Sony hx400v vs canon sx60 hs

[sanju123tom]

Sir
Please help me to pick any one of this camera.
I mainly focus on
Image quality
Fast and accurate focusing
Image stability
Shoting birds and other wild animals

These are my requirements
Plsee help me am fully confused

 

[basroil]

Sounds like you know nothing about photography, so either camera is fine. Canon one has RAW, which is always a plus for image quality, Sony has more video features. If you want still images over video, Canon. If video is more important, Sony.

 

[sanju123tom]

Absolutely you are right, i don't know anything about photography. I am a beginner.
Out of these cameras which one will be a nice choice for me (As a beginner)
Sony HX400V
Canon SX 60 HS
Nikon P900

 

[basroil]

Absolutely you are right, i don't know anything about photography. I am a beginner.
Out of these cameras which one will be a nice choice for me (As a beginner)
Sony HX400V
Canon SX 60 HS
Nikon P900

I already told you, now you just need to decide if video or photo is your thing. Video-> sony, photo->canon

 

[sanju123tom]

Thank your

 

[bjornl]

Absolutely you are right, i don't know anything about photography. I am a beginner.
Out of these cameras which one will be a nice choice for me (As a beginner)
Sony HX400V
Canon SX 60 HS
Nikon P900

I already told you, now you just need to decide if video or photo is your thing. Video-> sony, photo->canon

The above is not true.

If your thing is photos, get a camera with inter-changeable lenses. There are decent priced models from many companies. Most of them have advantages and disadvantages. Those with m4/3 sensors have smaller bodies but do not do as well in low light (although they typically can match most Canon's as most of them also struggle in low light).
The ones who do better in low light would be Nikon, Sony and Pentax. The exception would be those with very small sensors like most bridge cameras where most struggle in low light.
Also none of the ones you listed are known for being fast or accurate in focusing particularly on fast moving things like birds and wildlife.

In video the best line up is from Panasonic. In particular the GH series of inter-changeable lens cameas. Competing models from SOny tend to overheat when recording for longer than 15 minutes or recording for many short periods of time.

Since you are looking for an ALL IN ONE, the two you should be looking at are the Panasonic FZ1000 or the Sony RX10. For wildlife you want the longer lens which is the Panasonic fz1000 as the best value. If you want more info and professional reviews, check out DPRreview.com, the #1 photo review site. They also do a good job at video capabilities in their reviews.

 

[basroil]

The above is not true.

If your thing is photos, get a camera with inter-changeable lenses. There are decent priced models from many companies. Most of them have advantages and disadvantages. Those with m4/3 sensors have smaller bodies but do not do as well in low light (although they typically can match most Canon's as most of them also struggle in low light).
The ones who do better in low light would be Nikon, Sony and Pentax. The exception would be those with very small sensors like most bridge cameras where most struggle in low light.
Also none of the ones you listed are known for being fast or accurate in focusing particularly on fast moving things like birds and wildlife.

In video the best line up is from Panasonic. In particular the GH series of inter-changeable lens cameas. Competing models from SOny tend to overheat when recording for longer than 15 minutes or recording for many short periods of time.

Since you are looking for an ALL IN ONE, the two you should be looking at are the Panasonic FZ1000 or the Sony RX10. For wildlife you want the longer lens which is the Panasonic fz1000 as the best value. If you want more info and professional reviews, check out DPRreview.com, the #1 photo review site. They also do a good job at video capabilities in their reviews.

Not everyone has $800+ for all the crap you're hawking, the two OP was considering are about HALF the price that you're pushing!

Keeping that in mind, not a single thing you stated is good for THIS person, likely coming from a confusion about the difference from an ideal choice and what people need to lower their expectations to meet a financial need. When it comes to birding, an SLR (even mirrorless system) with lenses long enough will be several thousand dollars and end up weighing ten times more. The two cameras he picked are more than good enough at that price range, and will work very well for shooting birds.

 

[bjornl]

The above is not true.

If your thing is photos, get a camera with inter-changeable lenses. There are decent priced models from many companies. Most of them have advantages and disadvantages. Those with m4/3 sensors have smaller bodies but do not do as well in low light (although they typically can match most Canon's as most of them also struggle in low light).
The ones who do better in low light would be Nikon, Sony and Pentax. The exception would be those with very small sensors like most bridge cameras where most struggle in low light.
Also none of the ones you listed are known for being fast or accurate in focusing particularly on fast moving things like birds and wildlife.

In video the best line up is from Panasonic. In particular the GH series of inter-changeable lens cameas. Competing models from SOny tend to overheat when recording for longer than 15 minutes or recording for many short periods of time.

Since you are looking for an ALL IN ONE, the two you should be looking at are the Panasonic FZ1000 or the Sony RX10. For wildlife you want the longer lens which is the Panasonic fz1000 as the best value. If you want more info and professional reviews, check out DPRreview.com, the #1 photo review site. They also do a good job at video capabilities in their reviews.

Not everyone has $800+ for all the crap you're hawking, the two OP was considering are about HALF the price that you're pushing!

Keeping that in mind, not a single thing you stated is good for THIS person, likely coming from a confusion about the difference from an ideal choice and what people need to lower their expectations to meet a financial need. When it comes to birding, an SLR (even mirrorless system) with lenses long enough will be several thousand dollars and end up weighing ten times more. The two cameras he picked are more than good enough at that price range, and will work very well for shooting birds.

Shooting birds is pretty difficult actually. Talk to a birder. I know a few. BIF with the AF in those would not be very good. Birding can be done with a lens (on an DSLR) costing far less then several thousand. The Tamron 150-600mm has very fast accurate focus. On a camera with good ISO capabilities the f/6.3 aperture at 600mm this lens does pretty well. I am not a birder, but I have dabbled a little.
https://s3.amazonaws.com/masters.galleries.dpreview.com/3069673.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWXD4UV3FXMIDQLQ&Expires=1461715830&Signature=yXps2LzarSNL0beeCVrl5w37ZSA%3D
I have an SX series bridge camera too. My son uses it. It would not have been able to take that shot nor most of the bird or other wildlife shots I've taken over the years. It has a very small, poor performing sensor and spotty AF in anything short of ideal light. It has manual controls and a decent macro mode. But, my son typically borrows our Sony rx10 instead because of the ISO performance difference between a 1/2.3 and a 1" sensor.

The FZ1000 I was recommending (not hawking) is commonly available in "near new" condition around $100 more than the the sx60 HS, or hx400v and it is actually less the p900 he was also asking about. So I gave him a better way to achieve what he wanted and within the budget he was asking about.

 

[basroil]

Shooting birds is pretty difficult actually. Talk to a birder. I know a few.

No need to "talk to a birder", I've taken my fair share of bird photographs with a few K worth of equipment quite a bit better than that tamron. I can tell you that if you're shooting them in the air, any bridge is too slow, and if your thing is roosting/feeding, any of those is fine.

As for bridge cameras, NEVER buy used unless it comes with a manufacturer warranty (refurb from manufacturer). They just aren't built to the same specifications as an SLR, and are far more likely to be abused internally.

 

[bjornl]

Shooting birds is pretty difficult actually. Talk to a birder. I know a few.

No need to "talk to a birder", I've taken my fair share of bird photographs with a few K worth of equipment quite a bit better than that tamron. I can tell you that if you're shooting them in the air, any bridge is too slow, and if your thing is roosting/feeding, any of those is fine.

As for bridge cameras, NEVER buy used unless it comes with a manufacturer warranty (refurb from manufacturer). They just aren't built to the same specifications as an SLR, and are far more likely to be abused internally.

The Tamron is far from my most expensive lens. You should try it before you poo-poo it. I mentioned it because you said it takes 1000's of dollars worth of lenses to shoot birds, but it doe not. I prefer the Tamron for hiking because it is light enough that I can comfortably hike with it.

The build quality of bridge cameras varies. The Canon SX is a cheaply built of light weight plastics. The FZ1000 is built of more solid stuff, inline with the lowest entry level DSLRS. The rx10 lineup is fairly rugged, built mostly of metal, weather sealed and so forth. Far more rugged than anything short of a semi-pro DSLR. Mine has taken several hard knocks without ill-effect. Also Amazon offers warrenties on their electronics. KEH resells through them and also sells warrenties and would certainly be reputable enough.

Claiming that bridge cameras, once opened, are magically prone to falling apart is nothing but bias and FUD. By a small marging I buy mostly new, but I have also bought quite a bit of used gear. Including the several cheaply made cameras for my son's to use. These show up in guaranteed working order. If they don't, you send them back and get your money back. The only DOA parts I've had was a Canon 55-250 lens and a Tamron 28-300, both of which were bought new. These used cameras and lenses have lasted just as long those I bought new. Talk to just about any photographer who's been doing it a while and their bag will be a mix of old and new. A used bridge camera that shows up in good working order is no more nor less likely to suddenly fail than one you bought new and used for the 2-3 months many of these have been used for, One of them had a ridiculous shutter count of 340.
I'm not saying used is for everyone. Some people only buy new cars too, despite the price premium to do so. The risk/benefit is the same with camera gear. All you have full control over is the condition you accept it in and if the discounted price was enough to compensate you for the difference between that and new.

 

[sanju123tom]

Sir,
Thanks for information
But for Panasonic FZ1000 or the Sony RX10 cost more than 30000 Indian Rupees, my budget is less than 30000. That's why i thought of
Nikon P900 (27500 Indian Rupees)
Sony HX400V (24500 Indian Rupees)
Canon SX 60 HS (27300 Indian Rupees)
because these cameras are priced less that 30k Indian Rupees..
Please choose a camera for me which is priced less than the above price. (Camera should have long zoom)
Waiting for your replay!

 

[basroil]

Sir,
Thanks for information
But for Panasonic FZ1000 or the Sony RX10 cost more than 30000 Indian Rupees, my budget is less than 30000. That's why i thought of
Nikon P900 (27500 Indian Rupees)
Sony HX400V (24500 Indian Rupees)
Canon SX 60 HS (27300 Indian Rupees)
because these cameras are priced less that 30k Indian Rupees..
Please choose a camera for me which is priced less than the above price. (Camera should have long zoom)
Waiting for your replay!

Like I said a few times before the thread got hijacked, your best bet for what you want to do is the SX60 for stills, or HX400V for video. Just pick if video is more important or if stills are more important, and then get one or the other.

 

[bjornl]

Sir,
Thanks for information
But for Panasonic FZ1000 or the Sony RX10 cost more than 30000 Indian Rupees, my budget is less than 30000. That's why i thought of
Nikon P900 (27500 Indian Rupees)
Sony HX400V (24500 Indian Rupees)
Canon SX 60 HS (27300 Indian Rupees)
because these cameras are priced less that 30k Indian Rupees..
Please choose a camera for me which is priced less than the above price. (Camera should have long zoom)
Waiting for your replay!

Here is a comparison review by the top photography web site:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2015-superzoom-camera-roundup/14

The overall winner was the Nikon p900, 2nd place to the Canon, no show for the Sony.

In this other round up, the ones I mentioned above were included (the ones which were too expensive in India)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2015-roundup-long-zoom-compacts
In this review only the Nikon p900 from your list made the recommended list. The Canon and Sony were not recommended at all.

So the best one on your list, based on actual experts, is the Nikon p900

 

[basroil]

The overall winner was the Nikon p900, 2nd place to the Canon, no show for the Sony.

In this other round up, the ones I mentioned above were included (the ones which were too expensive in India)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2015-roundup-long-zoom-compacts
In this review only the Nikon p900 from your list made the recommended list. The Canon and Sony were not recommended at all.

So the best one on your list, based on actual experts, is the Nikon p900

1) Not one time did they say the P900 was better than the Canon or Sony cameras outright, rather that overall it's slightly better than the Canon (77% according to them instead of 75%)
2) The ONLY thing they did state at the end for the p900 winning was in telephoto range, and even then if you read up on the actual tests they say that it's on par with the HS60 most of the range
3) That is NOT a "clear winner" camera, the caveats stated there are basically the same as what I've stated here
4) I've been a professional photographer for over a decade, I don't appreciate your childish insults.
5) ALL those reviews will say the same thing: Sony has the best video options, Canon offers RAW files for better overall quality in it's longer ranges. That is 100% in line with my original recommendation.

 

[bjornl]

The overall winner was the Nikon p900, 2nd place to the Canon, no show for the Sony.

In this other round up, the ones I mentioned above were included (the ones which were too expensive in India)
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/2015-roundup-long-zoom-compacts
In this review only the Nikon p900 from your list made the recommended list. The Canon and Sony were not recommended at all.

So the best one on your list, based on actual experts, is the Nikon p900

1) Not one time did they say the P900 was better than the Canon or Sony cameras outright, rather that overall it's slightly better than the Canon (77% according to them instead of 75%)
2) The ONLY thing they did state at the end for the p900 winning was in telephoto range, and even then if you read up on the actual tests they say that it's on par with the HS60 most of the range
3) That is NOT a "clear winner" camera, the caveats stated there are basically the same as what I've stated here
4) I've been a professional photographer for over a decade, I don't appreciate your childish insults.
5) ALL those reviews will say the same thing: Sony has the best video options, Canon offers RAW files for better overall quality in it's longer ranges. That is 100% in line with my original recommendation.

Repeating yourself doesn't change anything. I offered my opinion and backed it up. You offered yours and then attacked mine. Who is the childish one? If your opinion had 1/2 the merit you thought it did, it would stand on its own merit.
DPR is 'the' site and a reliable source. Worth far more than your personal opinion, regardless of your claimed real and/or imaginary credentials.

I can see you very much want/need some sort of validation. In all my years online I've only ever once even heard of someone as petty as to demand that someone elses answer be de-selected before you will grace them with your opinion (which was nearly a quote of what I had told them previously). At first I was upset at the sheer audacity of such a childish move on your part. But upon reflection I came to realize that it was obviously based on some deep seated insecurity on your part. But you need to realize you aren't the only one who knows the difference between a viewfinder and the lens. Your opinions are generally worth more than the poster paid for them. But your opinion if it is truly worth something has to be able to stand on it's own and not constantly try to bicker about every different take on things. And if someone else can back up their point of view and you can't well then just let it go or if you must continue then instead of huffing and puffing and pulling the thread sideways why not just do something like "Oh and in support of what I wrote before here is a subject matter expert who wrote ........"

As for your quotes (mis-quotes) of what I said, that's fine. DPR did pick a best one in the first one and said this:

"For those who can afford to spend $600 on a point-and-shoot, the Nikon Coolpix P900 is our top choice."

Their issue with it was mainly price, but picked it as best overall regardless. In India, the OP listed prices which were identical for the p900 and the 2nd place sx60 hs. Making the p900 an easy recommendation. Remember that value is part of the rating system. The sx60 hs got a better value (due to a lower cost when reviewed) this boosted its relative rating compared to the then more expensive p900; even so, the sx60 hs was still edged out by p900.

In the other comparison they called out two winners (the more expensive ones I mentioned above) and called out two honorable mentions, one of which was the p900 the other was not the sx60 hs. Reinforcing ranking of the p900 since between the two, the p900 was again picked by experts reviewers.

This is not the first time you've brought up your experience. Here is light bulb moment for you. No one cares. I have more experience then you claim and no one cares about that either. They only care about the merit of our advice and how suitable or unsuitable they deem it to be. In most cases they lack the experience and insight to separate the wheat from the chaff, which is why I typically explain my logic (so it can be reviewed) and when possible I site my sources and my relevant experience with the stuff being discussed. You'll note I don't say "Well I've been doing it for 'x' length of time and therefore I am the grandpoobah on this subject matter. In stead I mention if I have used the camera in question or done what they are trying to do and what my experiences were in just what they care about.

Also I can't help but notice that you don't claim to own any of the cameras being discussed. And so are basing your opinion only on what? Google? I have a large household and so we own several of them. Including a Canon sx which I am not recommending despite buying one.