Bloke Loc: Waynesboro, Pennsylvania

Well, I drive a nissan versa, the 1600cc base model. My previous camera was a Canon powershot 1300 IS - about as basic as they come. I am not sure where I would fit in your scenario...

I have never seen the panasonic. I was impressed with some of the sx50 pics posted here, plus I had a chance to feel one out in wallmart, of all places. They actually had a battery in it, so I could check out the zoom.

I *had* been thinking of a refurb T3i, plus whatever lenses I could afford when I finally took the plunge. To get the telephoto performance of the sx, I would have had to spend a whole heap of money on glass.

Is it perfect? No, of course not. The body is a bit small for someone with 'normal-sized' hands, as has been discussed in many threads on here. It is very easy to inadvertantly switch various things on and off with the base of your right thumb. I expect to get used to that in time. It isn't as fast as most dslrs, and the sensor is quite a bit smaller than the 5D mk III. The price is also smaller, by a factor of about 7 or 8, not counting lenses.

The panasonic may well be a great camera, and I have no wish to disparage it. There are others out there too... I happened to catch part of a QVC (I think...) show the other day, which had a very similar camera on, but I can't remember what make it was. The zoom was only (only! ha!) 42x, but some of the other features were better than the sx. It was also selling for $250...! If I hadn't already bought my canon, I might well have jumped at it. If canon *do* produce the rumoured sx60 in the next few months, I might regret my haste at jumping for the sx50. That's an ever-present possibility with any consumer electronics purchase, however.

I think what I am trying to say, in a not-very-succinct-way, is that any of the similar cameras are likely to be a great buy. To someone like me, who last dabbled in 'serious' photography in the ancient days of 35mm film, the sx50 seriously blows my mind! If someone really feels the need, and wants to donate in my direction a 5D mk III and a few of those pretty white lenses, I could probably be prepared to move on, without kicking and screaming *too* much...

Shutterbugsailer Loc: Staten Island NY (AKA Cincinnati by the Sea)

And make sure they donate a additional 100k for the Canon 1200mm super telephoto lens and enough change to cover chiropractic treatments after lugging that 36lb monster around

Bloke Loc: Waynesboro, Pennsylvania

Oooh, yes please!

I had a Kowa Super 66 medium-format film camera for a while. They had an available fish-eye lens which was about 4 feet long, and the objective end kinda boomed outwards like a giant mushroom. There was enough glass on the end of that puppy to cover a tv set! It cost something silly like 8 thousand pounds - in the 70s! - and I never did find out just what it weighed. You would probably need an assistant, just to hold up the front of the lens! My feeling was always, like, really? For a shot you will maybe use once or twice a year?

bunuweld Loc: Arizona

To me the "no brainer" is the bottom bar of the review where the value appears to be the same for both until you look more carefully and see that the better value for SX50 is camouflaged on a dark gray practically invisible, unlike the flashing yellows proclaiming the adversary's superiority. Could this be intentional or just poor reviewer's lack of ability in presentation? I am inclined in thinking that commercial influences have something to do with it. another thing not singled out as important is the far superior ability of the SX50 to get sharp hand-held full-zoom pictures than with any other camera I know. I am not trying to dictate other people practices, but to me the spontaneity of prompt shot as opposed to a tripod one is a crucial part of capturing a scene.

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

There are reviewer that are misleading, incompetent or just plain dishonest but DPR is not in that category. They don't always get it 100% right but are always very close.

Yes the best way to decide what is best for you is to try each one for a period of time, but that's not practical. I don't get used to a camera in a week's time or even in a month. Nor do I have the budget.

So rather than accept opinions I look at data from as many sources as is practical. I always go with the data that supports the features I consider important. That's the way I do it, you are welcome to do it your own way.

I love these equipment debates. People are so passionate about their cameras.

I'm not a bridge camera fan. Tried a couple but they never quite satisfied. Just answering the OP's question best I know how.

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

[quote=bunuweld]To me another thing not singled out as important is the far superior ability of the SX50 to get sharp hand-held full-zoom pictures than with any other camera I know.

This says it all! :thumbup:

Ugly Jake Loc: Sub-Rural Vermont

[quote=Dlevon]

You really have to try it to believe it - it's That Good.

Thomasr53

I have the sx40 and i love it you dont know much about cameras.

Bill MN Loc: Western MN

Enlarge the photos from a bridge camera and I see noise.

Shutterbugsailer Loc: Staten Island NY (AKA Cincinnati by the Sea)

I hear noise every time my wife starts babbling

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

How about the Fuji SX1???? that would knock both Panasonic and Canon out of the park. :)

Ugly Jake Loc: Sub-Rural Vermont

I'll take that bet - borrow or rent one, then post right from camera next to this . . .

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

Against that blurry moon pic?? lol

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

I'm not talking about zoom size, that means nothing. I'm talking image quality and handling. The SX1 has a much larger image sensor than both the FZ200 and SX50.

Ugly Jake Loc: Sub-Rural Vermont

You can't get that image at all - "blurry" to zero = win for bridge camera.