This is kind-of interesting, maybe . . .


Newcastle, Australia
Real Name
Absolutely. Like the man said, "Ya pays yer money, and ya takes yer choice."

For long reach, I'm willing to sacrifice some IQ for convenience.

Cheers, Jock

Me too, Up to a point. I think I am more inclined these days, to crop from a larger sensor shot, than to be satisfied with one from the tiny sensor (eg P610 which I'll also sell). The FZ1000 is a good compromise, even though its actually bigger, dimensionally, than my K5 or K200D. Its lighter than both.

Tilman Paulin

Vancouver B.C.
Real Name
Jock, for me the interpretation of your image comparison was maybe slightly different (since my "starting point" is slightly different: I already own m43-gear, but was at times thinking about a bridge-camera)

If we're fine with slightly 'mushy' quality at pixel level on a bridge camera, why not be fine with it on another system too? Meaning: what stops us from applying a 2x or 3x digital zoom on m43, for example? (apart from our own views on "image quality")
I thought the EM5 "held up pretty well" against the superzoom, and I might play more with digital zoom going forwards :)

In the end it's all about picking the gear we're comfortable with and enjoying its benefits as best we can. :)

But to get even close to the amount of reach offered by the HX400V, I would need the OMD EM5 II, plus the Panasonic 100-400, which would give me 200-800, times two, if I am will to use digital zoom, which would result in 400-1600 mm e. I have been tempted by this combo, but I don't know if I could successfully handhold it. (The OMD combo would be nearly three times the weight of the HX400V).

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom