On 10.07.2018/1000/125, the Nikon COOLPIX PXNUMX camera was announced with a XNUMXx zoom (one hundred and twenty-five times!) EGF lens equal 24-3000 mm (FR is 4,3–539 mm). Usually I do not publish anything related to photographic equipment without interchangeable optics, but there are exceptions.
Nikon COOLPIX P1000
This is the first camera to break the zoom threshold. 100 x... Nikon COOLPIX P1000 has a zoom ratio 125 x! All details on the camera can be found. here. Prices at popular online shoppers here.
Nikon COOLPIX P1000
Material prepared Arkady Shapoval. Training/Consultations | Youtube | Facebook | Instagram | Twitter | Telegram
Come on, test it please.
Gorgeous, all the voyeurs lined up in line)))
I like “Light weight (only 1,4 kg)”
By the way, I suspect sharpness will not be good. Yes?
Sharp - nothing else: you can programmatically wind up. And if the picture will be liquid, don't go to the grandmother.
How to understand liquid?) "Soap"?
There is an official website Examples these ugly words.
Oh my God. And these are examples from the official site and this is reduced in size !! One soap! Just tin!
Yes with official, 960 * 640, about 0.6 MP.
Why is it on a telephone matrix? I said a long time ago that the ultra-zooms will be ruined by the marketing pursuit of the multiplicity of 100500 :)
Due to the small matrix, it is possible to create compact optics with just a monstrous focal length ratio (35mm), it is difficult to imagine what size the lens would be for a full frame, and even for a crop to achieve the same magnification ... As for the quality, there are already limitations not in a small matrix (even smartphones are not bad at shooting now), but the problem is already in the transparency of air, its inhomogeneous density, water vapor, smog and dust
But a small matrix gives rise to its own problems. Low sensitivity, diffraction threshold. At the long end and diaphragm 8 will be blurry even in vacuum. As already mentioned here - a beach camera.
I disagree, a beach camera, this is a dust and moisture resistant soap dish, with the possibility of submersion under water, for a humane price tag.
This meant photographing bodies on the beach from a long distance, and not relaxing on it :)
The matrix size is 1 / 2.3 inch, translated into the popular 6.2mm x 4.6mm. The picture quality is appropriate, no worse and no better.
Suitable for hunting chan in its natural form on a wild beach and watching the intimate life of insects.
Are you an hour offspring of zoologist Carl Linnaeus?
Here was a fan of the megazum soap dish, which filmed like a d800. This one will probably be like d850 :)
I wonder who will buy such a "soap dish"? Matrix from compact, dimensions and weight as professional SLR. It reminds me of the Chinese d3100 ... D7200
For spies or scouts. Image quality is the tenth thing, but you can see something close-up from three kilometers.
Um ... Equivalent 3000mm and extreme shutter speed at 1/4000. Here no stub will help and bullying ISO.
For video, it is not so critical, you can indulge in purely video filming ... one or two
Funny thing. I would still be equipped with a cast-iron frame for better guidance.
I watched a video review of one ambassador from Nikon in English. 16 minutes and all about the zoom ... neither about the matrix nor about the image quality and serious problems at the long end, and all photos were shown at the focal length (35mm) in the region of 70-100 mm ... the rest was only in video mode. When approaching the moon, it neatly fits into the frame, but there even an amateur sees how the air currents distort the picture. I did not increase more than 3000, although it is possible to programmatically increase more. In general, neither the Moon nor animal birds can be captured in dynamics. And seriously shooting an eagle at a distance in a magazine nest with such a matrix is still a task. The “ambassador” did not give a clear answer to the question and who is the target audience of this bandura. I agree with the previous comments that only voyeurs can watch the windows of high-rise buildings in front of them, and children can play spies. And the price of this absurdity is officially $ 999.95. In general Nikon annealed.
The matrix has nothing to do with it, just like the lens itself. On such FRs, ordinary air will spoil the picture much more. Eagles in nests are usually removed at 70-100 mm. They put the camera near the nest and remotely start it.
