This was just one of those “ I wonder just how close it could get “ and if you already own the fz330 and don’t use more than 600mm very often then that adapter tube and add on lens may make more sense for when you do need more reach. No it’s not good at pixel level but it’s certainly usable for reference stuff like bird id I couldn’t have put it more accurately myself.Ĭheers and happy shooting to you and all. It's just smoke screen and not a substitute for optical resolution.ĭoes that mean that you'd rather want to carry a P950 around permanently? Maybe, but more likely not. But i.Zoom doesn't really add anything that isn't there to start with. Once you unpack the LT55, the handling advantage of an FZ330 is considerably reduced but it still gives you F2.8 at the far end rather than F8 (unless you tell your camera that you have the LT55 on which is necessary for proper image stabilisation when handheld but leaves you with F4).
Or comparatively static scenes in sunlight caught with a tripod. It's great for far-away brightly things like the moon.
The FZ330 cannot really compete with the strengths of the P950 but the strengths are a niche category. Which is sort of a bane for handheld shots in less than brilliant light, and if your aim is capturing wildlife, a tripod is sort of unhandy for getting a stab at moving targets.
IZOOM PROFILE FULL
Buf F8 is a full 3 stops slower than F2.8, so you have to expose 8 times as long at equal ISO. If super-long shots in generous lighting conditions are your thing and you get them done before shaking under the weight of the P950, it delivers. I think there is not even a comparison at the far end if you look at the actual pixels: the Nikon delivers well-defined lines from the lettering and the FZ330 delivers a blocky mess with halos around the edges.Īnd I don't think this is surprising when you explicitly take the task that the P950 is built for in order to do comparisons and try emulating it with add-on weights and computational acrobatics on the FZ330.
0 kommentar(er)
