Watch This Before You Buy the Nikon Coolpix P1000 

no thanks. rather get a real telescope (oh wait, i already do!)

Hugh Mongus does it take cool pictures?

@@hedone13x the camera attached to it does.

@@hughmongus1233 what camera, and what telescope? Do these two cost less or higher than Nikon alone? Appreciate the answer!

@@JAVC1962 there are lots of combos

Nikon P5100 exactly

@akhi Sinha When the time come to see the mars clearly with your cam.. you'll heard "astronauts" say "oh we used to go mars in seconds but unfortunately we destroyed that technology and it's hard to build it again" loool

I heard rumors that the image of the black hole was captured on the Nikon p5000 concept.

@@CrypticRite are you sure? loool

@@GabrieLight *Sarcastically replies* Oh yeah, definitely positive about that one. Oh boy, oh boy, I'm definitely not fibbing around.

You predicted the future

Me! Hahaha.

Haha! Lockdown heaven!

The ideal "corona camera"

@@jpsholland Corona camera !!!dead 💀 🤣 😂 😳

Thanks for this info!

Is that camera right for street photography?

@@damianwojcikiewicz3951 I use it for candid street photography and it's amazing. But I'm a total amateur so what do I know? It's been my go-to since I got it. 3 other cameras sitting in my closet wishing they could morph into the P1000... Birding each morning with it makes my days brighter.

@@damianwojcikiewicz3951 Of course... but the camera is very heavy, so you need to decide if you really want to carry 2kg around with you for hours... for spontaneous street photography i usually prefer lighter cams

@@damianwojcikiewicz3951 yes if you want to take a picture of someone 1 km from you 🤣

but youll still gonna Record them with your shaky 1990's camera

ufo does not exist... There is no clear video with ufo =)))

@@NucleaR_EFECT Depends on what you mean by ufo. There are a bunch of videos of ufo but that doesnt mean there are solid photographical evidence of aliens. I have seen ufo's two times myself only caught it on my iphone from about 1km away and that is the very reason i am looking at this camera. Google hessdalen lights thats where i saw it.

@@Martin-nv3qh where are you from ??

NucleaR_EFECT Norway not far from hessdalen

11/10 name

No... it was video 😀

I took video of Saturn with a p900, not as clear or as zoomed in, but yes, it's a thing I've personally experienced.

@@SmartGadgetShow Easy fix. Go thru the video frame by frame for the best one, crop it as a photo. It's a life hack I used with my p900 all the time with wildlife photography, more so with birds. They're so skiddish and hyper, and I few shots don't cut it in comparison to hundreds of potential "photos" that lie hidden in a video.

you can see jupiter and it's moons too

Why does Saturn look like a really obvious optical illusion?

Get Or Make yourself a Sand Bags to help you hold it for the Roof shot's Or on the hood and it will give you a little more stability and also to were you're not getting all Hood color of your vehicle into the shots and you can bunch it up and hold it At all different angles.. just something else to Buy .... To get that one shot to be remembered for EVER...

no, its a shit..

Nomad Viking It's a telescope ' hi N V... binocular and telescope are more perfect clear focus... is that right

@@1981OA the only shit is your existence

Yeah , you can see saturn with p1000

@@idonotsleep4220 you can see 4 pixels that vaguely resemble saturn*

16mp is fine for Facebook, Instagram and image prints up to a reasonable amount. I've seen some fabulous images from a few that own this camera, albeit the weight gives me hesitation on purchasing it.

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Lol

burj khalifa might be a better option.

Lol

@@SAJ.GAMING why not he is trying on his penis lol

@@Kidz_masti 3

@@SAJ.GAMING 😂😂😂😂

Do you feel nervous holding a grand in your hand?

@@misterneckbreaker88 Great question 😆 I have never really thought about it.. The camera has been a real trooper especially during the shut in time of Covid. I could sit in the back yard and use the powerful zoom feature to catch all the birds and small animals that frequent my backyard. It has also been an excellent camera to shoot the moon. I will tell you that it is best supported by a very sturdy tripod in conjunction with a long lens stabilizer for the P1000....otherwise you get shake and the weight of the camera and extended lens will sag and make it hard to stay focused on an object. All in all it was a great purchase...even at the $1049.00 I paid. Thanks for the question....keep shooting. Fred in Texas