I remember I had a nikon p500. A very decent toy. The zoom was noticeably smaller, but it was enough to look at the craters on the moon. If not for the price, I would try this new invention of Nikon, for there is no other way to get such an increase on the camera. I would not make claims to quality, because the purpose of this new product is not shooting to order, but pictures for myself. Well, by the way, the same p500 did an excellent job of shooting handheld during the day, even at maximum zoom. The staff there was excellent. I think this new product was even more powerful.
all military binoculars-zooms have an excess of maximum magnification over the minimum by no more than 2,5 times ... commercial binoculars-zooms have an excess of magnifications of 3 or even 4 times ... but at a 4-fold excess it is very difficult to focus on the moon at 32x magnification (binoculars 8-32x50) it is necessary to switch to 28-24 ... therefore it is better to use binoculars 8-20x50 or 12-30x60 ... and with optics for cameras - rational excess of the maximum focal point over the minimum of no more than 4 ... then only image deterioration, as there would be no amateurs choking with delight….
The picture, as for 3000 mm, is nothing at all, I would even say - excellent.
I had a p900. There is 83x optical and plus 4x digital. What can I say .. He was good for a sunny day. In cloudy weather, all the noise was eaten. Manual settings were not useful. Automation has always done it better and most importantly faster. If you use only optical zoom, then even at the very dawn end, the sharpness was excellent, and the XA didn’t even smell of them., Almost perfect picture. Without using digital zoom, there were super photos. It's a pity the giant flu. In it I could shoot Jupiter at night, and strips were visible on the surface. And Saturn with its rings. I feel n1000 will be generally power
Was the picture good on a computer or laptop monitor? :-)))))) ... especially a picture of Jupiter ... all telescopes and astronomers cry on the sidelines with a terrible inferiority complex :-)))))))))
Nice gun, no need to plan to "nail down" her nails. Although the moon icon on the mode dial smiled. But if it was more down to earth, I shot the equivalent of 300mm and it was not enough. This is only 6 times your vision, i.e. from a distance of 1000m field in plan 120m. From 30 meters a person is whole and there is still a lot of air.
Now imagine that you want to shoot a woodpecker on a tree just 10-15 meters away, a woodpecker on a tree, and not a picture like “Find a gopher in the forest”. Or the barillef / gargoyle / spire of the tower at a height of 20m-160m and not from below, but slightly in profile. We had a digital camera at work with 20x, to shoot sites on 180-220 meter pipes, to plan the location of our equipment, and there was also little.
No one will shoot from a thousand meters to 3000mm, for this you first need to see / notice / find the object of photography - everything is like with binoculars. But from 15-200m will be. And the image quality will not suffer from evaporation, and it will also be better than a 10x crop with an expensive 300mm lens for a full frame. Not everyone has the knack or drones to get 10-30 meters to the subject.
Stub helped, but probably not to shoot at 1/20, 1/10. And just so that there is no trembling with the video. So that jerks were not noticeable
The question is - what for is it at all ?! All mega zoomoffs with such a matrix do not have a picture but disgusting game, especially the Sony HX. You can also sprinkle on FF from any suitable 300-500mm and the quality will be many times higher
You can crop, but on the contrary, to get from 300-500 24mm is a much more difficult task.
The crop factor of this masterpiece is somewhere around 5,5. If you cut a picture made at 300mm zoom in the FF editor, the equivalent will be 300 x 5,5 = 1650mm.
is it finally a mechanical manual zoom drive ?! and NRW didn't hide ... Nikon got on the right track.
There is no manual zoom there, the lens extends with the lever.
Comrades, the official RRC is $ 999. The purpose of this monstrous zoom is one. Fota Moon and Satellites, I saw a review on the P900, even Saturn can be seen.
And Jupiter is also possible on the P1000 :) However, I will insist on it, it is not a camera. This is an expensive toy :)
And by the way comrades! On the Internet, infa flashed that on Fri 27.07 there will be a bloody moon and the confrontation of Mars. Arming 300mm + teleconverter :)
Tell me, Nikon P1000 focal 3000mm, what kind of optics is needed for a cropped 1,6 SLR to get about the same quality and size of the object (taking into account the crop (cropping) of the photo after shooting)? At least approximately.
I once had a Nikon Coolpix P510. Optics, of course, to match the digital camera, but the stub worked out to the fullest. Hand photo: