Some of these cameras are really very OLLLDDDD I mean 7 years old. Who buys these anyway.

SLR is also pretty much dead. Mostly. Mirrorless Full Form is faster, has way more focus points I mean about 25x more if not 50x more than some SLR, and shoots really quick. Downside is battery life.

If you have the bucks Get the higher Nikon Zs or the Sony A7 (just watch out which model Sony as some are 12mp bodies but mainly being used for cinematography) ok its no arriflex but the sony is good for colour accuracy.

16mp is great but you ideally want to go higher. Some demand 30mp and higher if uploaded to some photo libraries.

I use a Hasselblad still and a Sony A7R IVA

Replaced my A7SIII with an A1 a while back. One thing I can say about the A7SIII, even being 12MP, it took brilliant photos in almost any lighting conditions. It was much easier to get good results with it compared to the A1. Sony definitely delivered with the "low light" capabilities. With the A1 I find I almost always shoot in manual with auto ISO where in the S3 I mostly just used aperture priority unless using filters.

Also, the 12MP A7SIII is actually a 48MP quad bayer sensor. Pixel pitch is the same as any other high resolution sensor, they just use four pixels to make a single pixel at a rough approximation.

That said, I would still pick the A1 over the S3 any day of the week. Framing isn't always as important when you have 51MP to crop with. When doing landscapes I almost always shoot wider than what I think the final frame should look like and crop to taste in post.

On the more budget friendly high end side, the A7IV definitely makes a very compelling case. It even has some more higher end features much to the ire of A1 owners. I've been tempted to pick one up to play with.
 
The whole idea of a bridge camera is that everyone does not want to carry big cameras and lenses around, but also still want to take a bit better picture(with zoom) than a phone.
I am also not that big into photography, I don't want to stand for an hour to get the perfect shot. What I found with this superzooms with the small sensors is that most of your pictures(with close to full zoom) are pretty bad. You have to take so many photos just to get one that have good focus and even then its only when light is good.
The 1 inch sensor bridge camera let you just get better pictures easier. Yes I sometimes miss the 50+ zoom, but it its more of an inconvenience that a pro, for me at least.
 
You might be thinking of crop factor.

Numerical multipliers [for example 2x, 4x, 125x, etc] are useless without at least knowing the lowest, or the highest, focal length.


Still pretty bulky for someone to always want to carry one around with them. I wouldn't. That's why my cellphone gets so much use.
Not crop factor.

Agreed that multipliers are useless without focal length, and focal length is pretty useless without image sensor size.
People go with what they know best, 35mm film has always been a good reference point, which is why it is used in most comparisons.
 
just to get one that have good focus and even then its only when light is good.
That's why the fastest lens is also a factor, especially when it isn't interchangeable, so anything offering F6.5 et al is out for me. Then for fast and accurate focus, nothing comes close to the RX10.
Finally affordability, that's where the Panasonic Lumix DMC-F1000 II shines.
 
My first bridge camera was the sx60 then upgraded sx70. Both been excellent for our safari trips.
 
My first bridge camera was the sx60 then upgraded sx70. Both been excellent for our safari trips.
People seem to love their Canon SXs. I am not sure why, when they don't have great focal point numbers nor fast focus specs, here Sony is undoubtedly king. Image sensor size is not great, and speed of lenses also not too great when compared with what is out here. Fujifilm and Lumix come to mind as runners-up.

I come from a Nikon, Olympus and Mamiya background in 35mm SLR and medium format film cameras, never been a Canon fan, yet they dominated there too, never quite understood it.

I had a SX-70 in my hands a few weeks ago, some things were OK, mostly OK, but I wasn't impressed to the degree that I WANTED one. It seemed overpriced for what it is. Maybe I'm wrong, but handling the Sony RX10 makes me WANT it. The Lumix comes in second. Maybe I'm too fussy ;)
 
People seem to love their Canon SXs. I am not sure why, when they don't have great focal point numbers nor fast focus specs, here Sony is undoubtedly king. Image sensor size is not great, and speed of lenses also not too great when compared with what is out here. Fujifilm and Lumix come to mind as runners-up.

I come from a Nikon, Olympus and Mamiya background in 35mm SLR and medium format film cameras, never been a Canon fan, yet they dominated there too, never quite understood it.

I had a SX-70 in my hands a few weeks ago, some things were OK, mostly OK, but I wasn't impressed to the degree that I WANTED one. It seemed overpriced for what it is. Maybe I'm wrong, but handling the Sony RX10 makes me WANT it. The Lumix comes in second. Maybe I'm too fussy ;)
The RX10 costs nearly 3 times what the sx70 does.
Canon offers a decent camera at a decent price and that is what guys who will likely use the camera on about 3 trips or less a year is after.
Price is a very important factor at the casual end of the market.
 
People seem to love their Canon SXs. I am not sure why, when they don't have great focal point numbers nor fast focus specs, here Sony is undoubtedly king. Image sensor size is not great, and speed of lenses also not too great when compared with what is out here. Fujifilm and Lumix come to mind as runners-up.

I come from a Nikon, Olympus and Mamiya background in 35mm SLR and medium format film cameras, never been a Canon fan, yet they dominated there too, never quite understood it.

I had a SX-70 in my hands a few weeks ago, some things were OK, mostly OK, but I wasn't impressed to the degree that I WANTED one. It seemed overpriced for what it is. Maybe I'm wrong, but handling the Sony RX10 makes me WANT it. The Lumix comes in second. Maybe I'm too fussy ;)
Well you are comparing a R9k small sensor Canon to a R30k 1 inch sensor Sony. No bridge camera can come close to the Sony RX10. But few people will fork out that money.
Also Canon have kind off abandoned the bridge camera market and the SX70 was about the same thing as the previous SX60 from 2014. So nothing to get exited about a Canon powershot today.
What they had going for them was the large zoom(before Nikon P series came out) the price and it was relatively small.
Canons have great colour and the UI is great.
Remember the SX70 came out in 2018 and a few years ago they were still selling new for 7-8k. Paying 11k+ now for that old tech is however a bit ridiculous
 
never been a Canon fan, yet they dominated there too, never quite understood it.
Legendary status, perhaps?

Example:


And when value for (local) money is considered, this ...

Screenshot_20230329_031920.jpg
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter