Article

2015 Superzoom Camera Roundup

While compact cameras sales continue to slide due to the rise of the smartphone, 'bridge cameras' remain popular. Bridge cameras offer zoom lenses exceeding 50X in a body that resembles a DSLR, and more expensive models usually include electronic viewfinders and manual exposure controls.

While the megapixel race has slowly come to a halt, there’s a different kind of battle going on, and that’s over zoom power. Ten years ago superzooms commonly had 10X and 12X lenses, and in 2015 the average is around 50X. Late last year Canon’s PowerShot SX60 HS hit 65X and in March 2015 Nikon blew away the competition, releasing its Coolpix P900 with an incredible 83X, 24-2000mm equivalent zoom.

 Shot with the Pentax XG-1. ISO 800, 1/30 sec, F4.5. Shot at an equiv. of 223mm Photo: Wenmei Hill

Having a long zoom lens isn't without problems, though. Trying to get a shake-free photo while hand-holding a camera at over 1200mm equiv. isn’t easy, and sometimes requires boosting the ISO, especially at lower light levels. This is particularly an issue for the superzooms in this round-up, whose small sensors collect very little light and therefore are generally noisy to begin with (here's why).

Another issue with long zooms is atmospheric haze and distortion, caused by light scattering and changes in refractive indexes of air as heat rises from the ground. These noticeably reduce image sharpness, especially on warm days, and the effects can often be visible even when photos are downsized. All of the issues raised are sacrifices one must make in order to shoot extreme telephoto, be it with a built-in or interchangeable lens camera.

Finally, on the subject of sacrifices, the small form factor and lower cost of these superzooms come at a hefty cost compared to larger-sensor counterparts: not only do the smaller sensors yield noisier images, but the small pixels put high demands on lens' resolving power. And since these lenses can't perform miracles, what results are images that won't be nearly as detailed as similar shots taken on larger-sensor ILCs with equivalent focal length lenses.

In this comparison we looked at five superzooms: the Canon PowerShot SX60, Fujifilm FinePix S1, Nikon Coolpix P900, (Ricoh) Pentax XG-1, and Samsung WB2200F. We’ll cover each of them in-depth and then show how their image and lens quality compares in controlled tests.

To start things off, here’s a table highlighting the similarities and differences between the five cameras:

Specs Compared

  Canon SX60 Fujifilm S1 Nikon P900 Pentax XG-1 Samsung WB2200
Sensor (size) 16.1MP BSI-CMOS (1/2.3") 16.4MP BSI-CMOS (1/2.3") 16.0MP BSI-CMOS (1/2.3") 16.4MP BSI-CMOS (1/2.3")
Focal range (equiv.) 21-1365mm
(65X)
24-1200mm
(50x)
24-2000mm
(83.3X)
24-1248mm
(52X)
20-1200mm
(60X)
Max aperture F3.4-6.5 F2.8-5.6 F2.8-6.5 F2.8-5.6 F2.8-5.9
ISO range (full resolution) 100-3200 100-6400 100-3200 80-6400
Raw support Yes No No No
LCD size (res) 3" (920k dot) 3" (460k dot)
LCD type Fully articulating Fixed
EVF resolution 920k dot 200k dot
Burst rate 6.4 fps 10 fps 7 fps 9 fps 8 fps
Max video res 1080/60p 1080/30p
Wi-Fi Yes No Yes
GPS No Yes No
Hot shoe Yes No
Weather-sealed No Yes No
External mic Yes No
Weight (loaded) 650 g 680 g 899 g 567 g 684 g
Battery life (CIPA) 340 shots 350 shots 360 shots 240 shots 600 shots
* All five cameras use field sequential technology on their EVFs, hence the actual resolution at any given moment is one third of what's shown above.

As you can see, all five cameras have 16MP BSI-CMOS sensors. While we'll never know for certain, it appears that one or two sensors are used for all five of the cameras. In terms of zoom range the Samsung and Canon start out at 20 and 21mm, respectively, versus 24mm on the other three models. 

The two models which lean the most toward enthusiasts are the Canon SX60 and Fujifilm S1, both of which offer a Raw capture mode and have hot shoes. The Fujifilm further differentiates itself by offering a weather-resistant body. 

A look at the weight row shows just how much of a monster the Nikon Coolpix P900 is, and the battery life row below that shows the Samsung WB2200F's huge advantage over the other four cameras in this regard.

