Sachs SC Legend

    Sep 21, 2010
    Not too far from Philly
    you should be able to figure it out...
    As a late entry, I'd go for sensor size, even for a secondary camera. I've usually had a smaller sensor camera to go along with my primary system, and I've never ended up using any of them very much, even the 1" RX100 and G7X. Only the Coolpix A, with it's APS sensor, makes the cut and gets enough shooting time to justify owning it. I now consider 1" the bare minimum I'd want to have, knowing I wouldn't use even that as much as I'd intend to when buying it. To me, the reach is one issue, but if reach was my primary consideration I'd buy the G3X. For me personally, 200mm might not be quite enough, but 400mm would be more than enough for my purposes. If f2.8 was my priority, I'd buy the RX10. But for a "sweet spot" between reach and speed, I'd almost surely buy the FZ1000 if I was even remotely in the market for such a camera - and I've thought about it at times. But between the FZ1000 and FZ300, the larger sensor in the FZ1000 more than compensates for the difference between f2.8 and f4 in the longer focal lengths.

    I thought a camera like this might have been great as a travel cam on my Alaska trip in August, leaving the DF and the various lenses I'd want available at home. I sort of thought of picking up an FZ1000. I didn't - I took the DF and I'm incredibly glad I did. I have shots from that trip that just wouldn't be the same with a 1" sensor and a zoom lens. They'd be OK, real good even, but sensor size is sensor size and it makes a difference. As do some of the lenses I had available for the DF - even the great 24-200 Sony/Zeiss in the RX10 isn't in the same universe as the 21 or 25mm Zeiss primes on a modern full frame camera. Or even the relatively low to mid-level Nikon zooms I had along. Some of the differences are subtle, some are obvious, but they're there there in any shot that matters... So I can't go there, but if I could, 1" would be my absolute minimum... And, of the 1" "bridge" cameras, the FZ1000 would be the sweet spot for me, in terms of zoom range, lens speed, focus speed, video (not that this would really affect my decision), price, etc.

    -Ray
     
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  17. bartjeej

    bartjeej SC Hall of Famer

    Nov 12, 2010
    bart
    Hmm I'm in the Good is good enough camp in terms of IQ, so long as you have at least one versatile really good camera. Given your DSLR gear, I'd say you have that covered. However, in terms of zoom, I'm also in the Good is good enough camp, and 400 would really suffice for me. What's left? Size and weather sealing, and on both counts, the fz300 wins. And on price, too.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  18. kyteflyer

    kyteflyer ~@¿@~

    Jan 31, 2011
    Newcastle, Australia
    Sue
    I've been mizzling over the same thing, and then I went and bought the Nikon P610. Its good, but not *quite* good enough. I don't think I'd be content with the FZ300, now, even with f/2.8, and I've given some more consideration to the FZ1000 and, oddly, after being so determined to have it, now that I can afford it, I am hesitant. I think if you are a mad twitcher, and can't afford the monster lenses for Nikon or Canon, one of these is excellent. I like shooting birds, but birds are not my only (or even main) subject... I'll be interested to see what you get with the FZ300.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1
  19. demiro

    demiro Serious Compacts For Life

    527
    Dec 15, 2011
    I haven't had much time to play with the 300 yet, but I took it out yesterday for my daughter's tennis lesson. 3PM sun was pretty harsh, reminding me as I struggled to see anything that only the best EVFs give me any chance to compose reasonably well as a glasses wearer with terrible eyesight. So I ran through some throw-away type shots, just to see what this little guy can do.

    300-1 (Medium).JPG
    600/2.8

    300-2 (Medium).JPG
    226/2.8

    300-3 (Medium).JPG
    600/2.8


    300-4 (Medium).JPG
    308/2.8


    . 300-5 (Medium).JPG
    226/2.8

    Certainly no revelations in terms of image quality, but I think Panasonic is getting a lot out of this sensor, just like on the FZ200.

    Other quick comments about the camera: Ergonomics are great for me. Small, but chunky enough to hold on to. Right amount of direct controls for a super zoom (4 Fn buttons help). Screen is very good. No major negatives other than EVF, which is more the nature of the beast than a flaw with a particular camera. I dabbled a bit with 4K photo mode. Seemed to work well. I will try to post up an example or two later.

    My limited test run doesn't make this camera choice a slam dunk for me, but I didn't think it would. No real surprises. It is not so useful in dim indoor lighting, but I didn't buy it for that. I suppose I don't see much reason to choose the FZ1000 instead. What does creep back in to my mind is buying an old Canon 40D and 55-250 zoom for maybe $300. No fancy bells and whistles (touch screen, flip screen, any kind of video, much less 4K photo, etc), but it would be my preference for shooting in the bright sun, which is where the FZ300 will be used a majority of the time.

    Of course the versatility of the FZ300 crushes the 40D, with ability to shoot at 25mm, instead of 88 min, and things like video, wifi, etc.

    Oddly enough, this little session sort of validates (to me) Sue's choice of the P610 (even though she doesn't like it). It's easy to get to the point where you say "Well, if I am going to accept a camera that is this limited by the sensor I might as well get one that really offers up something to compensate for that." 1440mm equiv zoom makes things interesting, I suppose.
     
    Last edited: Oct 5, 2015
    • Like Like x 1
  20. kyteflyer

    kyteflyer ~@¿@~

    Jan 31, 2011
    Newcastle, Australia
    Sue
    Those shots are just fine! Pretty damned good, IMO.

    Its not that I don't like the P610, I just don't like it for everything. Low light? Forget it :) Long zoom? Excellent. Who can afford to buy an equivalent lens for DSLR or MFT? For landscape, I'd prefer my X100, my TZ60 (it does remarkably well, as evidenced by the thousands of views I have on an ocean shot I took on a whim, when it was raining) or if I ever get one, the LX100. I think the main disappointment for me is the lack of RAW. But, its still the first camera I grab when I decide its time for a visit to the duck pond, or to see if the plovers have hatched new babies.

    A general comment: I think Panasonic makes more of the smaller sensor than any of the others. Now all I need to do is find my TZ60 which I seem to have lost.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Appreciate Appreciate x 1