​@@fredfleming8905Hey I am not in the know with camera tech to know what is going to be suitable. Would this camera be a good all rounder from family/friend photos all the way to zoomed in crisp subjects across the city (sounds handy for any sports day or adventure) NIKKOR Z 24-70mm f/4 S with a canon eos R50 mirrorless would cost me a lot more but looks like it would be a similar image (based on my lack of knowledge) with having 24.2MP and the same 4k 30

@@konarr7158 Hello, after having the P1000 Nikon for sometime now its plus’s are birds and wildlife photography for sure. Extreme telephoto is not that sharp you must use a very solid robust tripod and I use a special mount to handle the heavy extended lens. Even with that I can get some drift doing Moon shots…another thing it does well. It’s a heavy camera to carry around all day and mine is only 16MP. On a scale of 1-10 for a single purchase do everything camera I would give it a 6. I use my Sony a6100 and a 18-300mm lens for a very good all around camera and the P1000 primarily shooting wildlife. Hope that helps. Fred

Great camera. How are you getting on with it?

@@UFO-Ark This is the 3rd time I have responded to your question. The reply button keeps disappearing. I am simply exhausted.

@@UFO-Ark I have been out in the countryside for several hours trying to get the P1000 to work. Simple things like ISO, Aperture, and Shutter speed could not be set without great difficultly.

@@UFO-Ark The P1000 is not functional. Too many error and software difficulties. A decent photographer should not have to put up with what I went through today. I took 60 pictures and they were absolutely lousy. Settings could not be adjusted. Settings would disappear.

me too

Same

I was able to shoot the highest quality at 2400mm, and if you turn on super zoom mode with 4 megapixels, you can get up to ~9300mm which is 489x optical+digital zoom. Not sure if the P1000 is able to do this, but FZ80's price point, battery life and light weight is a win for me with 1/3 of the price :D

Patrick can i have your email so we can be in touch i need help with that with the setting

Think seriously about it before spending all that money.. Do you really need a super zoom camera? What type of photography are you looking to do? There are some great cameras out there for nowhere near the price of this Nikon super zoom. Do you want to do street photography? Or do you wish to do, micro photography, or night shots? For example, I have the Fujifilm Finepix s99OOW with a 50x zoom. I hardly ever use that zoom facility though, as I am more interested in taking shots of the subjects I have just mentioned. The s99OOW is nowhere near the price of the Nikon displayed, yet it takes stunning shots. I know what type of photography I want to do so that is half the battle won. So, as I said, before you spend all that money on a camera whose zoom facility you may not even use, think seriously about what type of photography you wish to produce.

I'll purchase your P900

I'm serious!!!!

I’m liking the P950 lately

Really?

That's complete idiocy. I'm willing to bet it's the EU since all they do these days is pass ridiculous laws.

Yes, my iPhone is definitely a movie camera.

@Angelo Cella Back in 2006, the EU controversially decided to classify high-end digital cameras as video recorders, which attached a customs duty of 5-12% for digital cameras imported into Europe. The classification was decided not just based on digital cameras' improving abilities to record video through its lens and sensor, but their ability to record direct input from external sources like televisions. A home video recorder tax would theoretically offset money lost from users recording movies off broadcast television or cable onto digital devices, though the EU has never been very clear on the tax's intent. The tax's consequence, though, has been felt in every digital camera user looking to use a DSLR in place of a camcorder, as camera manufactures would rather limit recording capability in software than raise the price of its cameras (or lower their margins).

Where in the world would any cinema be recorded as one whole single movie file? Jeez

The camera can be used while charging. That was a mistake.

Ah lol

P E R V O N E T H O U S A N D

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

😯 Hey, you might be right.

😂😂😂😂

Thats what we call " scumbag zoom "

What lens do you have wich weights 5 kg??? Thats impossible. I hava an old 1000 mm maksutov (mto1000a) mirror lens and its only 3.5 kg. No way a 150-600 could weight 5kg.

@@pauka13 I was wrong in my estimation of the weight, I've just put the tamron on the scales and it was 2.1kg in its bag it 2.5kg

@@iallso1 You weren't wrong, you thought in terms of pounds not kilos. 5 pounds is 2.2 kg.

@@schizophrantic you give me too much credit, thank you.

my *Panasonic* also does good with the *ZOOM* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-rsv5Uy4c2Vc.html The Zoom isn't as far reaching as the P1000 but it's alot more *STEADY* a M̤̈Ä̤Ẍ̤ zoom

Thanks very useful info.... I'll look into that one too..... The "perfect... For astronomers and earth scientist".. Says is perfectly 👌

RX10IV is double the price of this camera. lmao weird flex, dude.

