Very good comparison of the cameras but difficult to make a choice. That's why we bought the Sony for my husband and the Nikon for me and we switch cameras every now and then. We are very happy and satisfied with both cameras.
Sold my rx10iv and purchased the P1000 AND an A7rii...because I mainly need the zoom for astrophotography and daytime wildlife etc... Now I have a compact, full frame A7rii for most everything and a specialty zoom camera for those occasional special needs. I am very happy with the P1000 for astrophotography.
I used to own the P900, I had a lot of fun with it but in the end I wanted better image quality so I sold it. Many years later, two days ago I bought the P1000 second hand, it's shockingly big, if it had a 1inch sensor it would look like a bazooka unless they find some optical solution for the next Nikon super zoom
@@pabloolivares7425 I hated my P900 in the end, yes in good light I took some good pictures but generally the image quality was pretty basic. Now with the P1000 I sense improvements all round, it has RAW, 4k video and 125 X optical, lots of room to play.
Good job. I think more emphasis on the Sony RX-1--lV phase detect auto focus vs. the Nikon contrast based is the absolute major important difference. For example, with the quick shot of the Chetaah you showed would have been the place to say that the contrast detect auto focus of the Nikon would be almost usless on a fast moving animal especially at 3000mm. Phase detect auto focus is the key reason the RX-10-lV is so expensive yet has been around since 2017.
I don't think i would be able to resist buying the P1000 if it had that sony sensor and fstop. The bad low light performance really takes away from it.
Mate, awesome video. I've just read that the P1000 will be discontinued. As a result I have gone out and purchased the Nikon and your video has provided great insight into the cameras capability.
Great video, and thank you! I've been looking at both cameras and was unsure. But after watching this? You've helped me make up my mind! I'm getting into nature, birds and wildlife photography and i think that the zoom of the Nikon is where I'm leaning to! Much appreciated and love the humor.
Hey, thanks for the comment! Can't argue with your decision, that for wildlife you get so much more reach with the Nikon. If you do wind up getting it, just so you know I have a number of tutorial videos on that camera (the P950 /and P1000 which share the same menus, controls etc) so those might help you navigate and understand the inner workings of the camera and all they are capable of doing. Best of luck!
I really enjoyed the review of the cameras. I found on my RX10M4 the camera has an app in which you can zoom the lens to 2400mm. I have tried this feature at night and got an excellent photo from it. I would say from comparing them both, they are both alike. My opinion is that if you use Nikon you always stick with Nikon. The same as for Sony users. If you are a new user looking for a bridge camera I would say rent them both and you compare the results and go from there. But remember the RX10M4 has sold out more than the Panasonic bridge camera.
I have the P1000 so I watched this video with interest. The only time I'd really care to have the P1000 vs the RX10 - (based on your video) - is when long reach really matters. And in such a case I'll say the P1000 has to be on a tripod to take sharp photos. So it would have been nice if you had compared ease-of-mounting on a tripod between the 2 cameras. The P1000 tripod-mount socket is on the body and the camera is very tilt-heavy when fully zoomed. Enough so that it is hard to position it on the intended object at full zoom. I like the P1000 more for video than for stills.
I have P1000 and very satisfied. I also have DxO PureRAW 2 which makes the (RAW) images even much better. Can sometimes find it a little clumsy, but I can put up with that.
It’s a very different kind of camera. The d3000 is a SLR with interchangeable lenses. Your D3000 will give you a better quality image but you won’t have the extreme zoom of the p1000. You just have to decide which is more important
Fair enough. I bought my Nikon P1000 for its zooming properties, if to chase quality images I'll use my Nikon D300. Different tools for different jobs, although I think one day they will create a perfect camera, the jack of all trades. Right? 🤔
Check out Snap Chick’s review on the P1000, it is really very good. I think most people interested in a P1000 would already have another camera say APS-C or FF with a shorter FL lens on it. The big deal with the P1000 is about photographic reach, magnification and detail. Be aware that those amazing FLs need not take you to the horizon all the time. Getting a good crop optically on a bird without having to downsize your pixel count is really worth while. This P1000 camera is heavy, so if you are physically smaller, you might have to settle on the Sony but if you are normal size or “big” and you want one camera to rule them all, I don’t think you can go past the P1000, it is such a unique offering to the market. I love mine and I’m sure you would love yours as it is so much fun. Cheers
detail is very bad on the P1000. Sure enough much better than smartphones in the tele range, as expected, but not comparable to any APS-C or even MFT camera with a 400-600mm zoom or a 800mm prime lens. I mean i get it, this camera serves a "special" purpose.... superzoom and max reach at all costs, but the costs/tradeoffs are also far from negliable and have to be considered: - low light performance/"high" ISO performance. The P1000 literally looks ugly at ISO 400+ and i think it maxes out at ISO 800 or 1600... And i am not even happy with a max ISO of 32.000 since i had already a camera pushing to 51.000 with reasonable image quality. - depth of field/wide aperture stuff. Doesnt matter how less you care about it... the P1000 definately has NOT ENOUGH aperture headroom to make subject pop out of the background (nor the low optical element count needed for it to really get nice) - video performance especially regarding faster frame rates due to its age and small, yet 16MP sensor. The P1000 would have been so much better fitted with a low light capable 12MP sensor like this even 4k60 1:1 pixel to pixel readout would have been possible. - weight/size... its a big, heavy monster. And no way of getting wider than 24mm or going for a small regular zoom lens, for example a 28-90mm equivalent. The thing is, normally you have a camera for like 3-10 years depending on the advancement and prices of the cameras as 0815 person. You have to be happy with the P1000 in the long run especially since you cant replace the lens or upgrade the body. The main question is if you really NEED (!!!) this zoom that often to make sense in this "portable" package. I for example was once interested in the P1000, but luckily even 1000$+ were too expensive for my taste and i waited a few years more and enjoyed my DSLR i paid 70$ 2nd hand (EOS 550D, fked up and abused). I only had a frustrating 15 year old 75-300mm IS USM lens (120-480mm effective) from canon these days but it was "good enough" to begin wildlife a bit. Thankfully 2019/2020 changed a lot.... Sigma 150-600C lenses became very affordable 2nd hand (and 600mm F/6.3 is AMAZING for shallow DoF in wildlife, F/8 is tack sharp and still nice DoF!), Canon introduced their RF 600 & 800mm F11 lenses, the first modern, light, well stabilized AND affordable superteles. Also with 2019+, full frame became more or less affordable for the 0815 people (except for wildlife where full frame is still super expensive especially body, teleconverter and faster prime lenses wise) "Getting a good crop optically on a bird without having to downsize your pixel count is really worth while" Here im absolutely with you. But considering its 16MP packed into a super small smartphone sensor... the pixel count may fit, but the pixel size? I guess its at least better than Samsungs 200MP sensors in their phones. I dont even like the 1,9 µm/pixel or so on my 32MP APS-C Canon R7, the pixels get very small (80MP full frame equivalent) so im more or less forced to stay below ISO 12800 in photo and ISO 25600 in video, tho ISO 51.000 is max in photo and ISO 32.000 is max in 8 bit video (my previous camera, a entry level full frame EOS RP worked nicely up to ISO 51.000 in video and ISO 25.600 in photo! But its just 1 stop difference and also the noise and dynamic range are the same more or less. I for example really didnt like the 26MP full frame sensor anymore as i was into wildlife, slowmo video and cropped more, but it was crucial for my astrophotography which i cant do anymore on the crop camera. Not only because the pixel density of the R7 is too much for the telescope (750mm F4) but also because 1200mm is TIGHT for many deep sky objects where the 750mm with full frame fitted nearly perfectly for anything regular except the very big nebulas or andromeda galaxy.
Owner of a broken Panasonic lumix FZ -80 and have been debating between renting these two for grizzly photography in katmai! Thanks for the helpful video!
I’m a NIKON shooter but in this comparison the SONY wins hands down in the areas that matter - AF and image quality. Big price difference though. Thanks for sharing👍😄
@@techtoremember8096 my son needed a compact hybrid camera with a longish zoom lens and I recommended he get the Sony. Now I’m beginning to think I should get one too😄
I think the Sony is the better allrounder and that includes for travel. The Nikon is too heavy to make a nice travel-cam imo ( even the Sony is a little bit on the heavy side). But of course, if you’re really tough, both might be fine.
