|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.user47513   | sent on May 09, 2020 Pros: It is designed specifically for photography in the distance. Single zoom for videos as well. Valid general features. It should be used as a super telephoto from 500mm up, so the photos come out really nice, sharp and quite clean. Cons: It is not the right machine for those who want to start and learn to photograph, there are others for this purpose. Not suitable for specialized uses, serious photo hunting, and photography with little light. Obviously the sensor that shows all the limits in landscape and night photography and with little light. Opinion: My last bridge, having had over the years various canon sx 40/50, panasonic fz, Nikon p900. This is superior to all the others and the jump from the p900 is also remarkable. For example you can shoot in raw and the differences in the final result are appreciated... Then it has a much nicer and larger scope, it has a ring for manual focus and standard lampshade. But above all the 3000mm makes the difference. The jpeg are practically ready, very loaded, maybe too much, as for the P900. It's a type of camera that's on many boxes. Strangely, however, the discussions about her make thousands and thousands of visits and everyone talks about it. One because there will be. And in fact, if you use it for the purpose of having fun, to carry it around on excursions (it's big and heavy, but it's not that big and heavier than the others at the end, when compared to a reflex or mirrorless kit of 4/5/10kg), if you use it for photo hunting during trekking or to shoot animals even from prohibitive distances, and if you use it to shoot scenes very far away, it's a pure enjoyment. Having also a more serious set, I was able to test it optically on tripods alongside various telephotos. Over the long distance (30,50,100meters or even buildings several kilometers away) the 100-400 to 400mm can not compete with the p1000. With 150-600 and if you photograph a stationary or slow-moving subject with good light (not necessarily great light) the differences are not incredible... In fact, in some conditions the p1000 sells the skin dearly. ( e.g. Moon, wild animals or distant birds, airplanes, details of landscapes such as monuments in the distance...) Sometimes I found myself with photos that I could not distinguish if I had made them with p1000 or sigma 150-600. If we take into account then that some 150-600 lose at maximum focal point, which often have front back focus problems, which weigh even up to 3kg that become 4 with the body and 5.6..10. With the rest of the kit... so p1000 can become a very good solution. Not everyone has the time to take a reflex kit and carry all that weight, many want to enjoy photography as fun or as something extra in travel, trekking, hiking... The p1000 is suitable for this. It is certainly not suitable for those who practice serious landscape photography, or night. Moon and planets aside, it is unusable to photograph starry skies and nocturnal landscapes. It's much more to appreciate for daytime videos, taking advantage of the crazy 24-3000 zoom and excellent stabilization. It can be used freehand at 3000mm up to 1/100, even 1/80. But I recommend whenever you can to take on tripods to make the most of the optical quality, besides the "grain" in photos does not disturb at all, the photos are clean, obviously low iso. If you want to start photographing animals and things very far away, as it was for me at the beginning over 15 years ago, this machine is a bomb, has a firepower significantly higher than a canon sx70 or a Panasonic fz300, and can even compete with the 150-600. But if you want to do serious photo hunting then all the limits emerge. In addition to the optical quality come into play many other aspects such as the still slow electronic zoom, and the very limited iso seal (at 400 we are already at the limit) and a burst and operational speed not comparable to specialist cameras... |
  | sent on April 30, 2020 Pros: Hallucinatory fun; dizzying zoom; stabilizer; functionality; 4k; camera born for the Moon. Cons: Noise also iso 100; quality of image (by force of things); resistance on easel to maximum extension Opinion: The P1000 has a scary stabilizer. Consider that, usually, even the soul trembles beyond 300/400 mm. Until now, the most powerful stabilizer ever tested was mounted on the Tamron 70-300 VC USD. The corresponding Canon 70-300 IS II USM also goes strong, but on 3,000 mm the easel is not enough even if there is a slight breeze. For me, the P1000 stabilizer is promoted. As for the quality of the image, with a sensor of 2/3 what do you want, the Moon? Well, in fact it's made especially for the Moon ? Who's used to sensors and reflex glasses, can't think of loving the image quality produced by such a tiny sensor. But compromises are compromised. Also in reference to the P1000, I would recommend it to those who love to observe animals in their daily lives without the possibility of disturbing them, to those who like to observe the Moon and the Sun (with special darkening filter) and to those who want to dabble to observe Jupiter, Saturn, Antares and beautiful company. In the future, I reserve the right to try the superzoom 24-600 with 1 inch sensor, the quality definitely rises, even with a couple of hundred more iso than the P1000 that must, categorically, remain anchored to the 100. |