How much was it?

I also would like to know ?

Would this be better than an rx10 IV? Or a DSLR option, just curious

@@MatthewMKF Well it’s almost a year later and I’m still deciding between this and a few other cameras. It depends if you want to take pictures or record.

@@MatthewMKF The RX10 is probably better quality video wise but nothing beats the P1000’s zoom.

@@MatthewMKF a DSLR is also a good option as long as it can record and you have a lens that is at least up to a 300mm zoom. A lens will be necessary, but yes a DSLR is a good choice seeing how many different cameras, lenses, and accessories there are.

@@FrequencyORD for a higher price, would the a7 IV and a 200-600mm be good?

@@mroldnewbie At such incredible zoom-numbers, trust me that a mechanical zoom-ring has to have a gigantic throw to be able to focus onto the thing you like. My Olympus MFT 50-150 mm or so lens at the far tele-end will give you a 300 mm tele (35mm equivalent). The Olympus lens has the great advantage of having a switchable focus ring. By pulling it towards you while holding the camera, the focus works fully mechanical. Push it forward and it's electromechanical. At the far-tele end (and especially with the 1,4 x teleconverter used as well) the mechanical focus throw is waaay to small to accurately focus on things. As you try to focus on that specific spot, you usually start 'tapping' the ring in the hope you get the right point into focus. In reality, you keep overshooting that point and you will switch to electromechanical focus, which, especially at both far ends of the lens, give far more fine control over focus. Even my mechanically coupled videolenses (all full-mechanical by the way, exposure, zoom ánd focus is all directly coupled) that are meant to be focused by hand are quite hard when you get to the far tele-end of them. Their throw is better (and the ring doesn't have the same 'stickyness' of the Olympus) but it's still quite a challenge to focus on exactly thát thing you want in focus. And I'm talking about 1/3 inch sensor cameras there: my videocameras with interchangeable lenses don't have bigger sensors. The problems only get worse with bigger sensors as the depth of field usually decreases.

Actually, when measuring focal lengths of lenses, the length is much closer to the distance between the rear element and the sensor of the camera. It would be closer to the lens would need to be 3 meters long and then you hit the first piece of glass in the lens, and then you get to the business end of things. www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and-explore/a/tips-and-techniques/understanding-focal-length.html#

Or, sanity checking myself, and seeing that the 800mm 5.6 from Nikon is listed at 461mm long overall, I could be completely wrong 😀

@@bobwill oh yeah :-) 'distance from the centre of the lens to the focal plane or equivalent distance in a compound lens' , which it obviously is. At least someone was paying attention :-)

That would really only apply with a single element lens, such as with a refractor telescope. A teleconverter can double the focal length without doubling the physical length.

But if it was a larger sensor you will be able to crop more in the image and have the same zoom.

Or just get a cheap dobson telescope for the 600D. Images will be immensely better.

@@KP3droflxp P1000 is the favorite camera of the flat earthers. They cannot focus it on any celestial object and use this as a "proof" that stars and planets are fake.

​@@KP3droflxpmake sure you also get a camera adapter

my *Panasonic* also does good with the *ZOOM* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-rsv5Uy4c2Vc.html The Zoom isn't as far reaching as the P1000 but it's alot more *STEADY* a M̤̈Ä̤Ẍ̤ zoom

@@tumarbongrox6074 of course it is... but if compare them at the same zoom, I'm sure the p1000 is much steadier...

Now that's a camera I'd buy❤️

You can image Saturn with the thing, but a telescope. it is NOT.

So I wasn’t the only one who heard this 😂

Same with me. I thought i heard it wrong 😆

😁😁😁

2 piece chicken meal in the beach

Only people at nude beaches are horny old fat men, have fun taking dick pics I guess LOL...

Going to the wrong beach, beaches here is more boobs. less gay.