Hey there!! Love your videos, very detailed with a touch of humour. My question… what camera would you suggest for an Alaskan cruise ? Also how would you protect a p1000 from water/moisture? Thanks for all your efforts in developing the videos! Ted
Hi! Thanks so much for the compliment. Wow, an Alaskan Cruise, is great. Any camera really will produce great results. The Nikon and Sony that I reviewed would be great as they have nice wide angles to view the glaciers and scenery then if you wanted to zoom up on something you could. as well. As protection, you can go on Amazon and simply type in "camera rain gear" and you will see a variety of inexpensive plastic sleeves which will simply drape over the camera and keep them dry. I definitely recommend that. because Alsaska is often rainy and you want to keep the cameras protected. Have a great trip!
Thanks for the detailed review of these two cameras. I have a cannon zoom camera but thinking of getting a second camera , having looked up the price for the Sony , I'm gonna go for a DSLR and long lense 👍 thanks again
Of course, it is obvious that the sharpness of the Sony photographs is of much higher quality than the photographs of the Nikon P1000, and that is due to the size of the Sony sensor, much larger than that the Nikon. The advantage of the P1000 over the Sony is the 24mm-3000mm telephoto zoom lens. Each one with their own preferences. Good video.
Hi I've seen your videos around about the nikon coolpix p1000 so you seem like you know your stuff. This camera is 5 years old now do you know if it's going to be upgraded to a better model with more mp and zoom? Thanks
Hi there. There hasn't been any recent rumors about a new model. It seems that camera manufacturers these days are not focusing on bridge superzoom cameras so much as their mirrorless models where they probably is more profit for them. That is not to say there may not be a replacement-its just that we don't know when. Realistically, I don't think a new model will have any more zoom. The 3000 mm is so much at this point it would seem hard to believe they could get any more zoom in without making the camera too big and heavy. Its possible there could be more MP but that could also be a negative too because its a small sensor camera and more MP means more light is needed. So,,, right now you have 2 solid choices- the P950 and the P1000 both very unique models and I don't think Nikon is in a hurry to come out with a new model since there really is little competition from anyone else. No other camera manufacturer has a bridge camera with a zoom like those 2. Thanks for the comment and best of luck!
@@techtoremember8096 Thank you sir for your amazing reply I will have to look into the p950 and p1000 to see the difference I was thinking about the p1000 for ASTRO photography night and planets but I'm guessing without a motorized mount that is going to difficult on the planets because the p1000 has 500x zoom 125x 4x digital. Thank you again
I have the Nikon P900 and it worked great with a solar filter during the 2017 solar eclipse. I also have the Sony RX 10 III. I have a Sony a7 IV and the a7c. I ended up taking the RX10 III to Disney World and it was a perfect fit even for fireworks and night time videos. I wish so much they would update to a more current model. I would seriously consider selling off all my other gear and just use it as my travel camera. Come on Sony, WTF.
It is already his second video that I watch on Sony, as I am tired of going around with a backpack full of heavy optics and considering my age I would love a camera like this, great for my needs, but I am held back by the possibility of the release of the new model. Is there any definite information on this topic or is it just assumptions? Many thanks for his videos very well done and full of information.
Thank you ! Much appreciated I understand your concern about the new model but I wouldn’t wait. It might be a year maybe ? Or more no one knows. Not many additional rumors so I suspect it’s not comlng soon so if you need something now get the mark 4!
In my opinion I don't think Sony will be making a new RX10 model. Much like Fujifilm did, (They used to make some nice superzooms but now make none) I think Sony will move away from superzooms and concentrate on making money on their interchangeable lens cameras.
One very big issue effecting image quality when fully zoomed, isn't really the camera but the atmosphere. You get mirages and all kinds of refraction that will naturally blur your image, no matter how good the lens. Getting as close to your subject is always the best thing to do where possible.
And this is exactly why a P950 is "better" than the P1000. 2000mm is MORE THAN ENOUGH. I encountered heat haze and atmospheric issues already at effective 800mm with a 26MP camera and subjects at for example 30 meters in the greenery. Beyond 1000mm is for most things useless. Also, as much i enjoyed and still enjoy my 800mm prime lens (1280mm on APS-C...), the best wildlife shot i ever made was at effective 640mm (so 400mm on a Sigma 150-600C). And if i would have had enough time i would have even taken some zoomed out habitat shots with the subject smaller in the frame so less than 640mm needed. I sat down for a while near a bush and luckily some songbirds landed at this bush like 2 meters away from me. I had only like 2 seconds to react and shoot as many photos as possible, turned out only one of like 20 shots was the good shot but thats ok to have at least one very good. In that situation even my setup i had years ago (old, cheap APS-C DSLR + 20 year old 75-300mm lens) could have worked probably. 1000mm+ are USELESS when your subject is too far away in wildlife and if you find yourself in a situation with a long prime lens you maybe found it often the issue your frame is much too tight if the animals come closer thats why i have a Sigma 150-600 6.3 beside the long range RF 800 F11 lens.
@@techtoremember8096 Thank you for the swift reply dear Sir:)) May I also ask, if I am sitting beyond the middle-point, which cam is better? I still don't have much concept about 200mm zoom range.
That's the Best review.... Awesome job....this is the kind of video I need... Liked and subscribed.. Well ? Does nikon 1000 gets it's firmware updates?
Hi ! Thanks so much for the compliment. Nikon is usually pretty good on updates. I haven’t checked on the P1000 updates jn a while but Nikon is a company that does regularly update its cameras
Helpful video! There arent much useful superzoom comparision like yours, but you missed the whole point of superzoom. You need to compare what details can be made out in maxed zoom, maxed image quality setting, fully stabilized, showing a cropped portion of the photos in low and good lighting. This is to see their max possible output of what they are intended for
Hey, thanks for the comment! The P1000's zoom is clearly superior to the RX10's and for those where pure zoom is what's paramount, they are going to opt for the Nikon. What I wanted to get across in this video are the other differences in the cameras, picture quality, low light, autofocus, stabilization etc so folks could get an idea which camera was better suited for them overall. Good idea at some point however to do an in-depth analysis of zoom quality and detail but I'd save that for 2 cameras that have much more of a similar focal length so its a fair comparison.
@@techtoremember8096 what i want to see is a controlled indoors lighting cropped details test of tiny subjects- rx10 iv at max zoom, p950 at 1240mm, and a fullframe cam at 220mm. Same aperture, low and good lighting
@@andacq Why a full frame camera at 220mm? Or do you mean 2200mm? Thats insane :D But 2000mm+ are affordable nowadays... i have the EOS R7 (32MP APS-C) and a RF 800 F11, paid for both about 1800€ (RF 800 2nd hand, R7 in Moldavia a lot cheaper) I can zoom into the moon even more than frame filling with enhanced digital stabiliser in 4k60 crop (about 2200mm), frame filling without digital stabiliser mode just 4k60 crop and little bit wide image without crop (1280mm). Digital stabilised 4k30 fine (7k downsampled) should give for example about 1600mm with tack sharp 4k30 (but rolling shutter -.-)
@@andacq And trust me.... max reach is not something you really need or even want even if you think you want it. At least in long term 1000mm+ doesnt make sense to carry all the time with a "small" bridge camera. Same for the S23U users being proud at the moon shots... you do that how often to really make sense? I would rather have a wide aperture 5x camera with big sensor for nice portraits than a superzoom in a phone.
I don't think they are going to make a mkV version. I think the MkIV was too good and was eating into their interchangeable lens camera sales, especially the lower end models.
You are naturally funny so thumbs up for a good video although the part about the p1000 being darker was confusing. Why were you not matching exposure to see how they compared manually? Also not sure about your monitor but images and specially 4k video is clearly more detailed on the Sony. Regards
Hi! Thank you for the comment To answer your question about the exposure, I just wanted to keep it simple and compare how the cameras handled the scenes without any manual overrides. My thinking is many , if not most users will leave the exposing to the camera, especially on a bridge type camera. But you make a great point that you can always override and brighten the image if you so desire Regards !
Hello I just subscribed to your channel, I love the comparison you made here, it's really detailed and very informative, however my question is can the P1000 be connected to a PC screen and film the moon live to be able to visualize it in a big way? thanks and greetings
Hi there ! Yes you can connect to a monitor via HDMI out and clean HDMI out too so you won’t see the display info if you don’t want to on screen- But it’s only 1080p output not 4k Thanks for subscribing and welcome aboard !