We'll look at these cameras in alphabetical order, so we'll begin with the Canon PowerShot SX60 HS on the following page.

Shot with the Fujifilm S1. ISO 200, 1/450 sec. F6.4 . Shot at an equiv. of 111mm. Photo Dan Bracaglia

Buying Options

Fujifilm FinePix S1
From Amazon
Canon PowerShot SX60 HS
From Amazon
Nikon Coolpix P900
From Amazon

Comments

Comments

Total comments: 193
See more
ktb2000

why is it that the p900 is some spots are good and then 12 feet over see construction sie railing supports are bad- is this indicative of ocular problems

11 months ago
Eric Fossum
Eric Fossum

I just got back from a month on safari in Africa with this camera. I was very very happy with the quality of the images, and the super zoom capability was very handy and performed well. In-situ, I compared shots taken of the same safari scenes with guys carrying a lot of long, heavy glass and there was little difference. In fact, Nikon ought to pay me because I probably converted half a dozen to a dozen photographers to the P900 when considering I shot handheld, and they had to steady their telescopes. Fast glass, electronically stabilized zoom - a good combination. On the down side, I wish I could have shot RAW. This is a serious drawback. What were they thinking?

Oct 21, 2016
fpvnoob

I have it, its a fun little thing, the photos and videos are OK but not great.

You're really buying it for its monster zoom, which quite simply can get you shots you won't really get with any other camera.

That is the only reason why I tolerate it because no matter how much better the other cameras are for photos and videos, when you show people a video of you zooming into the moon, or a lighthouse several miles away, they are blown away and that is what photography is about, capturing things people want to see.

If Nikon release an update with 100x zoom I will update.
Until then I will never sell this camera, its too much fun.

May 1, 2016*
Entish 1

I sure wish one of my friends would buy a Nikon P900, so I could try it. These're tough choices for folks on limited budgets, but I am sold on compact super-zooms and bridge cameras for wildlife/nature photography (including insect & flower macros as well as distant birds). "Zooming-with-your-feet" only gets you so close, if you're determined not to disturb nesting /resting shore birds. I am currently agonizing over the decision between an ultra-zoom (>1000 mm) like the P900 or Canon SX60HS, or weather-sealing (Panasonic's Lumix FZ300 ?), or a larger sensor (Lumix FZ1000 ?) for better low-light performance. My recently deceased Canon SX30is and SX40hs both succumbed (after a few years each) to south Florida's subtropical moisture and salt, so I like the weather-sealed concept... but is it as good as advertised? Before failing, each Canon produced thousands of images I would otherwise have missed for fear of wrecking a far more expensive SLR kit.

Apr 24, 2016
petebuster
petebuster

The p610 been ignored as well has equal iq of the 900 what's the point of these reviews when when they leave half the contenders out?

Mar 12, 2016
Mac Carter

Why didn't you include the Panasonic DMC-FZ300 in this comparison? Seem like it is one of the best in this category.

Jan 13, 2016
ktb2000

i think they gave the fz300 there number one gold award already. I have the same camera fz200 w/o weatherization, I just love the camera, great colors, low light flowers : ) It is a bit hard to sneek up on birds with it.

11 months ago
Peiasdf

Page 7 "Image quality starts to slide downhill at higher ISOs, as illustrated by the "own" photo above."

Dec 19, 2015
Boopathy83

I want to buy ultra zoom camera .pls give a good suggestion for me. My budget $350 below

Dec 3, 2015
Ph1ogiston

"Pro: Astro and wildlife photographers, travelers, or anyone seeking the longest zoom available."

Why astro?? The camera is a noisy nightmare and a star eater for astro photographers. Shooting some nice pictures of the moon doesn't imply you are an astrophotographer...

Otherwise the camera may be ok (but I am not shure. For private eyes maybe?).

Nov 7, 2015
electrophoto

Why such massive zooms?
Like 1000+mm

I've seen a number of shots taken with these cameras at 800+mm and honestly none of these long-reach photos have much to offer, aside from the massive zoom-reach.

Just look at The P900 2000mm House-Photo here - the lines are all wobbly, jittery, details are completely smeared.
it looks VERY artificial.

Even the "cat" at 1200mm, much closer up than the houses - details are oddly lacking, painted over look.

