-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Nikon P900, Nikon P950 or Nikon P1000 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Himalaya
- Start date
I had the p900, changed to a used p1000.
I don't notice the image quality being worse than the p900.
Don't have any regrets in changing.
*The Manual focus is better, and the 4k video is really good.
*The digital zoom is usable as well, especially with shutter timer and a tripod . I don't think I ever got a good digital zoom pic from the p900.
*In difficult situations with fast moving subjects, I tend to take video, and grab a still from the video. This is really useful if you are trying to identify something, as you are capturing calls too.
I think my p1000 paid for itself on a trip to Thailand.. YouTube video quality can be increased to 4k
Sultan Tit was a photo, 5-10m away.
Warbler was a grab from video.. I think only a couple of frames had the bird, so a photo was pretty much impossible with this camera
Sultan Tit was a photo, 5-10m away.
Warbler was a grab from video.. I think only a couple of frames had the bird, so a photo was pretty much impossible with this camera
Attachments
Lerxst
Well-known member
I have an old beat up P900 that I still drag around sometimes, and a P1000 that sits on a shelf. I find it too bulky and weighty and harder to use overall. I also felt that if the images were improved on the P1000, I certainly couldn't tell. But I am not a photographer and have terrible eyesight.
The video in particular, I was pointing at the birds, zooming right in, pressing record, and the screen would go blank for a second then start up with the subject seemingly incredibly sharp. I was laughing to myself how sharp and bright it was.
I wasn't laughing when I realised I'd filled my memory card with 3 days left, mainly of a Taiga Flycatcher that kept landing a couple of metres from me!
Not sure if the p950 shares the 4k video?
It's definitely a step up from the p900.
PaulCountyDurham
Well-known member
Aye it does.
From memory, I think the differences between the P950 and the P900 are: improved image stabilisation, RAW shooting option, and maybe a few other bits. Does the P900 have active dynamic lighting? I find that very useful on the P950.
The cameras have the exact same sensor size and megapixels and so picture quality should be more or less the same, although given the P950 is a newer model it may utilise more modern technology (I've never seen that stated anywhere).
My gut feel is that there's not going to be a great deal of difference and in the event the P900 no longer serves your purposes, then perhaps the lightweight mirrorless cameras are worth a look. It's something I'm thinking of at the moment and I've seen pictures taken using mid-range camera bodies and old lenses: the results are impressive, particularly on cloudy days.
PaulCountyDurham
Well-known member
'Suppose it depends on how you use your camera.
The P950 suits me except the small sensor.
In the event Nikon manufactured a superzoom with a larger sensor, same zoom, then that would be perfect. I do not think that's realistic, however.
For someone like me, there's nowhere to go except to a mirrorless camera, assuming you're looking for a bit more from a camera.
It has us going down a dead end to some extent.
These cameras do struggle a lot in dull conditions, or anything fast moving.
Trouble is, you go to any other model and the loss of reach must be unbelievable. P1000 can take reasonable pics into the digital range, ~4000mm?!
And the size / weight / price of anything trying to rival that goes up and up.
I wonder if the only improvement to the p1000/P950 is better internal "software" to enhance the pics, and faster focus.
I suppose they can always upgrade the viewfinder too - by all accounts (and I say this as a P900 user) that's one of the main reasons for moving to a P950 or P1000.
PaulCountyDurham
Well-known member
Again, 'think it depends on the user, Peter.
I've never considered the focus to be a problem but maybe that's due to the way I take pictures.
I agree with what you're saying about reach. When I change camera, it won't be for another bridge camera/superzoom.
I think it can work in dull conditions also, providing you're not aiming into the sky or into water. I've had some decent pictures in overcast conditions at say 1/60, 1/80 shutter speed. I can't be bothered to post them unless somebody really wants to see them in order to see what the camera can do in those conditions. It works for me anyway because I don't like pictures of a bird that doesn't have a glint in its eye. 'Spoils the picture for me no matter what else is good in that picture. So, I find myself taking pictures only when there's sun and whichever camera I have that won't change. As I say, a bird with a glint in its eye is a must for me and that demands sun.
I like the P950. It's light, takes decent pictures, easy to use, image stabilisation is good, the active dynamic lighting feature is very useful, no issues with the focus, the menu is easy to follow. In terms of the way I take pictures, the one limitation that I notice, which cannot be overcome, is the small sensor. I think for 800 quid or whatever it is, it's good value. Judging by the pictures I've seen from mirrorless cameras mid-range price, those cameras are good value also. So I suppose it boils down to what you're trying to achieve in terms of whether or not it's money well spent.
One thing that has just come to mind. I have the Panasonic FZ330. When I compare pictures it is obvious the lens is better quality in the FZ330. The problem with that camera is more often than not you're out of reach. Maybe Nikon could do something there.
PaulCountyDurham
Well-known member
I think the P1000 should get you better pictures in general given that the zoom means you're going to be in range more often than the P950.
When I bought the P950, I discounted the P1000 due to the increased weight and increased difficulty in keeping the camera steady.
In hindsight, both were a bit of a red-herring. I have the strap 'round my neck and when I'm walking around I barely notice the camera is 'round my neck and so the P1000 isn't going to be much different. Similarly, I take pictures lying down or sat down in an attempt to keep the camera steady and in that scenario it's going to more or less the same with the P1000.
I think that difference in price is probably about right in terms of the difference in getting you pictures that you want to keep.
Whichever you go, I'd imagine both are good cameras which will get you some nice pictures.
Something I noticed when moving from the p900 to p1000, was the zoom on the p1000 moves really quick from 1500mm to 3000mm.
I had it in my head that it would behave like the p900 up to 2000mm then continue to 3000mm.
Instead the time the p900 would take to get to 2000, the p1000 is at 3000. It literally jumps through the telephoto range in increments of 500mm!
I don't think it's necessarily good or bad, just markedly different, and takes a bit of getting used to how sensitive the zoom is at the extreme.
I had it in my head that it would behave like the p900 up to 2000mm then continue to 3000mm.
Instead the time the p900 would take to get to 2000, the p1000 is at 3000. It literally jumps through the telephoto range in increments of 500mm!
I don't think it's necessarily good or bad, just markedly different, and takes a bit of getting used to how sensitive the zoom is at the extreme.