I've owned both, and still own RX10 IV. Literally there is no comparison between both. Nikon is all about reach but not IQ. Sony gives the best image details etc. Nikon images are unusable except for the fact I can get closer but end up with worse image on screen
I have the P1000, most images are just not sharp across the focal length, but especially at high zoom. My Sony RX100 VII is sharper and better in all but the focal length. I assume RX10 IV is the same as RX100 VII only with a better lens, and if so, it's hands down RX10 IV.
From my own testing, yes the RX10IV is a bit sharper than the RX100VII. I think the P1000 can produce reasonable sharp images under the right conditions but it is a small sensor and definitely has limitations that you must put up with if you want that extreme zoom.
The Sony a7R4 has a 61 megapixel full frame sensor. The P1000 has 16 megapixels. As far as I can see, you can crop an image taken with Sony's a7R4 to a quarter of the original image and then obtain the same resolution as with the P1000 = 16 megapixels, which in that case would mean that a correct comparison between an image taken with the P1000 and 3000mm and sony with 2X teleconverter and 600mm = 1200mm corresponds to an image of 4 x 1200= 4800mm if you use Sony and crop to the same 16 megapixel resolution. Am I right or wrong? On the other hand, if the largest aperture that the P1000 has in the 3000mm = 8 mode, Sony's zoom 200-600mm with teleconverter cannot measure up to this, since the Sony zoom is at aperture 6.3 at 600mm and with the 2x converter loses a step to aperture 11 ? I think it will be. How do other properties such as dynamic range and other important features of the P1000's tiny sensor compare to Sony's full frame, even if you only use a quarter of it when you crop the image ???
I would appreciate information about the error that my nikon coolpik P1000 camera gives me. The error is the following: THE CAMERA WILL SHUT OFF TO PREVENT IT FROM OVERHEATING.u It turns off and you can't do anything anymore. Thank you Jose Antonio
I've had both cameras and if you don't need some ridiculous zoom, get the Sony. There's no comparison, Sony RX10 is way better for wildlife photography.
i use RX IV telescope my neighbour to get some excited scene during movement restriction time due to Covid19 ...at least get back some value of the purchase😎
Hi I’m not too familiar with prograde -I can just say that if you see my video comparing it to the top of the line Sony A1 - a $6500 full frame camera , it’s surprising how close they look - without pixel peeping of course
I think either camera would be fine. If you are watching from a very far distance I would say the P1000 has the edge due to its longer zoom. And if you are on a shaky boat, the P1000 also has the edge in terms of stabilization.
Interesting question I would say the Nikon because you really need that extra reach in this case - your specific concern requires the longest possible zoom ! and I’d say the Nikon is the best bet
@@techtoremember8096 thank you for the reply. Ive been binge watching all your super zoom camera videos and I think I might go for the p950 due to its smaller body. One thing I have found out when comparing the p1000 vs p950 is that it seem as if the p1000 if better in lower light. do you have any input on that ?
@@harrison00xXx strange you would say that considering most people who plane watch as a hobby highly recommend these systems. UAPs seem to give off light.
I have RX10-IV, and I would advise against it if your reason for buying is solely for bird photography. Reasons why I said so: - P950/P1000 lens have more range than RX10-IV at lower price. You might want to look into that (I haven't had chance to use p950/p1000, but more often than not I wish I had that kind of zoom capability when birding). - RX10-IV is not that much of an advantage (in term of bird photography) given the price. The bokeh is not that nice at full zoom, and in low light the autofocus does hunt and the noise still noticeable. The image quality does suffer when you crop the photo (highly likely to occur if you are shooting birds photo). The image stabilizer at max zoom is also not that good (my olympus EM1-2 works better at similar focal length than this camera). Much like other point and shoots, it is not so forgiving and you need to find a perfect condition to capture good photos. - At that price point, I preferred a second-hand apsc camera with decent second-hand telephoto lens which may give similar or even more range and much more forgiving than RX10-IV. Nevertheless, RX10-IV is still usable. The autofocus is quick and snappy, and it is more versatile (one camera for all genre of photography). Bottom line, buy RX10-IV if: - you are going to use the camera as an all-rounder - landscape, night photo, potrait, birding etc, especially when you want to travel light without needing to bring other cameras or lenses. - If you got a heavily discounted RX10-IV.
Actually, the only area that the P1000 excels is the reach. Sony has twice the low light sensitivity and has a 1 inch sensor. The Nikon P1000 just has a 1/2’3 size sensor, almost the same size as a cellphone so the photos will suck, especially if you want to crop in.
I woudn't say its redundant. The Sony is more practical to carry around and the picture quality is a bit better. Personally, I have both. When you just need an extreme zoom for wildlife or maybe astrophotography, the P1000 is there for you, but for more everyday shooting I'd say the Mark 4 is the better choice
I would recommend "something else" than another bridge camera. I would suggest looking into modern mirrorless systems, maybe the Sony A6700, soon coming A7C II (that might be a game changer and full frame so pretty nice...), one of canons (R7, R8, R10,...) or Nikon (Z6 II, Z8,...) has something which fits your needs. Nikon finally also stepped into the 150-600/200-600 game with a 180-600 and its really nice and cheaper than canons "slow" 100-500L lens. On a crop camera you get with any 500-600mm zoom lens good enough reach, especially if it has any other crop mode as my R7 (1,6x APS-C + 1,77x 4k60 crop + 1,4x enhanced digital IS = 4x crop, nearly on P1000/P950 level of sensor size) Also, when you guys say "astrophotography", are you for real? I mean i get it.... moon and a few planets are also astrophotography.... but i understand under astrophotography a stacked long time exposure (1-10 hours) of a very dark nebula invisible to the naked eye with sub exposure times of like 2-8 minutes, at best even with a narrowband Ha, H2 and O3 filter combined. And anything untracked/unguided except for basic milky way photography i dont even mind as "astrophotography", sadly anything than moon and planets are only doable with tracking at least, guiding is recommended heavily as well to enjoy proper long exposure times of at least 2 minutes per exposure. Also, at the point you want to go beyond the moon and planets.... a proper telescope, and if its just a cheap 750mm F4 newton on an older, motorized GoTo mount, the Skywatcher EQ3-2 is uncomparable to even a fast tele lens. Can the P1000 even capture the orion nebula without tracking?
@harrison00xXx Hi, thanks for the feedback. I'm fond of the A6700, but that's not cheap. Need not to say A7C and etc. I am eyeing on the A6400 though, but it has no IBIS and bad rolling shutter. Hence no good for videography. R10 is in my bucket list as well - Don't have robust lens variety as Sony though. Another concern when go into mirrorless is the need of upgrading to better lens afterward (additional cost). Which P&S cam need not to. Not sure upon getting the basic kit lens, how good the image quality could be. I am kinda in a tight budget phography mode... hehe
@@jamesykhong I can absolutely understand your position you are coming from. I had the luck that i grew up over 10 years with canon DSLRs and purchased some good glass over many years, so since EF glass works just fine on RF cameras the decision was not that hard for me with the EOS RP first and now the EOS R7. Also adapting EF glass is much better than you might think, i ever prefer EF over RF as long it doesnt have to be the smallest formfactor or its anyways bigger zoom lenses. Im also on a tight budget, thats why i have "only" a APS-C canon and "only" for example a Sigma 150-600mm lens and a RF 800 F11 on the longer end. R10 has btw also horrible rolling shutter, R7 only slightly better but it has IBIS and a better sensor at least as well more features and faster in general. I would really avoid the R10. The R7 and R8 are the best value for money on canon, R6 II if you have deeper pockets tho is also very nice but then you dont have the "teleconverter" ala APS-C sensor or the charme of smaller lenses fitted for APS-C.
