APS-C + Tamron/Sigma 16/18-300mm vs Panasonic FZ1000

HOOT · Apr 4, 2017

Is there anyone who has experience with the two setups, or even better, has had the chance to test them side by side?

I currently own the FZ1000 but I am seriously looking to move to an APS-C camera + Tamron or Sigma 16/18-300mm lens because I would greatly benefit from the cable tethering ability which the Panasonic is unfortunately not capable of. The convenience of a lens with such a wide zoom excursion is something I absolutely cannot do without, which is why I'm looking at these two combinations.

I'll be shooting solely in studio so I have plenty of light available (flash) and will be using the camera with low ISO and low apertures (high f-numbers).

astroNikon · Apr 4, 2017

which APS-C camera as there are many in a variety of formats, etc.

HOOT · Apr 4, 2017

Entry level DSLR, so something like a Canon 750D/T6i.

HOOT · Apr 6, 2017

Nobody?

Derrel · Apr 6, 2017

I have an older FX and the 10x zoom with OIS...It's no match for a DSLR if the same era. Bigger sensor in a DSLR, but a much bigger camera to carry.The two cameras are different things.

HOOT · Apr 6, 2017

In my case the bigger senor is of no real value as I'm shooting in studio with flashes at low ISO's and low apertures. Which is why I went with the FZ1000 in the first place. The only reason I'm looking to switch is the tethering ability via cable, which the Panasonic FZ1000 cannot do. My question is whether the picture quality I'd get with those APS-C lenses would be comparable to the FZ1000? I've read their reviews and they all mention them being very soft.

astroNikon · Apr 6, 2017

HOOT said:
Entry level DSLR, so something like a Canon 750D/T6i.

I don't really know Canon very well.
But DSLRs are more packed with more features .. it's a bigger camera as mentioned.
The more modern ones are packed with more "remote" type capabilities. I can tether my Nikon cameras both with a cable or without. But my older ones only with a cable.

I think Canon is far ahead of Nikon in this regards for remote capabilities.
Maybe if you could buy one where you can return it no questions? Then you could test it out.

astroNikon · Apr 6, 2017

HOOT said:
In my case the bigger senor is of no real value as I'm shooting in studio with flashes at low ISO's and low apertures. Which is why I went with the FZ1000 in the first place. The only reason I'm looking to switch is the tethering ability via cable, which the Panasonic FZ1000 cannot do. My question is whether the picture quality I'd get with those APS-C lenses would be comparable to the FZ1000? I've read their reviews and they all mention them being very soft.

The quality of the APS-C sensor should be far better than the FZ1000. What is important here is the lens (quality of the glass) that you put on the camera. The 16/18-300s "super zooms" are not known for high quality IQ/details when you pixel peep.

And also, knowing how to actually use it. When you get to larger sensors your knowledge of use has to be far greater as "depth of field" and thus proper focusing techniques come into play. And many people aren't very good at that at first.

greybeard · Apr 6, 2017

The FZ1000 was designed for casual snapshot stuff while a DSLR is designed for those who have a more serious need which really sounds like you. I have some experience with an 18-300mm Nikon zoom on a D7000 and the results were acceptable.

HOOT · Apr 6, 2017

Size isn't an issue, its going to sit on a tripod. Definitely not a pixel peeper, photos are for web use only anyway. My only worry is losing quality from what I'm currently getting with the FZ1000, if a Canon 750D plus one of those lenses can deliver the same results or better in terms of sharpness and colour then I'm happy.

Derrel · Apr 6, 2017

Web-sized images from my 4-megapixel Canon G series, shot in raw and converted, give me deep depth of field at f/4, due to the small sensor size. I can photograph small objects for eBay sales (cameras, fly reels, knives,etc) with the Canon P&S and its tiny sensor, use the built-in neutral density filter, and get the right ecxposure with my studio flash at its lowest power levels. With the d-slr, I need to be at ISO 100 and f/13 or things are over-exposed, and I get about the same depth of field as I do with the Canon P&S at f/4 on those types of small-product, tabletop shots.

In some ways a Point and Shoot sized sensor is actually better for some types of pictures than a larger sensor is.

HOOT · Apr 8, 2017

One thing I didn't take into consideration so far, with the FZ1000 I can shoot at any shutter speed with my flashes, with the 750D would I be limited to a max of 1/200 before getting any banding?

beagle100 · Apr 10, 2017

HOOT said:
One thing I didn't take into consideration so far, with the FZ1000 I can shoot at any shutter speed with my flashes, with the 750D would I be limited to a max of 1/200 before getting any banding?

depends on the flash - some flashes have "HSS"- high speed sync which allows high shutter speeds
www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless

HOOT · Apr 11, 2017

I have YN560-III flashes which unfortunately do not support HSS. I think I'll just have to try it out and see for myself. Otherwise I'll have to save up for the Sony RX10 III which is the only bridge camera that supports USB tethering.