WE LIVE ON A FLAT STATIONARY PLANE WITH A FIRMAMENT ABOVE. ITS A CLOSED SYSTEM. WE CANNOT LEAVE THE EARTH. THEYVE NEVER BEEN TO SPACE. NOTHING GOES IN OR OUT OF THE FIRMAMENT. THE ROTATING GLOBE IS A LIE! WHY? TO MAKE US FEEL INSIGNIFICANT. THEYRE HIDING CREATION/INTELLIGENT DESIGN. THE GOLDEN RATIO AND FLOWER OF LIFE PROVE ITS INTELLIGENT DESIGN. A FLAT STATIONARY PLANE WITH A FIRMAMENT ABOVE PROVES ITS INTELLIGENT DESIGN. THE SUN AND MOON ARE LOCAL LUMINARIES. THE SUN IS NOT 93 MILLION MILES AWAY. THE MOON IS NOT 250+ THOUSAND MILES AWAY. THE MOON IS SELF ILLUMINATING. THE PHASES OCCUR REGARDLESS OF THE SUNS POSITION. I DONT THINK THE MOON IS EVEN A SOLID SPHERICAL OBJECT EITHER. THE SUN IS MORE CONSISTENT WITH THAT OF A HEAT LAMP. WATER WOULD HAVE TO FLOW UP HILL FOR A GLOBE TO WORK. "THERE IS NO UPHILL ON A GLOBE" SAYS GLOBERS. GIVEN THAT LOGIC , THERES NO DOWN HILL ON A GLOBE EITHER. WHY WOULD WATER FLOW AT ALL? CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. IF IT WERE A GLOBE ROTATING ON AN AXIS 1000 MILES AN HOUR AND HURLING THROUGH SPACE TOWARDS POLARIS THEN NORTH IS TOP/ FRONT ... EQUATOR IS THE CENTRE/MIDDLE AND SOUTH IS BOTTOM /BACK ... THE EARTHS MOTION WOULD CAUSE DIRECTIONAL ORIENTATION... WE ALL KNOW THE EQUATOR IS THE CENTRE / MIDDLE. .. THEN WE ARE SUPPOSEDLY ROTATING 1000 MILES AN HOUR ON AN AXIS WHICH MEANS CENTRIFUGAL FORCE IS GREATEST AT THE EQUATOR. THE IMAGINARY FORCE YOU REFER TO AS GRAVITY WOULD GRADUALLY GET STRONGER TOWARDS THE POLES . ITS AN "OBLATE SPHEROID"... "PEAR SHAPED" ... "A LITTLE CHUBBIER BELOW THE EQUATOR" ... THEN ON TOP OF THAT THE EARTH IS HURLING THROUGH THE GALAXY AND SPIRALING AROUND THE SUN AT 37,000 MILES AN HOUR TOWARDS POLARIS. .. NORTH BOUND! NORTH IS FRONT! THE PHYSICS WOULD BE LIKE A WET FOOTBALL SPIRALING THROUGH THE AIR. WATER WOULD MOVE FRONT TO BACK ...NORTH TO SOUTH... AND BE THROWN OFF AT THE CENTRE/ MIDPOINT / EQUATOR . NILE RIVER IS OVER 4200 MILES LONG AND FLOWS FROM SOUTH TO NORTH. THE NILE RIVER WOULD HAVE 572 MILES OF CURVATURE AT ITS MIDPOINT (APEX) THEREFORE THE NILE RIVER WOULD HAVE TO FLOW UP AND OVER 572 MILES OF CURVATURE OVER A DISTANCE OF 4200+ MILES ON A BALL. THE NILE RIVER WOULD HAVE TO FLOW UP HILL BEGINNING SOUTH OF THE EQUATOR,CROSSING OVER THE EQUATOR AND CONTINUE NORTH DESPITE THE ENTENSELY STRONG CENTRIFUGAL FORCE . IMPOSSIBALL! THE SUPPOSED CURVATURE IS 8 INCHES PER MILE SQUARED. .. 1) BEDFORD EXPERIMENT PROVES NO CURVATURE. 2) TORONTO ROGERS CENTRE SEEN FROM GRIMSBY 6FT ABOVE LAKE LEVEL FROM 30.84 MILES AWAY PROVES THERES NO CURVATURE. TOP OF THE ROGERS CENTRE SHOULD BE OVER 200FT BELOW THE SUPPOSED. 3) CHICAGO IS SEEN FROM MICHIGAN.THIS PROVES THERES NO CURVATURE. OBSERVER IS 6FT TALL. SO 6FT ABOVE LAKE LEVEL.60 MILES AWAY.CHICAGO SHOULD BE 2166FT BELOW THE SUPPOSED CURVATURE. 4) THE LONGEST CANAL IN THE WORLD IS 100 MILES LONG BUT NOT A SINGLE LOCH WAS USED. NO CURVATURE NO GLOBE! 5) LONGEST BRIDGE IN THE WORLD IS 102 MILES LONG. SHOULD BE ALMOST 7000 FT OF CURVATURE IN THAT BRIDGE. NO CURVATURE NO GLOBE! 6) LAKE PONTCHATRAIN BRIDGE IS 24 MILES LONG AND COMPLETELY LEVEL AND BUILT OVER WATER THE ENTIRE 24 MILES. ONLY 2 INCHES LOWER ON ONE SIDE . 2 INCHES IN 24 MILES??? NO CURVATURE NO GLOBE! 7) EXALT WIRELESS WORKS BY LINE OF SIGHT OVER A DISTANCE OF 146 MILES ACROSS THE MEDITERRANEAN SEA. THE TOWERS ARE NO MORE THAN 50FT HIGH. IMPOSSIBLE ON A GLOBE! PROOF OF FLAT EARTH! 8) SASKATCHEWAN. .. SALT FLATS OF BOLIVIA. .. KANSAS .... ALL FLAT FOR HUNDREDS OF MILES! 9) LIGHTHOUSES ARE SEEN FROM IMPOSSIBLE DISTANCES. LIGHTHOUSES WORK BY LINE OF SIGHT! 10) LASER GUIDANCE SYSTEMS WORK USING LINE OF SIGHT! SEA (LEVEL). .. AIR (PLANE)... PLANE (T) ..PLANE & LEVEL MEAN FLAT! THERES ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF OF A GLOBE ROTATING IN SPACE. NOT A SINGLE REAL IMAGE/FOOTAGE. NONE! MOON LANDING WAS A HOAX. ISS LIVE STREAMS ARE OBVIOUSLY FAKE AND FILMED IN STUDIOS. ISS=IN SOME STUDIO. HARNESSES, GREEN/BLUE SCREENS, CGI, UNDER WATER , AIR BUBBLES, FLY ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE ISS WINDOW. ETC WE LIVE ON A FLAT STATIONARY PLANE WITH A FIRMAMENT ABOVE. THEYVE NEVER BEEN TO SPACE. ITS A CLOSED SYSTEM. WE CANNOT LEAVE THE EARTH. SPACE IS WATER. "GRAVITY" IS AN UNPROVEN THEORY. IT DOESNT EXIST. ITS A PATHETIC DESPERATE ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN HOW EVERYTHING STICKS TO A BALL ROTATING AND FLYING THROUGH A "VACUUM OF SPACE". ITS REALLY JUST DENSITY AND BOYEUNCY. WEIGHT. UP AND DOWN. LIGHTER THAN AIR AND HEAVIER THAN AIR. JUST MOLECULES INTERACTING WITH EACH OTHER. FOR EXAMPLE-THE MOLECULES IN A ROCK ARE MORE DENSE THE MOLECULES IN THE AIR. THEREFORE THE ROCK FALLS THROUGH THE AIR TO THE GROUND. SIMPLE. TO ALL YOU TROLLS - (WE DONT LIVE IN A VACUUM CHAMBER.A VACUUM ISNT A NATURAL STATE) WHAT SEPERATES THIS VACUUM FROM EARTH ATMOSPHERE? "GRAVITY" ?? LOL WERNHER VON BRAUN (NASA FOUNDER / ROCKET SCIENTIST) HAS PSALMS 19:1 ENGRAVED ON HIS HEADSTONE. PSALMS 19:1 TALKS ABOUT GOD AND THE FIRMAMENT. SEARCH-SPRITES PROVE THE FIRMAMENT! ROCKETS HAVE HIT THE FIRMAMENT! SEARCH-ROCKET SLAMS INTO THE DOME (FIRMAMENT) SEARCH-"METEOR" HITTING THE FIRMAMENT. MOUNTAINS ARE GIANT PETRIFIED TREE STUMPS. DEVILS TOWER FOR EXAMPLE. THE INDIVIDUAL HEXAGONAL COLUMNS ARE PLANT FIBRES! TROLLS / SHILLS CAN TAKE A HIKE! LOL

I have a P900 it does the job well. I don't consider the P100 worth double the cost. I bought a circular polarizer and a solar filter for it and I very pleased with what I can do with the P900

I had a p900 and now have a p1000, the sensor works fine.

All this P-1000 talk drew me to look into the P-900. I’m gonna pick one of those up too. :) $599 here where I live.

Bigger sensor would be impossible without massively increasing the weight, and price. I use a lumix gf3 with a 100-300mm that's a 200mm-600mm equivalent, or I can use an adapter and use my sigma 150-600 That's 300-1200mm equivalent, but with that set up and weight, plus no image stabilisation it has to be used on a tripod. Lumix gf 3 is a micro 4/3rds system. I guess it could be done with a 1inch sensor but it'd be 4 times the weight and twice as long and cost a few thousand bucks. It's made at a price point to sell, designing it isn't the main issue, it's trying to sell it, who would buy a 1 inch sensor camera with a 25-2000mm equivalent lens that weighs 4kg and cost 3-$4,000.. Even at this price they'd need to be able to sell a lot to be worth the cost of development and manufacturing of it. The P900 is damn good for what it Is, the p1000 I don't think will sell that well, the kind of people who buy these types of bridge cameras aren't the type who want to pay that kind of money for it. It needs to drop down to around $700 ... £600ish before it starts selling in any great numbers

I think it will drop to around 700 after 12 months, it's new so price is high, i was trying to find the launch price of the P900 so see how much it had come down by since launch (if any). The 1/2.3 sensor is about a crop factor of 6, which is as you have said why the zoom is so large, put in a bigger sensor and the zoom would have to be redesigned, maybe not much heavier, but larger yes. As for price, yeah a £1000 (in the UK) is way to much for the performance of a mobile phone camera in terms of sensor.

Random RimRock that’s what these amateurs don’t get. Close is everything. You’d be much better off figuring how to get closer.

@@the_original_skytiger Right, you know the situation of everyone on the planet the best. Everyone else is stupid.

@@pekarna Just quit whining and get closer. You'll see I'm right.

Its huge and I'm on the fence about returning it and keeping my 900. I was able to take some amazing moon videos and photos with it but not really that much more impressive than the 900.

So basically you want to return it so some poor sucker gets stuck with your used camera. I swear people who buy cameras are the biggest low life fuckers.

You are truly an idiot. The shop will sell it as used or return it to Nikon for credit. Moron. You have never returned anything in you miserable little life?????

@@8PMFORMULA Consumers have the right to return products if they're unsatisfied. The store will not lose money because they'll just return it to Nikon for credit then sell it as refurbished at their site or the store will resell it as an "open box". The store may charge a restocking fee to discourage returns but why keep an expensive item you're not happy with? Nikon will not lose money, believe me.

@@8PMFORMULA You are a person of very little quality!

A "beast" with a TINY sensor which "magnifies" the "zoom". While the camera is fun, you will NOT get quality images with this camera.

I don't think the P1000 is any better. Even in the video you can see the FZ80 is near as good. It doesn't zoom as far, but the P1000@3000mm is only pixel junk. Digitally zoom in the picture of the FZ80 and you would get the same result. lol!

@@REDxFROG yup. P1000 is no big deal ;)

P900 is 1.5MP and p1000 is 1MP so the p900 has a lower lens zoom but an higher digital zoom.

I went from my F801/F3. Film camera's to a Canon digital.. WHoops. By Bye. then a P500. then P600. as long as you stay BELOW the digital Zoom on them they give fine shots. All the Digital zoom does is select centre of largest zoom range and blow it up. You want bigger. Get closer. I'm old school never play with my shots. what I take is what I use. We go O'seas every yr and use both my P600, with My Samsung phone for movie type shots. At 77 yrs my eyes tell my Brain. "You ain't gonna see any better than that with these eyes so I'm fine. (They pretty good as long as you don't want action stills. The mechanisms are too slow to react. My Nikon P801. 8000 shutter was best I ever had. even over the F3 for Jet sprints. Arrows and even Projectiles on Macro. But film too exxy for the working man nowadays, even processing your own.

@@REDxFROG To my opinion the 3000 mm shot is not pixel junk. It is not as good as the more normal range, but it is actually surprisingly good for such an insane range. Most of the degradation can be attributed to the atmosphere. We have to keep in mind what we can see there is not possible to see usually. I have seen moon photos taken with that camera, which shame pics taken with a $ 4000 telescope. Lastly, remember what you had to pay for a single 3000 mm photo lens. I think a not perfect picture is still better than no picture. I would be glad if I even had the FZ80 mentioned, but the P1000 opens a new door for many of us.

amzn.to/2zMgtAS

BTW I use the same Manfrotto Fluid head, (MVH502AH) but on a different tripod. The fluid head is very hefty, but superb for big video cams etc.

Guess u need an Eiffel Tower to hold so much weight 😊😊😊