I completely get the appeal of say anything up to 400mm...
I can fully understand a good 200mm in a "compact" camera...

but IS or not - beyond 200-400mm it just becomes a gimmick with rather bad photographic results... so why bother at all?

I mean there's bound to be a reason, why you'd need 12'0000$+ for that 600mm Nikkor F/4... and a massive tripod to actually make use of it.

Consider that at f/6.5 and it's tiny 1/2.3 sensor - it behaves like a f/36 lens on full frame... useless.

Nov 6, 2015
Augustin Man
Augustin Man

Please check that SOOC image out:

http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/8679031173/photos/3327366/dscn3802

It's 2000mm handheld! It's a good image, but if you make an effort to visit the forum, you'll see there jaw-dropping images at full zoom. Now you understand what P900 are good for?

Nov 20, 2015
electrophoto

Augustin

I am maybe looking at this from a different angle...
And I'm not much a bird shooter.

The two first photos of the bird (link)...
Whilst it is technically impressive (handheld at 2000mm) the picture itself is "flat" to me - lack of interesting composition, lack of perspective.
I know that there was not much in that regard to be done - with the bird sitting where it sits ;)
Maybe in terms of a documentary process the 2000mm handheld are useful - maybe a PI is finding it practical...
I'm not saying there are no uses.
it's just the results I've seen don't "speak" to me.
I've seen tons of wildlife photos taken with shorter lenses and more interesting compositions that are indeed "jaw-dropping" - 2000mm not really a requirement and practical only in a select few situations with excellent light.

I've opened the nikon forums (coolpix) and filtered by camera (p900) and then for photos - the results are all similar at the extreme tele ends - flat, dull, and not very intriguing.
sorry

Nov 20, 2015
omersad

Why SONY HX400V was not included in this roundup???

Oct 16, 2015
rudolf68

These giant camera makers are exploiting consumers' pocket. They can make bridge camera with bigger sensor and zoom like a superzoom but if its done, who will buy dslr?

Oct 15, 2015
GEwart

I've just bought the SX60, I wasn't even tempted buy the P900 even if it was readily available despite it's amazing lens. The images I've seen are too smudged with in camera noise reduction. Now if the Nikon had the Canon sensor.... how often can one say that?

Aug 29, 2015
Lin Evans
Lin Evans

Perhaps the images were made with too much noise reduction applied? I have had every Canon super zoom since their first through the SX50 HS which I still have and use frequently. I also have the Nikon P900 and I can tell you with absolute assurance that the P900 has higher image quality than my SX50 HS... Just saying...

Sep 4, 2015
Augustin Man
Augustin Man

SX60 isn't a good superzoom, that's a fact. Get a cheap refurbished SX50 or better a P610.

Nov 20, 2015
davids8560

P610. That's what I decided too, and that's what I done did! Best choice for a very long consumer zoom, given all the assorted and inevitable drawbacks and compromises among the bunch.

Mar 24, 2016*
User3137826464
User3137826464

i own the Panasonic Lumix FZ1000, DPreview gave it an 82% rating. In my opinion has awesome image quality of just about all my photos! I am a big superzoom fan and this by far is the happiest i've been with one. I see that DigitalJerry is happy with his as well.

Jul 26, 2015
KZMike
KZMike

RE, the Nikon P900 >> Apparently I did not read this review closely enough, as I was intrigued by the long zoom and went to a camera store to check it out.

I was totally surprise that there was no hot shoe for a longer reach when lighting conditions dictated. . . this made no sense as I was a seriously considering a buy and now am NOT. . .

It could be I missed something, but with out a hot shoe, or some other option, and needing some flash assistance beyond the usual pop up flash reach of 10' ► 15'+/-, this seems to be a silly/stupid omission by Nikon

Jul 14, 2015
Entish 1

Hot shoe? P900 owners I encounter are all birders, many just hoping for "good enough for ID" images from the long lens. I've not seen a P900 pointed at anything closer than 50 ft away; usually it's 100 to 300 ft or even more distant. Some are leaving in car or at home more durable, moisture-resistant binocular or spotting scope. Who needs a hot-shoe if using the P900 to sort, identify and document flocks of birds-in-flight (BIF), birds in tall tree tops, birds on or over water or far down a beach? A P900 allows them to forego trampling habitat, or entering restricted areas, to observe wildlife without altering its behavior or scaring it off. I doubt these users intend to frame or even keep most images. The P900 is an unmatched combination of stabilized reach, portability and (relatively) reasonable price. Even w/o weather-sealing, I'd love to have one, it just looks like so much fun. I'll rely on a larger sensor (or film) for low-light situations or any images I hope to hang on a wall.