@@jamesykhong What could be a very interesting thing, but its already older and a dying mount... EF-M, so EOS-M cameras. M6 II, M50 etc are also awesome, you have very nice lenses for the EF-M system including a lot of really good 3rd party lenses and the prices are pretty low. On a tight budget i ALWAYS bought 2nd hand, first only lenses, but sometimes also bodies. For example long ago a EOS 550D for 70€, absolutely fked up but much cheaper than the average one in "good" condition for like 200-350€ and its main purpose of shooting photos was still working just fine. With this 70€ invest i worked around my too old 400D for over 3 years until i finally found an affordable full frame camera, the EOS RP. What about a 2nd hand EOS 90D and EF glass, later an upgrade to the EOS R camera you want in the future? Luckily we have nowadays a lot of options, and as much quirks and problems the R7 also has, im pretty happy with it. Best compromise out of performance for my needs and price considering my budget i found.
@@techtoremember8096 if you look carefully 1.5 inch above from the big circuller spot from the bottom of the moon, there is a really small dot flying over from left to right. and you can follow it on moving to the right corner and vanishes in the next shot 10:01 . can you see it now?
Wow ! Yes I can ! Thank you for pointing it out. I will tell you I don’t know what it is. My first thought was maybe a little dirt on the lens but that isn’t it. I actually found the original clip and there is actually another mark that is very fleeting that comes across the moon much quicker which is maybe a bird. As for the dot you saw, a bird it would seem too far away to make sense. It clearly is very far away as it takes quite a while to go across the moon -I think I may post another video and zoom up on this and come up with theories. Very cool ! Thanks for pointing this out
@@techtoremember8096 I don't think it is a bird even if it looks like, it should be magnified too at that zoom lvl or may be a bird flying waay up in the space between Earth and the Moon ?
Not to be too nit picky but while technically taking pics of the Jupiter and the Moon is astrophotography it's not a good example of taking pics of deeper space objects like the Milky Way and nebulas and what not which are things people wanting to do astrophotography would want to take pics of. These images were just daylight level exposures of things that happen to not be on Earth but fairly close. To take a properly exposed photo of the moon or any planet in our solar system, you would use similar exposures (shutter speed, aperture, and ISO settings) as you would walking around on the street during the day, because they are all being lit by the same light source - the Sun. To get pictures of stars/galaxies you're going to need manual settings, a tripod, and looooong exposures. Also it's not so much the low light level photography production of the cameras but it is what makes it better in low light that's the cool feature - for me anyway. The Sony is VASTLY superior at high ISO settings due to it's much larger sensor. That's going to make it much better in anywhere a higher ISO would help like sports and wildlife photography where you might be using a long zoom (high ISO = high shutter speed = less blur) . It can also help in macro photography because you can stop down the lens more to get more depth of field. I had a Panasonic with a similar sensor size and feature set and I found it miserable to use because I had to stay at low ISO's to get good images and that caused a lot of problems.
Hi there, you are absolutely right that wasn't true astrophotography but many people are interested in photographing the moon and planets and I wanted to demonstrate that in the video to give an idea as to what to expect. Also the side by side comparison of the street at night in the video clearly shows the vast superiority of the Sony over the Nikon. Hands down the Sony is the winner in low light . Thanks for the comment and clarification
@@techtoremember8096 wow super quick response. 🙂 I edited my reply in an attempt to sound less like a know it all and overly critical. I worked in the industry for some time and have taught photography - it just struck me people who are spending this much might be more invested than someone wanting to point and shoot. I took a chance on a similar product to the Nikon and was soundly defeated by it's limitations lol. The bigger sensor of the Sony just gives you so much more flexibility in a variety of situations. I just thought anyone wanting to apply any serious photographic 'craft' would probably be much better served with the bigger sensor.
I actually sold the sx70 because I felt it wasn’t for me. I think the Sony would beat it in every area including Picture quality . focus , stabilization video and low light. The only thing the sx70 has is the longer lens
I mean Sony vs Nikon color science is like... do you want it green (sony) or yellow (nikon) I would prefer the Nikon colors tho, Sony looks so bad (unhealthy, zombie like with a green tint) on human skin without post processing.
would you recommend the P1000 for plane spotting (fighter jets)? sometimes the plane is far away so i think i'll need the zoom but im not really into taking videos more into photos so would you recommend me the P1000 for this purpose?
I have the RX10IV from 2018 and a friend of mine bought the Nikon (and sold 2 weeks after). Nikon is bullshit quality and Sony is the King. End of story !
Very good comparison of the cameras but difficult to make a choice. That's why we bought the Sony for my husband and the Nikon for me and we switch cameras every now and then. We are very happy and satisfied with both cameras.
Oh wow ! I like it can’t go wrong with that decision ! Thanks for the comment
hello so which image quality is good?
If you had to get rid of one, which would it be?
Im a proud owner of that crazy P-1000 and let me tell u, its the most fun I've ever had with a camera!
Great ! Glad you’re enjoying it !
Sold my rx10iv and purchased the P1000 AND an A7rii...because I mainly need the zoom for astrophotography and daytime wildlife etc... Now I have a compact, full frame A7rii for most everything and a specialty zoom camera for those occasional special needs. I am very happy with the P1000 for astrophotography.
The Nikon P1000 is tempting, if only it had a bigger sensor!
Yup, that’s a deal breaker.
@@notyourtypicalwatchreview2563For sure, Sony beats it.
I used to own the P900, I had a lot of fun with it but in the end I wanted better image quality so I sold it. Many years later, two days ago I bought the P1000 second hand, it's shockingly big, if it had a 1inch sensor it would look like a bazooka unless they find some optical solution for the next Nikon super zoom
@@griffith500tvrI was thinking about buying the P900… was it a good camera? I mean, could you get good quality results, or they were so bad?
@@pabloolivares7425 I hated my P900 in the end, yes in good light I took some good pictures but generally the image quality was pretty basic. Now with the P1000 I sense improvements all round, it has RAW, 4k video and 125 X optical, lots of room to play.
Good job. I think more emphasis on the Sony RX-1--lV phase detect auto focus vs. the Nikon contrast based is the absolute major important difference. For example, with the quick shot of the Chetaah you showed would have been the place to say that the contrast detect auto focus of the Nikon would be almost usless on a fast moving animal especially at 3000mm. Phase detect auto focus is the key reason the RX-10-lV is so expensive yet has been around since 2017.
Thank you. Great point ! I appreciate the comment
You are right .. at the time when it came out it boasted the quickest autofocus at .03 sec
This is the best review i’ve seen so far. Great job.
Thank you so much !
I don't think i would be able to resist buying the P1000 if it had that sony sensor and fstop. The bad low light performance really takes away from it.
Mate, awesome video. I've just read that the P1000 will be discontinued. As a result I have gone out and purchased the Nikon and your video has provided great insight into the cameras capability.
Thanks so much!
Great video, and thank you! I've been looking at both cameras and was unsure. But after watching this? You've helped me make up my mind!
I'm getting into nature, birds and wildlife photography and i think that the zoom of the Nikon is where I'm leaning to! Much appreciated and love the humor.
Hey, thanks for the comment! Can't argue with your decision, that for wildlife you get so much more reach with the Nikon. If you do wind up getting it, just so you know I have a number of tutorial videos on that camera (the P950 /and P1000 which share the same menus, controls etc) so those might help you navigate and understand the inner workings of the camera and all they are capable of doing. Best of luck!
I really enjoyed the review of the cameras. I found on my RX10M4 the camera has an app in which you can zoom the lens to 2400mm. I have tried this feature at night and got an excellent photo from it. I would say from comparing them both, they are both alike. My opinion is that if you use Nikon you always stick with Nikon. The same as for Sony users.
If you are a new user looking for a bridge camera I would say rent them both and you compare the results and go from there. But remember the RX10M4 has sold out more than the Panasonic bridge camera.
What is this app? Where can I find it?
great comparison thanks like but i think I will keep my P1000
I have the P1000 so I watched this video with interest. The only time I'd really care to have the P1000 vs the RX10 - (based on your video) - is when long reach really matters. And in such a case I'll say the P1000 has to be on a tripod to take sharp photos. So it would have been nice if you had compared ease-of-mounting on a tripod between the 2 cameras. The P1000 tripod-mount socket is on the body and the camera is very tilt-heavy when fully zoomed. Enough so that it is hard to position it on the intended object at full zoom. I like the P1000 more for video than for stills.
Good point you make there, yes. You’d need a really heavy duty tripod as well, not one of those flimsy ones on Amazon that might literally tip over
I've had similar trouble on quality tripods with the P1000
Team Nikon p1000💓
I have P1000 and very satisfied. I also have DxO PureRAW 2 which makes the (RAW) images even much better. Can sometimes find it a little clumsy, but I can put up with that.
