Canon SX50 HS or Panasonic FZ200: Which would you buy... mostly used for children, landscapes, vacation, sports from the stands..thanks...

Paayl96 Loc: Boston

Which would you buy...
mostly used for children, landscapes, vacation, sports from the stands..thanks

donrent Loc: Punta Gorda , Fl

I've had the SX40 and was dissapointed with it so much I almost immmediatly sold it. Did not like the jerky movement of the telelens (not a smooth movement) and the camera is so small , my fingers would without knowing it, hit buttons screwing up my settings...
I have now the Panasonic ZS7 p&s with a Leica lens, and for the most part like it very much..It takes the best B/W photos of any camera I've ever had... I will go back (but keep the ZS7) to a regulaar type camera and really like FZ200 because of the 2.8 lens all the way, and because its a Leica lens... Panasonic is putting out some VERY good cameras...

Opps, made a mistake... The lens on this model is NOT a Leica lens, but there should be no doubt of its quality...

I would very seriously consider the Panasonic... :shock:

Ched49 Loc: Pittsburgh, Pa.

It's really a no brainer, the SX50 is a better camera. The Canon has 50X zoom vs. 24X, Canon shoots 13 f.p.s. vs. 12 f.p.s. Image quality is better for the Canon. The Canon is cheaper. The FZ200 does have a better quality lens.

Jerry Brown

There's lots of comparison sights here's one

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-PowerShot-SX50-HS-vs-Panasonic-Lumix-DMC-FZ200

But what it boils down to how does the camera fit in your hand. These camera are very different. The 50 is much smaller than the 200 so what donrent says is very viable. But if you have smaller hands that wouldn't bother you. What feels the best??

donrent Loc: Punta Gorda , Fl

Most definatly a good point... Check it out...

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

cjkorb wrote:

It's really a no brainer, the SX50 is a better camera. The Canon has 50X zoom vs. 24X, Canon shoots 13 f.p.s. vs. 12 f.p.s. Image quality is better for the Canon. The Canon is cheaper. The FZ200 does have a better quality lens.

Where did you come up with that?

Check out DPReview the most presidios review site on the internet.

The yellow bar show where the FZ200 exceed the SX50.

Indeed its a no brainer.

sbesaw Loc: Boston

joer wrote:

Where did you come up with that?

Check out DPReview the most presidios review site on the internet.

The yellow bar show where the FZ200 exceed the SX50.

Indeed its a no brainer.

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

I don't know of any sports shooter that needs more than 600mm.
If any of your sports are inside, Basketball, hockey, swimming, arena soccer or Lax the 2.8 lens will allow much higher shutter speeds to freeze the action allowing for sharper shots. The low light performance of the FZ200 is unmatched

donrent Loc: Punta Gorda , Fl

The lens xxx on th 50 is VERY impressive, but I found that I rarely used much more than 200mm or so, so that much (600mm) is basically a waste...That lens IS very good, but I still put money on the Panasonic...
I have been a Canon type guy for years, but there is always a better mouse type somewhere...

sbesaw Loc: Boston

donrent wrote:

The lens xxx on th 50 is VERY impressive, but I found that I rarely used much more than 200mm or so, so that much (600mm) is basically a waste...That lens IS very good, but I still put money on the Panasonic...
I have been a Canon type guy for years, but there is always a better mouse type somewhere...

I was talking about Panasonic 640mm) not Canon 1000mm. I agree with you

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

not to mention the Panasonic has a much higher resolution electronic viewfinder and articulating screen

charles brown Loc: Tennesse

Paayl96 wrote:

Which would you buy...
mostly used for children, landscapes, vacation, sports from the stands..thanks

My nephew has taught photography for several years. He is a die hard canon man. I asked him the exact same question. A few days later his answer was buy the Panasonic.

noknees438 Loc: NYC

I agree Don. I have an old FZ7 and the Leica glass is tack sharp. Luv my Lumix when I don't want to lug my Canon DSLR around.

donrent wrote:

I've had the SX40 and was dissapointed with it so ... (show quote)

Bill MN Loc: Western MN

Paayl96 wrote:

Which would you buy...
mostly used for children, landscapes, vacation, sports from the stands..thanks

I tried both of them. Didn't like either one. If I had to pick it would be the Panasonic FZ200. The more zoom the worse they get.

Ugly Jake Loc: Sub-Rural Vermont

Racmanaz wrote:

not to mention the Panasonic has a much higher resolution electronic viewfinder and articulating screen

You mean the 50 ? resolution in a viewfinder is like buying a car for the cupholders, IMO.

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

joer wrote:

Where did you come up with that?

Check out DPReview the most presidios review site on the internet.

The yellow bar show where the FZ200 exceed the SX50.

Indeed its a no brainer.

As in life specs are not everything! Never trust reviews! Half of the time the reviewers have never used the camera. Best info is by those that have the camera and enjoyed it, loved it, or hated it. There is no such thing as a perfect camera. Best way to figure it out is to either buy one, use it, and see if it meets your needs, or rent or borrow one! And decide if it's a keeper or not. I for one like many SX 50 owners on the Hog, love it as it meets my needs in photography, especially at this time in my existence.