Just to define what a raw file is (if I've missed it above, my apologies!) it's essentially a digital negative - the camera saves the raw output from the sensor and then allows processing software such as Lightroom or many other programs to then process the file to produce a jpeg.The reason this is an advantage is because when the jpeg is produced, information is lost so with raw photos you can usually get more details in the dark and bright areas, set the white balance etc.
Its usefulness varies on a few things, increasingly now cameras have great jpeg engines and various software tricks to improve the photo plus the bigger the sensor, the more you can usually get out of the raw photo.In practice I don't tend to bother processing raw files from the RX100 unless there's issues with the photo I need to correct (such as getting the white balance wrong) as there's not so much latitude to improve the dynamic range and the camera has a good jpeg engine.My big Nikon D700 DSLR has a terrible jpeg engine and a fantastic full frame sensor so I always process the raw files from it and rarely use the jpegs, I tend to always process the raw files from the D750 as well although its jpeg engine isn't as bad.
As for an actual camera I agree with Ugg10's post above - the choice is between a huge zoom and a tiny sensor or a moderate zoom and a bigger sensor.The Panasonic TZ100 strikes a balance in the middle with its comparatively huge 1in sensor and 25-250mm zoom lens.The sensor isn't as good as a DSLR sensor but I've been impressed with the 1in sensor size as it still offers a noticeable improvement over the superzoom sensors but without making the cameras too big.
Between the cameras you've mentioned there isn't going to be much between them in terms of image quality and instead it's more going to be handling and other features that set them apart. If you were happy with the Panasonic then I'd lean towards the TZ80 as it should be similar in use. The reason your sample image of the seals is so soft is because the camera increased the iso setting to 320 to prevent any motion blur in the photo, on a small sensor this means a big increase in the noise which the camera has tried to control with aggressive noise reduction - if you zoom in close you'll a sort of splotchy effect which is typical of high iso noise reduction, it reduces the noise but also reduces the detail.Generally the bigger the sensor, the less noise you'll have at higher iso - the 1in sensor is not bad up to 1600 while a good full frame sensor can go 6400 and above giving them better image quality in poor light.
This is an exciting photo (only high iso one I had online with a 100% crop) at iso 1600 from an RX100mk1 with a 1in sensor:
/proxy.php?image=https://photos.smugmug.com/Photography/RX100/i-HgWtBsh/0/L/DSC00152-L.jpg&hash=d18b9357f4136452980fcc9b3ff5c5f8
And a 100% crop:
/proxy.php?image=https://photos.smugmug.com/Photography/RX100/i-TPJsSrQ/0/L/RX_Crop152-L.jpg&hash=7d42b3e694a522625021069bb5b9847b
The image is a little softer but there's still a lot of detail and this is two stops more (equivalently allowing four times more light) than the seal picture above. Thank you, I'll google ISO later to find out what it means. The ISO setting is a digital amplification of the sensor - each time you double the iso setting, you can double the shutter setting so if you're somewhere dark that you need a higher shutter or in your case when using a long focal length and want to avoid motion blur then you can increase the iso setting to do that.
The problem is that each time you increase the iso setting, you also increase the noise in the image which shows as random coloured dots in the image.The higher the iso, the worse this noise gets although generally the bigger the sensor the better they can handle higher iso settings.Dpreview have this studio comparison tool which allows you to compare cameras and choose the iso setting so you can see how they differ, I've set it to the TZ60, a TZ100 (1in sensor), a Sony A6300 (APS-C sensor) and a Nikon D750 (full frame sensor):
Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review
As with everything it's a case of balance, the tiny sensor on the TZ60 allows it to have that monster zoom in such a small package but it means the image quality suffers in less than ideal conditions.Each time the sensor gets bigger you get an improve in image quality but everything needs to be bigger hence the TZ100 only has a 10x zoom while the Sony and the Nikon are both mammoth packages with their 10x zoom lenses.
John That has to be the winner. Some of the youtube videos show unbelievable reach with that Coolpix  We've used a Canon Powershot SX50 HS for the last few years and found it to be superb. Both in terms of zoom (optical x50) and overall image quality.
No doubt there will be a later version but I'd recommend taking a look at the Canon "superzooms" or considering picking up one of these second hand for a good price. The problem with most compact zoom cameras is that dust and fine debris eventually gets inside the zoom barrel lens and it is impossible to remove. The images and video will have dots and blurs on them.
The best solution is to buy either an Olympus Tough (25-100 internal zoom) with water proofing up to 15m but only has 12.7 Mp resolution, or stick with your phone camera. These days phone camera images are getting to the equivalent resolution of travel cameras and they are easier to handle. My failing TZ60 will not be replaced with a camera but with a newer phone.
Half of the gizmos on cameras these days are pointless. Most people want a decent zoom pocket camera but there are few that are any good.
Witness the large stores like Currys/PC World in the UK and there are very few cameras on display and these are mostly SLR's. There are more drones than cameras on display and that says what direction cameras are going in.
Pages:
1
[2]