I think will choose the Nikon P1000, have better cost benefit... Thanks for this amazing review!!
Awesome ! Thanks for your comment
I am a P1000 owner, it's really great comparison, simply explained.
I appreciate that ! Thanks for your comment
Is it a good upgrade from my nikon d3000?
It’s a very different kind of camera. The d3000 is a SLR with interchangeable lenses. Your D3000 will give you a better quality image but you won’t have the extreme zoom of the p1000. You just have to decide which is more important
Which is a better option for a medium level birding enthusiast?
I’d say the Nikon because of its very long zoom
Fair enough. I bought my Nikon P1000 for its zooming properties, if to chase quality images I'll use my Nikon D300. Different tools for different jobs, although I think one day they will create a perfect camera, the jack of all trades.
Right? 🤔
Let’s hope ! We are inching closer !
@@techtoremember8096 🤞
DAMN! The P1000 must have been a great tool to capture the recent total eclipse.
Check out Snap Chick’s review on the P1000, it is really very good. I think most people interested in a P1000 would already have another camera say APS-C or FF with a shorter FL lens on it. The big deal with the P1000 is about photographic reach, magnification and detail. Be aware that those amazing FLs need not take you to the horizon all the time. Getting a good crop optically on a bird without having to downsize your pixel count is really worth while. This P1000 camera is heavy, so if you are physically smaller, you might have to settle on the Sony but if you are normal size or “big” and you want one camera to rule them all, I don’t think you can go past the P1000, it is such a unique offering to the market. I love mine and I’m sure you would love yours as it is so much fun. Cheers
detail is very bad on the P1000. Sure enough much better than smartphones in the tele range, as expected, but not comparable to any APS-C or even MFT camera with a 400-600mm zoom or a 800mm prime lens.
I mean i get it, this camera serves a "special" purpose.... superzoom and max reach at all costs, but the costs/tradeoffs are also far from negliable and have to be considered:
- low light performance/"high" ISO performance. The P1000 literally looks ugly at ISO 400+ and i think it maxes out at ISO 800 or 1600... And i am not even happy with a max ISO of 32.000 since i had already a camera pushing to 51.000 with reasonable image quality.
- depth of field/wide aperture stuff. Doesnt matter how less you care about it... the P1000 definately has NOT ENOUGH aperture headroom to make subject pop out of the background (nor the low optical element count needed for it to really get nice)
- video performance especially regarding faster frame rates due to its age and small, yet 16MP sensor. The P1000 would have been so much better fitted with a low light capable 12MP sensor like this even 4k60 1:1 pixel to pixel readout would have been possible.
- weight/size... its a big, heavy monster. And no way of getting wider than 24mm or going for a small regular zoom lens, for example a 28-90mm equivalent.
The thing is, normally you have a camera for like 3-10 years depending on the advancement and prices of the cameras as 0815 person. You have to be happy with the P1000 in the long run especially since you cant replace the lens or upgrade the body. The main question is if you really NEED (!!!) this zoom that often to make sense in this "portable" package.
I for example was once interested in the P1000, but luckily even 1000$+ were too expensive for my taste and i waited a few years more and enjoyed my DSLR i paid 70$ 2nd hand (EOS 550D, fked up and abused). I only had a frustrating 15 year old 75-300mm IS USM lens (120-480mm effective) from canon these days but it was "good enough" to begin wildlife a bit.
Thankfully 2019/2020 changed a lot.... Sigma 150-600C lenses became very affordable 2nd hand (and 600mm F/6.3 is AMAZING for shallow DoF in wildlife, F/8 is tack sharp and still nice DoF!), Canon introduced their RF 600 & 800mm F11 lenses, the first modern, light, well stabilized AND affordable superteles. Also with 2019+, full frame became more or less affordable for the 0815 people (except for wildlife where full frame is still super expensive especially body, teleconverter and faster prime lenses wise)
"Getting a good crop optically on a bird without having to downsize your pixel count is really worth while"
Here im absolutely with you. But considering its 16MP packed into a super small smartphone sensor... the pixel count may fit, but the pixel size? I guess its at least better than Samsungs 200MP sensors in their phones.
I dont even like the 1,9 µm/pixel or so on my 32MP APS-C Canon R7, the pixels get very small (80MP full frame equivalent) so im more or less forced to stay below ISO 12800 in photo and ISO 25600 in video, tho ISO 51.000 is max in photo and ISO 32.000 is max in 8 bit video (my previous camera, a entry level full frame EOS RP worked nicely up to ISO 51.000 in video and ISO 25.600 in photo! But its just 1 stop difference and also the noise and dynamic range are the same more or less.
I for example really didnt like the 26MP full frame sensor anymore as i was into wildlife, slowmo video and cropped more, but it was crucial for my astrophotography which i cant do anymore on the crop camera. Not only because the pixel density of the R7 is too much for the telescope (750mm F4) but also because 1200mm is TIGHT for many deep sky objects where the 750mm with full frame fitted nearly perfectly for anything regular except the very big nebulas or andromeda galaxy.
Great comparison, this is what I wanted to make up my mind, bought a p1000. Thanks.
Thanks ! Glad it could help. Hope you enjoy your Nikon
Great review mate, I always enjoy watching your videos! I just really like the Sony, but that damn zoom on the Nikon... really evens it out.
Hi there ! Yes it’s a tough choice for sure! Thanks for your comment and support
Thank you. This review is well rounded and very helpful!
Thank you !
Owner of a broken Panasonic lumix FZ -80 and have been debating between renting these two for grizzly photography in katmai! Thanks for the helpful video!
Cool! Sounds like an exciting project !
I have the P1000 and it is stunning also for macro
Excellent video, upbeat as usual, I love your approach!
Hi ! Thank you and much appreciated !!
I’m a NIKON shooter but in this comparison the SONY wins hands down in the areas that matter - AF and image quality. Big price difference though. Thanks for sharing👍😄
I can’t disagree with you !
@@techtoremember8096 my son needed a compact hybrid camera with a longish zoom lens and I recommended he get the Sony. Now I’m beginning to think I should get one too😄
Haha You only live once !!
Wow, the P1000 captured a satellite moving across the moon at 9:49 .
Not bad for its small sensor!
P1000 is best camera for travellars and amateur photographers. Sony is good for professional video shoot for short films, etc.
I think the Sony is the better allrounder and that includes for travel. The Nikon is too heavy to make a nice travel-cam imo (
even the Sony is a little bit on the heavy side).
But of course, if you’re really tough, both might be fine.
For bird photography, nikon p1000, p950 and p900 are by far the best cameras
Always great review of this cameras
It's the first time I've seen your videos and I like it because for some reason it has a 2000s look
Oh ! In what way do you mean ?
*P1000 of course* If something is worth doing, it's worth overdoing.
9:50, is that a satellite whizzing by?
17:04, The RX10 can take Pic while recording as well, it even took them more than simple 4k.
See my ufo video !!
P1000 is prevailing in most aspects
Hey there!! Love your videos, very detailed with a touch of humour. My question… what camera would you suggest for an Alaskan cruise ? Also how would you protect a p1000 from water/moisture? Thanks for all your efforts in developing the videos!
Ted
Hi! Thanks so much for the compliment. Wow, an Alaskan Cruise, is great. Any camera really will produce great results.
The Nikon and Sony that I reviewed would be great as they have nice wide angles to view the glaciers and scenery then if you wanted to zoom up on something you could. as well. As protection, you can go on Amazon and simply type in "camera rain gear" and you will see a variety of inexpensive plastic sleeves which will simply drape over the camera and keep them dry. I definitely recommend that. because Alsaska is often rainy and you want to keep the cameras protected.
Have a great trip!
@@techtoremember8096 thanks for your response! Looking forward to seeing more videos!!
Thanks for the detailed review of these two cameras. I have a cannon zoom camera but thinking of getting a second camera , having looked up the price for the Sony , I'm gonna go for a DSLR and long lense 👍 thanks again
No problem ! But I think your option will cost you a bit more but you’ll have more flexibility Thanks for the comment
Of course, it is obvious that the sharpness of the Sony photographs is of much higher quality than the photographs of the Nikon P1000, and that is due to the size of the Sony sensor, much larger than that the Nikon. The advantage of the P1000 over the Sony is the 24mm-3000mm telephoto zoom lens. Each one with their own preferences. Good video.