11 months ago*
PatsyK

Sizewise and specwise, how would a Canon 100d with Tamron 16-300 be?

Jul 6, 2015
gago

Closest at camerasize: Tamron 18-270. Gives an idea of what it would be, looks good! (y)
http://camerasize.com/compact/#448.313,ha,t

Nov 7, 2015
Lanidrac

If cam makers got really serious and put in dslr sized sensors, raw and other dslr options into these cameras then who then needs a DSLR? Some are at 7 fps now. That's almost my 7D! 24 to 2000 mm's without swapping glass? Amazing stuff and it's only going to get better.

Jul 6, 2015
shaolin95
shaolin95

How do you expect this to happen? How do you think they can just put a much larger sensor and give you a 2000mm reach in that package?

Jul 10, 2015
Lanidrac

It's photography or like any other biz. If a major maker see's a profit to be made in a market, they will pounce.. or they should? Digital cameras are evolving - it's incredible what has occurred in just 20 years. My original Nikon CP 990 took almost 1 minute to process a single 3.1MP TiFF image before I could shoot another photo.

Jul 10, 2015
shaolin95
shaolin95

That is not the point. You are only getting a 1200 or 2000mm (35mm equivalent range) because of the tiny sensors having a huge crop factor of around 5.62
Not saying that eventually technology will change this completely but for the time being this is not going to happen.
Its like when you have a 100mm Lens on a Full Frame camera...you get 100mm. But that same lens on a smaller APS-C sensor with crop factor 1.5 then becomes a 200mm in equivalent range.

Jul 10, 2015
Lanidrac

So what?

Jul 10, 2015
shaolin95
shaolin95

So what? That is funny...
In other words you have NO idea what I just explained..so go read and learn THEN you will get that is not so easy as you think..otherwise we would have it already. You are not THAT smart that they couldnt figure out it would be great to have bigger sensors without you pointing it out.... ;)

Jul 10, 2015
paulfulper

Lanidrac , I would love that combination too , but are you aware that the camera will be so giant you need a wheelbarrow to carry it around ?

Sep 24, 2016
Entish 1

Ooo! Play nice, Shaolin95. "Smart" and "educated" do not equate, and it is really hard to be well-educated about everything, regardless of intelligence. The point Lanidrac is missing is this: the reason we don't have pocket-friendly telephoto and zoom lenses paired with larger sensors is not about economics, and it is not about technology. It is about physics (paulfulper hints at this) and what happens to light passing through a camera lens as you increase magnification by extending the lens barrel and move some of the lens elements farther away from the camera sensor. For an easy and, yes, oversimplified demo: look at same object through tubes from toilet paper vs paper towels. Plenty of better explanations (with diagrams) can be found online: For example, see: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/ru/tutorials/camera-lenses.htm

EVERYTHING SHOULD BE MADE AS SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE, BUT NOT SIMPLER—ALBERT EINSTEIN

11 months ago*
Lanidrac

I love my 5D Mark 4. L glass rocks. Cropped sensor cams no more! Whoo-hoo! Only cost $10,000 to play too!!! Glad I did.

;-)

9 months ago
aemayers

The Panasonic Lumix FZ200, althoiugh several years old and more modest in terms of zoom range, can stand comparison with these in terms of image quality and overall utility. Its 2.8 aperture throughout the zoom range is a tremendous advantage.

Jul 2, 2015
gago

And the FZ70 (16MP) also still rocks, with its amazing 20-1200 (2.8-5.6) range and impressive stabilization.
A big advantage of the Panas (both the FZ200 and the FZ70) is that they allow shooting in RAW, so you can get decent images (of course if you stick to 100ISO and good light)

Nov 6, 2015
NCB

Pity the Nikon P610 wasn't included in the main review. It would have been worthwhile seeing how it stacked up against the Canon SX60S, on paper a very similar camera, and indeed against the Nikon's own P900, offering much the same but in a distinctly more portable body.

Jun 29, 2015
CaPi

Uhm.. some of these jpegs look a bit like comic book sketches. Check out the top left drawing. :)
Canon and Olympus look ok to me.

Jun 28, 2015
bkwilson

I own the P900 and just love it. I also own the D800e and all the best glass I can afford. If you are taking serious pics use your best camera. If your bird hunting the p900 is just fun. I carry it around on my dirt bike to get way up in the hills, and get wonderful shots of birds and animals that would be very hard with my big camera and tripod. the camera has its draw backs for sure but it has made me excited to take pictures again. The pictures I get are pretty good with alittle work before and after taking them.

Jun 27, 2015
mostlyboringphotog

"... whose small sensors collect very little light and therefore are generally noisy to begin with (here's why)." is rather misleading.
For example, if one need to enlarge the large sensor image to match the 2000mm equivalent FoV, it may look worse in terms of noise and/or sharpness. Of course one can put 2000mm lens on a FF camera and get a better result.
BTW, small sensor image is no more noisy if it's not enlarged anymore than a larger sensor image.

Jun 26, 2015
Francis Carver

1/2.3-inch sensor form factor cameras are an insult to us all in late June 2013. Die already, 1/2.3-inch cameras, please do....

Jun 27, 2015
(unknown member)

It must be tempting to produce these 1/2.3" cameras just to wind up people like Mr Carver who who get in such a frenzied rage over machinery whose existence makes absolutely no difference at all to them. It is difficult to see any reasoned point of view in all this passion.

Jun 27, 2015
Cybergate9

as others have suggested - the inclusion/exclusion of brands would helped by some transparency..
I don't mind if DPReview is used as Amazon's camera selling platform as long as I know which bits of editorial are affected by the sites ownership..

Jun 25, 2015
Richard Butler
Richard Butler

No parts of the editorial are affected by the site's ownership. We're owned by Amazon but have complete editorial autonomy - only DPReview.com editorial staff have any input into which cameras are and aren't included or what is said about that. More detail here.

No inclusions or exclusions are made on the basis of brand, they're made on the basis of how relevant the specific model is.

Jun 25, 2015*
whakapu

First point: It's a pity Canon went the specs-race route from the SX50, because all the comparisons I've seen also show a huge backward step in image quality from that model. Second point - a suggestion for dpr. I'd love to see a "reach-resolution index" based on a long telephoto test scene so that we can compare different options for getting detail and contrast of distant subjects. P900 versus 5DS-R with 600m cropped - versus 760D with 600 - versus Nikon J5 with CX 70-300, M43 with 300 etc etc. In general longer lens with smaller sensor seems to beat cropping larger sensor. It would be fascinating to see a thorough test of exactly where the crossover occurs. My guess is that currently a 760D with a Sigma 150-600 sport would yield the most detailed shot of a subject filling a 2.5 degree field of view, but maybe a P900 would beat that now. Of course background separation is another matter. A benchmark combo could be chosen and a "reach index" based on that.

Jun 25, 2015
anu l
anu l

agreed, the 1/2.33" sensors with 16MP resolution have proved to be disaster..... with pathetic DR & noise starting early in ISO range.

Jun 25, 2015
anu l
anu l

I feel like filing a petition against all companies on change.org who fill 16 MP on 1/2.3" sensors :)

Jun 25, 2015
DigitalJerry

It would be most helpful if DRReview would post their criteria for including or excluding cameras. Could it be somehow related to how well you are rewarded for including or excluding certain manufacturers? Both Sony and Panasonic have cameras that compete well, perhaps a bit too well with the cameras you did include. Many of my students, all of whom are over 60 years of age since I teach at a community college designed for seniors, like and use those cameras as well as ones from the companies you decided did not match your criterion what ever that may be. I guess your moderator can use similar criteria to not include my comments. Be interesting to see what happens.

Jun 25, 2015
Jeff Keller
Jeff Keller

Please see the FAQ for the answer to your question about ethics.

We will be adding a bit of content as well as the studio test scene for the Sony HX400V and Panasonic FZ70 as soon as we can get ahold of them (which is proving to be difficult).

Jun 25, 2015*
mpix345

You are saying you can't buy the Sony or Panny models mentioned? BuyDig has the Sony on sale (open box) for maybe $320, and the Panny, with a bunch of crappy extras, for $260.

Might upset your Amazonian masters, but no excuse not to have these cameras in the comparison.

Jun 29, 2015