Oh boy, which camera do I want?

[jzmtl]

So I've been resisting a DSLR forever now because I know I will not carry it with me, and it'll be essentially useless. Now with the advances in point and shoot they really come close in some aspects and I've been looking at these.

On one hand is the super zoom cameras like the Panasonic ZS60, which has 30x optical zoom (60x effective for video) and optical image stabilization. I really could use the zoom for sports videography, and the small size would be easy to carry around while skiing. The down size of course to fit such a high zoom in small lens size would require a small sensor, 1/2.3" if I recall.

On the other hand are the "DSLR in a P&S" type, like Sony RS100 IV, packing a full 1" sensor in a similar sized body, but much limited on zoom, less than 3x in fact. One of my main complaints regard digital camera is while the number of pixels is high, the quality of them is quite low, seems this camera is a good fix.

I'm really torn between the two. I'd love to have 30x zoom at my disposal (especially consider I'll spend two months traveling this summer), but a high quality sensor that gives me actual clear pixels is absolutely awesome too.

Both isn't an option. 

[Daark]

The low quality you are referring to is in the most part due to the optics than to the sensor.
If you are willing to step a bit up in size but still stay below DSLR size, take a look at the mirrorless cameras. Sony is ahead in this field as they concentrated now on it. Check out their NEX series.

I personally own a Nikon DSLR and had the chance to borrow a NEX 5 a few years back. It was awesone and worked well and, depending on the optic, much smaller and lighter. Meanwhile the guy whom I borrowed it from stepped up a notch and got the NEX7 full frame. Roughly same size but man, this thing is awesome.

+ interchangeable lenses
+ easy to use focussing via the back monitor (focus finding of sony's mirrorless is an awesome thing)
+ this makes it also very easy to use manual lenses which can be obtained quite cheap, as sony adopted the minolta (i think?) bayonet
+ relatively small size (especially with the right lens)
+ depending on which model and lens you take or it's age but usually these have considerable better image quality than point and shoot cameras

- more expensive than a point and shoot
- larger than a point and shoot
- no integrated flash but an optional one (NEX 5)

[dks]

It depends on how portable you want it to be.

A huge zoom is possible with an SLR too (a good choice would be a Tamron 18-270, a classic decent zoom, fits most SLR models) but the package will not fit in your pocket. Fine hanging from your neck.


The problem with any compromise, and not getting an SLR is a compromise, is that you take pictures that do not look great, knowing that had you had the SLR with you they would have been so much better.


In reality, if you are not shooting in low light then many p&S and pseudo SLRs will do. (Brighter viewfinder, more flexibility with an SLR)

As you said zoom means very little. A megapixel packed sensor can offer digital zoom, resulting in the same quality as a proper zoom of a lower MP camera.

Also, a cropped SLR image may be better than a proper P&S  camera image, zoomed.

I have several cameras, including many P&S  and i have never regretted taking my SLR with me. I have, however, on many occasions regretted leaving it at home and taking a lesser camera.  Well, unless i am taking underwater photographs, where my SLR has to be left behind. 

Basically, only you know what you want and you have probably already decided in which direction you are heading 

[jzmtl]

True, they won't come close to what a full size SLR can do, but for me portability is a top concern. I can't carry a camera pack nor have the time to set it up while skiing, I do need the zoom because we take videos for movement analysis later on computer screen, so the entire person has to be clear instead of just a dot in middle. (270 is not enough, 30x is about 720 in 35mm equivalent).

But on the other hand I could leave that tedious job to the guy with camcorder, so that makes the planned summer traveling a concern. I'm not sure if I want super high zoom or high quality with no zoom right now though.

[Daark]

You can go super high zoom AND super high quality in a decent small (with interchangeable lenses) package with a mirrorless camera.


When in doubt always go for quality (Not just sensor but also, and maybe much more important, optic)! There are a lot of good photographers that use fixed lenses (no variable zoom) with 50mm (or equivalent of 50mm on full frame) which is roughly about the same as when you look with the naked eye.
The lack of zoom makes you often "move" around more than you would with a zoom. This might sound less desireable due to physical work but it turns out moving yourself around rather than turning a zoom wheel makes images tremendously better more often than not.

(I had this experience too. For me it was thinking more about the image I want to have in the end rather than trying to get something just closer by turning a wheel.)

[comis]

jzmtl, have you gotten your camera yet?  I might be a little late in discussion, but I do own the RX100 MK2 and MK4, both are really excellent camera to say the least. 

In terms of getting a point-n-shoot, I think sensor size and aperture are big deals for me.  Given the smaller size sensor of PnS, the image will bound to be a lot nosier than regular full frame DSLR, so having larger aperture lens will at least give some assurance on the image quality.

[jzmtl]

jzmtl, have you gotten your camera yet?  I might be a little late in discussion, but I do own the RX100 MK2 and MK4, both are really excellent camera to say the least. 

In terms of getting a point-n-shoot, I think sensor size and aperture are big deals for me.  Given the smaller size sensor of PnS, the image will bound to be a lot nosier than regular full frame DSLR, so having larger aperture lens will at least give some assurance on the image quality.

Just did two days ago actually. I eventually decided that I would get a superzoom compact, and later on a micro 4/3 mirrorless for quality photos. The RX100 IV is just really expensive, more than some mirrorless in fact, and there are apparently dust issues with the unsealed lens.

Ended up going with Panasonic ZS50, so far happy with it, the 60x zoom in video mode is just insane, 30x in photo isn't shabby either.

The NFC (which was removed in 2016 version) is really nice, transfer photos to phone or set up remote control is as easy as rub the two together, no bothering with scan QR code, or trying to enter alphabetical password with a rotary dial controlled numpad.

The flip screen and tiny size on Sony H90V is nice to have, but decided against the model because you have to spend another $10 to buy the time lapse app to install on the camera, which I though was retarded especially consider every other camera has it built in.