Well said! Thanks
Hi I've seen your videos around about the nikon coolpix p1000 so you seem like you know your stuff. This camera is 5 years old now do you know if it's going to be upgraded to a better model with more mp and zoom? Thanks
Hi there. There hasn't been any recent rumors about a new model. It seems that camera manufacturers these days are not focusing on bridge superzoom cameras so much as their mirrorless models where they probably is more profit for them. That is not to say there may not be a replacement-its just that we don't know when. Realistically, I don't think a new model will have any more zoom. The 3000 mm is so much at this point it would seem hard to believe they could get any more zoom in without making the camera too big and heavy. Its possible there could be more MP but that could also be a negative too because its a small sensor camera and more MP means more light is needed. So,,, right now you have 2 solid choices- the P950 and the P1000 both very unique models and I don't think Nikon is in a hurry to come out with a new model since there really is little competition from anyone else. No other camera manufacturer has a bridge camera with a zoom like those 2. Thanks for the comment and best of luck!
@@techtoremember8096 Thank you sir for your amazing reply I will have to look into the p950 and p1000 to see the difference I was thinking about the p1000 for ASTRO photography night and planets but I'm guessing without a motorized mount that is going to difficult on the planets because the p1000 has 500x zoom 125x 4x digital.
Thank you again
In the twilight shots even thou the Nikon was not as sharp, I think it looked more realistic.
I have the Nikon P900 and it worked great with a solar filter during the 2017 solar eclipse. I also have the Sony RX 10 III. I have a Sony a7 IV and the a7c.
I ended up taking the RX10 III to Disney World and it was a perfect fit even for fireworks and night time videos.
I wish so much they would update to a more current model.
I would seriously consider selling off all my other gear and just use it as my travel camera.
Come on Sony, WTF.
Yes, they need to do something. We all getting impatient!
It´s time for a mark II of the P1000
P1000 or P950?
950 if you are carrying around for long periods -1000 if you must have the longest zoom possible and you are using a tripod
Very informative video, thank you! BTW I got Nikon 😊
Thank you ! Congrats on your Nikon
It is already his second video that I watch on Sony, as I am tired of going around with a backpack full of heavy optics and considering my age I would love a camera like this, great for my needs, but I am held back by the possibility of the release of the new model. Is there any definite information on this topic or is it just assumptions? Many thanks for his videos very well done and full of information.
Thank you ! Much appreciated I understand your concern about the new model but I wouldn’t wait. It might be a year maybe ? Or more no one knows. Not many additional rumors so I suspect it’s not comlng soon so if you need something now get the mark 4!
In my opinion I don't think Sony will be making a new RX10 model. Much like Fujifilm did, (They used to make some nice superzooms but now make none) I think Sony will move away from superzooms and concentrate on making money on their interchangeable lens cameras.
One very big issue effecting image quality when fully zoomed, isn't really the camera but the atmosphere.
You get mirages and all kinds of refraction that will naturally blur your image, no matter how good the lens.
Getting as close to your subject is always the best thing to do where possible.
Very good point
And this is exactly why a P950 is "better" than the P1000. 2000mm is MORE THAN ENOUGH. I encountered heat haze and atmospheric issues already at effective 800mm with a 26MP camera and subjects at for example 30 meters in the greenery. Beyond 1000mm is for most things useless.
Also, as much i enjoyed and still enjoy my 800mm prime lens (1280mm on APS-C...), the best wildlife shot i ever made was at effective 640mm (so 400mm on a Sigma 150-600C). And if i would have had enough time i would have even taken some zoomed out habitat shots with the subject smaller in the frame so less than 640mm needed. I sat down for a while near a bush and luckily some songbirds landed at this bush like 2 meters away from me. I had only like 2 seconds to react and shoot as many photos as possible, turned out only one of like 20 shots was the good shot but thats ok to have at least one very good. In that situation even my setup i had years ago (old, cheap APS-C DSLR + 20 year old 75-300mm lens) could have worked probably.
1000mm+ are USELESS when your subject is too far away in wildlife and if you find yourself in a situation with a long prime lens you maybe found it often the issue your frame is much too tight if the animals come closer thats why i have a Sigma 150-600 6.3 beside the long range RF 800 F11 lens.
I have both of them.
Hi, May I ask if Nikon P1000 or Sony RX100 VII better for a concert? indoor low-light concert, position in the middle of crowd.
The Sony is much better in low light and autofocus So I would say the Sony
@@techtoremember8096 Thank you for the swift reply dear Sir:)) May I also ask, if I am sitting beyond the middle-point, which cam is better? I still don't have much concept about 200mm zoom range.
That's the Best review.... Awesome job....this is the kind of video I need...
Liked and subscribed..
Well ? Does nikon 1000 gets it's firmware updates?
Hi ! Thanks so much for the compliment. Nikon is usually pretty good on updates. I haven’t checked on the P1000 updates jn a while but Nikon is a company that does regularly update its cameras
@@techtoremember8096 Cool... Thank you...
Please make a video on P1000 tricks ...it would be great to know from your experienced knowledge
I was thinking of that. I am also working on a p950 video too in case you were interested. Thanks for your support !
@@techtoremember8096 ❤️ Longing it see what the p1000 can do....
Helpful video! There arent much useful superzoom comparision like yours, but you missed the whole point of superzoom. You need to compare what details can be made out in maxed zoom, maxed image quality setting, fully stabilized, showing a cropped portion of the photos in low and good lighting. This is to see their max possible output of what they are intended for
Hey, thanks for the comment! The P1000's zoom is clearly superior to the RX10's and for those where pure zoom is what's paramount, they are going to opt for the Nikon. What I wanted to get across in this video are the other differences in the cameras, picture quality, low light, autofocus, stabilization etc so folks could get an idea which camera was better suited for them overall. Good idea at some point however to do an in-depth analysis of zoom quality and detail but I'd save that for 2 cameras that have much more of a similar focal length so its a fair comparison.
@@techtoremember8096 what i want to see is a controlled indoors lighting cropped details test of tiny subjects- rx10 iv at max zoom, p950 at 1240mm, and a fullframe cam at 220mm. Same aperture, low and good lighting
@@andacq Why a full frame camera at 220mm? Or do you mean 2200mm? Thats insane :D
But 2000mm+ are affordable nowadays... i have the EOS R7 (32MP APS-C) and a RF 800 F11, paid for both about 1800€ (RF 800 2nd hand, R7 in Moldavia a lot cheaper)
I can zoom into the moon even more than frame filling with enhanced digital stabiliser in 4k60 crop (about 2200mm), frame filling without digital stabiliser mode just 4k60 crop and little bit wide image without crop (1280mm).
Digital stabilised 4k30 fine (7k downsampled) should give for example about 1600mm with tack sharp 4k30 (but rolling shutter -.-)
@@andacq And trust me.... max reach is not something you really need or even want even if you think you want it. At least in long term 1000mm+ doesnt make sense to carry all the time with a "small" bridge camera.
Same for the S23U users being proud at the moon shots... you do that how often to really make sense? I would rather have a wide aperture 5x camera with big sensor for nice portraits than a superzoom in a phone.
I've been holding out for an RX10 V. I'm sure the updates will be worth it given how long it's been
But when coming out? This is the biggest question!! And the price also!?
Hopefully we find out soon !
I don't think they are going to make a mkV version. I think the MkIV was too good and was eating into their interchangeable lens camera sales, especially the lower end models.
Hi. You may be right but I sure hope not !!
@@billr6983 If they come out with a touch screen and side articulating screen, I'd for sure get it over an interchangeable lens system.
You are naturally funny so thumbs up for a good video although the part about the p1000 being darker was confusing. Why were you not matching exposure to see how they compared manually?
Also not sure about your monitor but images and specially 4k video is clearly more detailed on the Sony.
Regards
Hi! Thank you for the comment To answer your question about the exposure, I just wanted to keep it simple and compare how the cameras handled the scenes without any manual overrides. My thinking is many , if not most users will leave the exposing to the camera, especially on a bridge type camera. But you make a great point that you can always override and brighten the image if you so desire
Regards !
@@techtoremember8096 keep it up :)
Hello I just subscribed to your channel, I love the comparison you made here, it's really detailed and very informative, however my question is can the P1000 be connected to a PC screen and film the moon live to be able to visualize it in a big way? thanks and greetings
Hi there ! Yes you can connect to a monitor via HDMI out and clean HDMI out too so you won’t see the display info if you don’t want to on screen- But it’s only 1080p output not 4k Thanks for subscribing and welcome aboard !
thanks
I've owned both, and still own RX10 IV. Literally there is no comparison between both. Nikon is all about reach but not IQ. Sony gives the best image details etc. Nikon images are unusable except for the fact I can get closer but end up with worse image on screen
please do comparison of canon powershot sx70hx ,65x zoom ,and this 2 camera !?
I think i need both cameras😏
Can’t go wrong !!
I have the P1000, most images are just not sharp across the focal length, but especially at high zoom. My Sony RX100 VII is sharper and better in all but the focal length. I assume RX10 IV is the same as RX100 VII only with a better lens, and if so, it's hands down RX10 IV.
From my own testing, yes the RX10IV is a bit sharper than the RX100VII. I think the P1000 can produce reasonable sharp images under the right conditions but it is a small sensor and definitely has limitations that you must put up with if you want that extreme zoom.
For the bokeh shots, were you shooting in Automatic mode, or Aperture Mode, or what?
Hi the shots were all in program auto mode
😂 funny!!and the best review out there. Thanks for this 👍
Laughing not crying I hope !
Aw I appreciate it. Thank you !!
9:56 What is the moving dark spot visible on the moon?
Good catch !! I made a whole video about that Check it out on my channel Called Did my p1000 spot a ufo !
The Sony a7R4 has a 61 megapixel full frame sensor. The P1000 has 16 megapixels.
As far as I can see, you can crop an image taken with Sony's a7R4 to a quarter of the original image and then obtain the same resolution as with the P1000 = 16 megapixels, which in that case would mean that a correct comparison between an image taken with the P1000 and 3000mm and sony with 2X teleconverter and 600mm = 1200mm corresponds to an image of 4 x 1200= 4800mm if you use Sony and crop to the same 16 megapixel resolution. Am I right or wrong? On the other hand, if the largest aperture that the P1000 has in the 3000mm = 8 mode, Sony's zoom 200-600mm with teleconverter cannot measure up to this, since the Sony zoom is at aperture 6.3 at 600mm and with the 2x converter loses a step to aperture 11 ? I think it will be. How do other properties such as dynamic range and other important features of the P1000's tiny sensor compare to Sony's full frame, even if you only use a quarter of it when you crop the image ???
Nowadays, if I really need a huge range, I am taking my smartphone, the S23 Ultra.😁
Nice video! I found the stabilization on the Sony was worse and I actually wouldn't be satisfied with the shaky footage.
Yeah that’s the one area that needs to be improved ! Thanks for your comment !
Top job! Thanks!👍
I would appreciate information about the error that my nikon coolpik P1000 camera gives me.
The error is the following:
THE CAMERA WILL SHUT OFF TO PREVENT IT FROM OVERHEATING.u It turns off and you can't do anything anymore.
Thank you
Jose Antonio
Question: For outdoor wildlife photos that you want to make into prints of at least 12" which camera would you suggest?
The Sony has a larger sensor so far that reason I would have to recommend to you the Sony enabling you to enlarge
I've had both cameras and if you don't need some ridiculous zoom, get the Sony. There's no comparison, Sony RX10 is way better for wildlife photography.
9:58 you didn't even noticed ISS you captured :)
bottom-right a bit from center
I did yes ! I made a whole other video in this
i use RX IV telescope my neighbour to get some excited scene during movement restriction time due to Covid19 ...at least get back some value of the purchase😎
🤣
Do you think with ideal conditions the rx-10m4 can produce prograde IQ photos ?
Hi I’m not too familiar with prograde -I can just say that if you see my video comparing it to the top of the line Sony A1 - a $6500 full frame camera , it’s surprising how close they look - without pixel peeping of course
Is the boot up time same for both or is the Sony bit slower?
Both are pretty quick I’d say about the same
So which one be a better camera for birding?
If you really want that long zoom for birding nothing beats the Nikon !
Which would you recommend for whale watching? Thanks
I think either camera would be fine. If you are watching from a very far distance I would say the P1000 has the edge due to its longer zoom. And if you are on a shaky boat, the P1000 also has the edge in terms of stabilization.
Hi, I really appreciate this comparison BUT if you had to choose a camera to capture UFO which one would you pick and why? (Serious question )
Interesting question I would say the Nikon because you really need that extra reach in this case - your specific concern requires the longest possible zoom ! and I’d say the Nikon is the best bet
@@techtoremember8096 thank you for the reply. Ive been binge watching all your super zoom camera videos and I think I might go for the p950 due to its smaller body.
One thing I have found out when comparing the p1000 vs p950 is that it seem as if the p1000 if better in lower light. do you have any input on that ?
Haha ok great ! Binge watching is good The 950 is a great choice due to its better weight and size but still a great zoom ! Thanks a lot
None of both either.
A more or less sharp, nearly 180° camera will do the job recording 24/7 much better than any barely low light capable P1000
@@harrison00xXx strange you would say that considering most people who plane watch as a hobby highly recommend these systems. UAPs seem to give off light.
P1000🔥
Great video - Thanks
Much appreciated !
For bird photography which camera is better? Please advise.
I think you may want to use the longer reach of the P1000 to get in really tight !
I have RX10-IV, and I would advise against it if your reason for buying is solely for bird photography. Reasons why I said so:
- P950/P1000 lens have more range than RX10-IV at lower price. You might want to look into that (I haven't had chance to use p950/p1000, but more often than not I wish I had that kind of zoom capability when birding).
- RX10-IV is not that much of an advantage (in term of bird photography) given the price. The bokeh is not that nice at full zoom, and in low light the autofocus does hunt and the noise still noticeable. The image quality does suffer when you crop the photo (highly likely to occur if you are shooting birds photo). The image stabilizer at max zoom is also not that good (my olympus EM1-2 works better at similar focal length than this camera). Much like other point and shoots, it is not so forgiving and you need to find a perfect condition to capture good photos.
- At that price point, I preferred a second-hand apsc camera with decent second-hand telephoto lens which may give similar or even more range and much more forgiving than RX10-IV.
Nevertheless, RX10-IV is still usable. The autofocus is quick and snappy, and it is more versatile (one camera for all genre of photography). Bottom line, buy RX10-IV if:
- you are going to use the camera as an all-rounder - landscape, night photo, potrait, birding etc, especially when you want to travel light without needing to bring other cameras or lenses.
- If you got a heavily discounted RX10-IV.
Ah the Witches of Eastwick, an underrated movie from the ...80's?
Yes sir. 1987!
Hey could reply to this comment and say which city you took the moon shot 9:55 in? Thanks :)
New York City !!
Actually, the only area that the P1000 excels is the reach. Sony has twice the low light sensitivity and has a 1 inch sensor. The Nikon P1000 just has a 1/2’3 size sensor, almost the same size as a cellphone so the photos will suck, especially if you want to crop in.
maybe test with stativ???
If I already own P1000, should I get the RX10 IV? Will it be a redundant? Would it be best if I get a APS-C camera instead?
I woudn't say its redundant. The Sony is more practical to carry around and the picture quality is a bit better. Personally, I have both. When you just need an extreme zoom for wildlife or maybe astrophotography, the P1000 is there for you, but for more everyday shooting I'd say the Mark 4 is the better choice
I would recommend "something else" than another bridge camera. I would suggest looking into modern mirrorless systems, maybe the Sony A6700, soon coming A7C II (that might be a game changer and full frame so pretty nice...), one of canons (R7, R8, R10,...) or Nikon (Z6 II, Z8,...) has something which fits your needs.
Nikon finally also stepped into the 150-600/200-600 game with a 180-600 and its really nice and cheaper than canons "slow" 100-500L lens.
On a crop camera you get with any 500-600mm zoom lens good enough reach, especially if it has any other crop mode as my R7 (1,6x APS-C + 1,77x 4k60 crop + 1,4x enhanced digital IS = 4x crop, nearly on P1000/P950 level of sensor size)
Also, when you guys say "astrophotography", are you for real? I mean i get it.... moon and a few planets are also astrophotography.... but i understand under astrophotography a stacked long time exposure (1-10 hours) of a very dark nebula invisible to the naked eye with sub exposure times of like 2-8 minutes, at best even with a narrowband Ha, H2 and O3 filter combined. And anything untracked/unguided except for basic milky way photography i dont even mind as "astrophotography", sadly anything than moon and planets are only doable with tracking at least, guiding is recommended heavily as well to enjoy proper long exposure times of at least 2 minutes per exposure. Also, at the point you want to go beyond the moon and planets.... a proper telescope, and if its just a cheap 750mm F4 newton on an older, motorized GoTo mount, the Skywatcher EQ3-2 is uncomparable to even a fast tele lens.
Can the P1000 even capture the orion nebula without tracking?
@harrison00xXx Hi, thanks for the feedback.
I'm fond of the A6700, but that's not cheap. Need not to say A7C and etc. I am eyeing on the A6400 though, but it has no IBIS and bad rolling shutter. Hence no good for videography.
R10 is in my bucket list as well - Don't have robust lens variety as Sony though.
Another concern when go into mirrorless is the need of upgrading to better lens afterward (additional cost). Which P&S cam need not to. Not sure upon getting the basic kit lens, how good the image quality could be.
I am kinda in a tight budget phography mode... hehe
@@jamesykhong I can absolutely understand your position you are coming from.
I had the luck that i grew up over 10 years with canon DSLRs and purchased some good glass over many years, so since EF glass works just fine on RF cameras the decision was not that hard for me with the EOS RP first and now the EOS R7.
Also adapting EF glass is much better than you might think, i ever prefer EF over RF as long it doesnt have to be the smallest formfactor or its anyways bigger zoom lenses.
Im also on a tight budget, thats why i have "only" a APS-C canon and "only" for example a Sigma 150-600mm lens and a RF 800 F11 on the longer end.
R10 has btw also horrible rolling shutter, R7 only slightly better but it has IBIS and a better sensor at least as well more features and faster in general.
I would really avoid the R10. The R7 and R8 are the best value for money on canon, R6 II if you have deeper pockets tho is also very nice but then you dont have the "teleconverter" ala APS-C sensor or the charme of smaller lenses fitted for APS-C.
@@jamesykhong What could be a very interesting thing, but its already older and a dying mount... EF-M, so EOS-M cameras. M6 II, M50 etc are also awesome, you have very nice lenses for the EF-M system including a lot of really good 3rd party lenses and the prices are pretty low.
On a tight budget i ALWAYS bought 2nd hand, first only lenses, but sometimes also bodies. For example long ago a EOS 550D for 70€, absolutely fked up but much cheaper than the average one in "good" condition for like 200-350€ and its main purpose of shooting photos was still working just fine. With this 70€ invest i worked around my too old 400D for over 3 years until i finally found an affordable full frame camera, the EOS RP.
What about a 2nd hand EOS 90D and EF glass, later an upgrade to the EOS R camera you want in the future?
Luckily we have nowadays a lot of options, and as much quirks and problems the R7 also has, im pretty happy with it. Best compromise out of performance for my needs and price considering my budget i found.
9:55 what is that small dot, flying over the moon??😱
Someone else asked about this but I don’t see it ! Can you tell me what part of the moon you see it on ??
@@techtoremember8096 if you look carefully 1.5 inch above from the big circuller spot from the bottom of the moon, there is a really small dot flying over from left to right. and you can follow it on moving to the right corner and vanishes in the next shot 10:01 .
can you see it now?
Wow ! Yes I can ! Thank you for pointing it out. I will tell you I don’t know what it is. My first thought was maybe a little dirt on the lens but that isn’t it. I actually found the original clip and there is actually another mark that is very fleeting that comes across the moon much quicker which is maybe a bird. As for the dot you saw, a bird it would seem too far away to make sense. It clearly is very far away as it takes quite a while to go across the moon -I think I may post another video and zoom up on this and come up with theories. Very cool ! Thanks for pointing this out
@@techtoremember8096 I don't think it is a bird even if it looks like, it should be magnified too at that zoom lvl or may be a bird flying waay up in the space between Earth and the Moon ?
Hey I’m thinking it’s not a bird. You can see the other objects much closer are birds but this one is too far away
Not to be too nit picky but while technically taking pics of the Jupiter and the Moon is astrophotography it's not a good example of taking pics of deeper space objects like the Milky Way and nebulas and what not which are things people wanting to do astrophotography would want to take pics of. These images were just daylight level exposures of things that happen to not be on Earth but fairly close. To take a properly exposed photo of the moon or any planet in our solar system, you would use similar exposures (shutter speed, aperture, and ISO settings) as you would walking around on the street during the day, because they are all being lit by the same light source - the Sun. To get pictures of stars/galaxies you're going to need manual settings, a tripod, and looooong exposures. Also it's not so much the low light level photography production of the cameras but it is what makes it better in low light that's the cool feature - for me anyway. The Sony is VASTLY superior at high ISO settings due to it's much larger sensor. That's going to make it much better in anywhere a higher ISO would help like sports and wildlife photography where you might be using a long zoom (high ISO = high shutter speed = less blur) . It can also help in macro photography because you can stop down the lens more to get more depth of field. I had a Panasonic with a similar sensor size and feature set and I found it miserable to use because I had to stay at low ISO's to get good images and that caused a lot of problems.
Hi there, you are absolutely right that wasn't true astrophotography but many people are interested in photographing the moon and planets and I wanted to demonstrate that in the video to give an idea as to what to expect. Also the side by side comparison of the street at night in the video clearly shows the vast superiority of the Sony over the Nikon. Hands down the Sony is the winner in low light . Thanks for the comment and clarification
@@techtoremember8096 wow super quick response. 🙂 I edited my reply in an attempt to sound less like a know it all and overly critical. I worked in the industry for some time and have taught photography - it just struck me people who are spending this much might be more invested than someone wanting to point and shoot. I took a chance on a similar product to the Nikon and was soundly defeated by it's limitations lol. The bigger sensor of the Sony just gives you so much more flexibility in a variety of situations. I just thought anyone wanting to apply any serious photographic 'craft' would probably be much better served with the bigger sensor.
Great work
Thank you !
Can You Make Sony rx10 Mark 4 Vs Sybershot SX70?
I actually sold the sx70 because I felt it wasn’t for me. I think the Sony would beat it in every area including Picture quality . focus , stabilization video and low light. The only thing the sx70 has is the longer lens
thankyou for this video
My pleasure !
Sony is so much better. I can't wait for RX10 V. Nikons have this weird yellow tinge in all of their cameras and images.
I mean Sony vs Nikon color science is like... do you want it green (sony) or yellow (nikon)
I would prefer the Nikon colors tho, Sony looks so bad (unhealthy, zombie like with a green tint) on human skin without post processing.
Makineyi aldım kullanmayı bilmiyorum
I got all three picture comparisons wrong. In broad daylight Nikon shots seem better.
Hi. They are close. But Nikon is surprisingly good
1:40 I've seen enough adult movies to see where's this gonna end...
What I actually need with superzooms is not what these cameras offer. 😂
I’d always go for reach. Sorry.
Sony is by far the better camera all round
would you recommend the P1000 for plane spotting (fighter jets)? sometimes the plane is far away so i think i'll need the zoom but im not really into taking videos more into photos so would you recommend me the P1000 for this purpose?
It is great for that purpose ! Lots of people using this camera for plane spotting
ok thank you! @@techtoremember8096
You have a beautiful wife 😅
have a nice day all of you
I have the RX10IV from 2018 and a friend of mine bought the Nikon (and sold 2 weeks after). Nikon is bullshit quality and Sony is the King. End of story !
Awesome review ! I subscribed as i really enjoyed waching your great video and the women in it is superbly beautiful wow! Your great thx.🎉
Thanks so much for your comment. Welcome aboard!
How did she know all that about me
المفروض سوني تتحد مع نيكون وبعدها انا متأكد من أن الشركتين ستكونان في شركة موحدة الأفضل في العالم على الإطلاق .
Aww, be kind to yourself, my man. This is unfair: 11:27
All in good fun !
👍👍👍❤
BEAUTIFULE GIRL ♥