wteffey Loc: Ocala, FL USA

The Panasonic FZ200 has a constant f2.8 throughout the zoom range, unlike all other competitors that might start out at f3.5, then close to f6.5 at full zoom. In theory, this would allow for significantly lower ISO's and/or higher shutter speeds as the zoom is extended, resulting in better images in lower light. Unfortunately, I cannot find a comparison that presents data that actually proves or disproves this theory. Has anyone seen data that shows that the Panasonic can shoot at lower ISO's and/or higher shutter speeds under comparable conditions?

haroldross Loc: Walthill, Nebraska

Have a look at the review on cameralabs.com. There are quite a few comparison photos between the two cameras.

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Panasonic_Lumix_DMC_FZ200/index.shtml

wteffey Loc: Ocala, FL USA

This is one of the best comparisons, but unfortunately all photos were taken at the lowest ISO available, 100 for the Panasonic and 80 for the Canon. Both camera's used the same f stop (apparently the Panasonic's constant f2.8 was disabled) and the shutter speeds were not shown, so it is impossible to tell if the constant f2.8 presented any advantage. If the comparisons were shot on AUTO, and all information provided, we could see if there was an advantage or not.

haroldross Loc: Walthill, Nebraska

Check out this page on cameralabs.com:

http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Canon_PowerShot_SX50_HS/

There are a few photos comparing the lens of the two cameras.

BHC Loc: Strawberry Valley, JF, USA

Take a look at this comparison:

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

BboH Loc: s of 2/21, Ellicott City, MD

Also look at DxO - they may have an analysis of the lens with your camera

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Huge difference is scores.

haroldross Loc: Walthill, Nebraska

I don't think there is an answer to your query. There are too many variables involved. In theory, the constant f2.8 would clearly have an advantage over a lens that starts out with a maximum of f3.5 and ends with a maximum of f6.5.

Lens speed is one variable. The quality of the lens elements, the design of the lens, sensor quality, and the computer in the camera are some of the other variables. A super zoom bridge camera is a closed system so a great lens may not perform up to expectations because of one of the other parts being the weaker link. On the other hand, a mediocre lens can give better results because of a better computer in the camera or better sensor.

wteffey Loc: Ocala, FL USA

I'm not a big fan of Snapsort. It looks as if all their data comes from data sheets, not hands on evaluation. Anyway;

Apparently a f2.8 lens is a f2.8 because the manufacturer says it is. While there may be some technical calculations to define a 2.8 lens there seems to be no standard definitions to which a manufacturer must comply. Most of the time, who cares? But if a manufacturer charges more for a lens because they label it a f2.8 at 600mm instead of f5.6 at 600mm it would be worthwhile to know if in fact the lens is really 2 stops faster and really worth the extra money.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

That's correct. What they do is compare the cameras based on specifications, not "feel" or image quality. Their site is good for a quick comparison, but I wouldn't let it rule my life. The advantages they list below the results can point out features that you might find more desirable than they did in selecting a "winner." Snapsort is just one of the resources available to help us make a decision.

ggttc Loc: TN

I have the sx50 and couldnt be happier...but you are interested in low light conditions while I am not..

Here is something that might be helpful

"And Aperture?

Don't forget that sensitivity is only one factor when it comes to picture quality. In low light, the speed of the lens (determined by its aperture) is also crucial. At wide-angle, the Canon SX50 has an aperture of f/3.4, whereas Panasonic's FZ200 is at f/2.8. So with the same shutter speed, Panasonic's bridge can stay at 800 ISO when the Canon has to push up to 1180 ISO. And this difference increases as you zoom. At 200 mm, for example, the SX50 lens aperture drops to f/5.6 while the FZ200 stays at f/2.8, letting in four times as much light. The FZ200 can therefore stay at 400 ISO when the Canon SX50 is at 1600 ISO, plus it can shoot at 1/50 ths (a speed at which portraits will generally come out clear and sharp) while its rival will need to drop to 1/12 ths (so you'll have to ask your subjects to strike and hold a pose)."

http://www.digitalversus.com/duels-battle-of-five-star-products-a966/bridge-battle-panasonic-fz200-vs-canon-sx50-hs-ap904.html