 | sent on March 29, 2020 Pros: Telescope focal length, jpeg quality, very effective VR, orientable display, grip Cons: needs a great tripods because of the weight, some commands too "consumer", mandatory micrometric head in astrophoto Opinion: He does what he promises and he does it well. If you want to get closer to the world of naturalism is a great school to learn how to handle long focals and weights, if you are already used to reflex I recommend a D7500 and a tamron 150-600; you will achieve a much higher quality. Different speech for moon and sun astrophoto in that the quality is equal if not higher than the reflex-telescope configuration (up to 5") with huge benefits for the management of focus and weights (P1000 with tripods about 2.5kg, 5" telescope with frame about 15kg) In naturalistic the astronomical focal allows you to observe at a good distance with good quality but if it is your only purpose then the configuration d7500-150-600 is to be preferred and the sacrifice in economic terms will be well rewarded (proven buy a P900 that costs half and does the same thing. The first time you hold it in your hand and zoom in you'll be grounded: it's a bridge but it's huge! some commands can be improved. you have to keep the iso below 400. allows you to shoot in RAW but the jpeg is already very correct in most photos. A micrometric head and astrophoto remote shot are essential. Ultimately I use it almost exclusively for photos of the moon and the sun (with special filter) at the focal of 2200/2400mm in place of the d800-telescope and I have gained in everything: weights, clutter and final quality. |
 | sent on March 10, 2020 Pros: The focal length; only real pro, but it is worth gold. Cons: Bad autofocus, irremediable noise even at LOW ISO, great slow buffer, flatness of images, slow zooming, very narrow bokeh possibilities. Opinion: Despite the many cons, I still find it an admirable machine, especially for birdwatchers. At ISO reasonably low, it also returns images of a quality more than discreet. In two words better (but VERY better!), and for mathematical reasons, a P1000 used with criterion, rather than a D850 (divine machine, be clear, and that in turn I use) with ISO constantly at one million and in priority of the times; especially if it demeans to the sound of crop... |
 | sent on February 16, 2020 Pros: It does what it promises Cons: He does what he promises. Opinion: A year of fun and I want to continue like this. A machine that I use for hiking and allows me to grasp all kinds of details. For those who have not known how to appreciate I say only that you have wrong purchase. For me a great camera also because I chose it to do what it was created for. I hope I was helpful and chuaro. |
 | sent on December 27, 2019 Pros: 0servation of the behavior of animals and birds, without disturbing them. Cons: Aesthetically the shape of this camera... Opinion: I've been using this p1000 for almost a year, I take it with me mainly when I go to the mountains on long walks. When I shoot, I always use a support point and a wire remote control. Of course in good light you bring home beautiful shots, his work does it if you put it in a position to do it. When I do not have optimal light I just observe, given its focal length..... Of course, if one wants exclusively image quality does not buy this, but buys a ff!!! In practice I share the opinion of Mr. Valerio Bollin.... |
 | sent on November 19, 2019 Pros: Depends on what you want to do Cons: Depends on what you want to do Opinion: For the detractors of this machine, for those who say that it sstacks the photos, for those who have valuable SLRand and thought that this machine approached them in quality.... but what did you take to do it? For the purposes for which it was built is a beautiful machine, there is not only quality in photography but also fun. Documenting the life of animals at a safe distance, where they do not realize that you are there is priceless. |
 | sent on July 21, 2019 Pros: Long focal. End of the positives. Cons: Over 200-400 iso indecent quality. Big weight. It can only be used with a lot of light. Slow focus. Ridiculous battery life. Shamefully slow sequence. Opinion: I bought this camera, already having a P 900, because I would need an all-rounder, but I was wrong resoundingly . The file quality is acceptable only to 100 iso, as the P 900, onward, becomes increasingly poor. A camera whose price is very high and totally absurd, should cost much less than half, but no more. |
 | sent on June 02, 2019 Pros: The opportunity to see through a 3000 and beyond Cons: So much hard stuff to list Opinion: I have the machine in question for about 5 months, very first impression: a toy, a very nice toy. To be honest you have to make a premise: what do you want to do with this machine? The goals, as we all know are many in the field of photography, then knowing what you intend to do for your profession, passion, hobby as a result you find out if this equipment is for us. We want to spy on the animals in freedom, see the moon in a palm of nose; Without claiming to squeeze the photos to make masterpieces? Well the toy does it and it does it well, the price is his. You have fun if you go down to some compromises... I repeat it all depends on what you want to pull out. The weight a no brainer, if you bring machines in hand with battery grip without glass weigh more, then you can easily get used to the weight. You don't have to pretend amazing things. You bring shots at home and let's not forget footage in 4K respectable. Of course I wouldn't do a wedding and miss a safari. A trip maybe you, but if I have to choose to leave the camera at home with two/three glasses and bring me only this... I still opt for the first one. The street impossible, the macro is better... A walk in the mountains chasing... All right. Let's say you hold a telescope in your hand... At a reasonable price... For social or the web is enough, does not go further though... I still am and I'm having fun, I think it's a different thing from what I call photography... Greetings to all. |
 | sent on May 19, 2019 Pros: Maybe the macro and a 3000mm that comes in and goes everywhere (but with so many reserves) Cons: In the presence of low light images disturbed by punctiform noise Opinion: It could be good for newbies who are not able to read quality and results... Spappolated images, noise even at 100 iso... Needs a thug and even with this you feel the micro moved. If you shoot at 3000mm you also put the atmosphere and it seems that from the bottom up there are air vortices. Bought yesterday because I wanted to touch some promises and have some fun... But I found myself faced with the devastation of the images... Almost or worse than a compattina... It seems appropriate to note that if you use the tripod and opti for the focal length from 2000mm to 3000mm you will have to use the self-timer of 10 "so that the vibrations get more.. So forget to be able to shoot freehand because, given the minimum aperture at F8 to 3000mm, the shutter speeds will always be tight and the blur or Microshake will be devastating. Unfortunately, looking at the PC and enlarging the image you will find the presence of annoying noise and some mixed colors that go to deteriorate the quality of the image. I realize that I am accustomed to vastly different qualities (D850-D810 other planets) but I can not convince myself and accept that sensors of this size do not lead anywhere.. This is the fourth rip-off, but now that's enough... |
 | sent on December 30, 2018 Pros: Okay like first camera Cons: All Opinion: Do not get pulled with the throat of the Super Sonic Zoom! bashes the photos.... 3,000 mm serves the tripod and the ISO goes up and the squished is certain even when there is full light. Proven in more ' outputs, only decent when there is full light and on short focal! Subjects like a moving heron doesn't hook him up. Af on moving subjects... bad. Excessive cost..... 1,100 euro..... Much better a SONY RX and costs less I say mine didn't like it at all. Experience to forget. |
 | sent on November 30, 2018 Pros: Awesome telephoto-image quality-price Cons: Weight and footprint, but on the other hand to have such a luminous focal must be so Opinion: I have it for a few days so these are my first sensations. To the face of experts who try to deify such a phenomenon I have to say that this machine I was so surprised that I wondered if it was still worth keeping all that expensive photographic material that are in possession.... Try to believe. I laugh when I hear you say that you are bashes photos.... But before you talk have you looked at the published photos? Excellent grip that allows to keep the chamber firmly; The price? It's worth them all. |
 | sent on November 21, 2018 Pros: Certainly the zoom is the ace in the sleeve of this camera; The electronic viewfinder and the rear screen are remarkable. Cons: With little light at high magnifications, disturbances appear on the photos, deriving from the noise produced by the small sensor. Opinion: In the photo I sent on November 13, 2018 having as Object The moon, I ventured even focal over the 4000mm. (Of course in digital) and in my opinion the quality of the image is still discrete; I consider this camera a small telescope, which in optimal conditions, can give great satisfaction. I think the price is adequate. |
  | sent on November 21, 2018 Pros: An excellent alternative to those who cannot afford powerful and costly telephoto lenses. The quality of the photos if you do not use the digital is perfect. Cons: With the sky covered there are limits, even if it all depends on the distance. Opinion: What about: I bought it after a careful reflection since I need it for my observations from Birdwatcher. The optical zoom is great but also the digital is defending well. The videos are something indescribable. The use of the tripod is advisable. I found it great also for photos on the fly of birds. The macro is awesome. The weight is worth all the quality of the shots. For the birdwatchers the Nikon P1000 is outstanding both for the quality of the photos and for the NON-disturbance to the FAUNA. The purchase value of this Nikon P1000 is correct. The Nikon has proven itself to the height of its name. |
| sent on November 05, 2018 Pros: "Smart" camera very entertaining and in some ways "alternative" with a telescope focal! Very good lens quality (given the focal range) and good also the overall quality of the camera; Optimum stabilization of up to 1,500-2,000 mm of focal length; Cons: Limitations (with low light) related to small sensor; WIFI camera control/Very limited features via Snapbridge App; Not present functions style 4k photo/post Focus/etc Opinion: |
 | sent on October 23, 2018 Pros: Weight Zoom amplitude; Extensive system of stage and post-productive filters of good yield Cons: 16mni sensor, minimum f8 diaphragm, difficulty stabilizing it due to the absence of a screw mount on the barrel, less good pictures on the focal court (24-130), new RAW file owner not yet accepted by all post-production programs (Lightroom is Adequate only last week-15/10/2018) Opinion: The P1000 is not bad, indeed! Rating 9 is evidently optimized for the mid-high focal lengths (from 300 mm up) where it gives the best of itself, especially in good light conditions, even compared to what it costs and how much they cost fixed optics of similar focal length. At the shorter focal lengths the image decays slightly, especially in low ambient light conditions, tending to knead the details, making them less sharp; Effect that is noted especially in landscapes, while making much better in the closer picture (within 10/15 MT); I have not tried the macro function (I will reupdate the review) The comparison is with D750 + 24-120 f 4, 300 F4 and 2x III – also compared with Sony DSC-HX400V which comes out destroyed. According to our observation (MIA and a friend – Photoshop 100%), the reflex prevails, though not by much, with the 24-120 which also shows him several gaps; the comparison with the 300 F4 (€2,000 objective, if nital) is slightly in favor of the P1000, we do not talk then of 3 00 + 2x (Other €550-today's prices on Amazon) the photos with the focal lengths 1,000 and 2,000 are very good, a pelino minus the focal 3,000. The test with the 12,000 is made on the bird position (bird) and the correction software works very well: Of course it is a Crop and I have to check if in post production a photo with the 2,000 or 3,000 gets better or worse. |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
