SX50- Do I have a problem? A month ago I bought a SX50, and have been learning to use it. Problem is when I do a 100% view of the pictures, in PP, I seem to have tons of noise in it.

Ka2azman Loc: Tucson, Az

A month ago I bought a SX50, and have been learning to use it. Problem is when I do a 100% view of the pictures, in PP, I seem to have tons of noise in it. By despeckling, and noise reduction helps to some degree, but I can't get a sharp picture. It looks sharp (decent) maybe around 50% view. I've tried A-P-Tv-Av modes. They all seem to do it. I tried changing ISO from 100-400 etc. Doesn't matter.
Could I have a defective sensor? Or does this event happen to everyone else at 100% view?

I have a T4i, yes 18 mp compared to 12 mp, but this nose problem doesn't start for this one circa 200% or so.

Thank you, for your time and any replies.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Why don't you upload a few examples and click "store original" so we can compare?

Here is a link to a couple of my recent shots that I consider to be about as good as any I've gotten. You can click download, then the magnifier to see if they look similar.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-130820-1.html

JPL

Ka2azman wrote:

A month ago I bought a SX50, and have been learnin... (show quote)

I do not have a SX50, but I have been looking at pics taken with it and posted on various places on the Internet. My research is the reason for that I do not want a SX50. I think your SX50 is just like other SX50, the pic quality is simply not so good. I guess it is due to the small sensor in SX50, it is so small that it is impossible to get better quality from it at the price level for this camera. So you will have to accept low quality of the SX50 or buy something else. Maybe you can change your settings, use fixed ISO instead of auto ISO etc, but the image quality will still be bad compared to a dslr.

Jimande Loc: Huntsville, Alabama

Admittedly, I don't see as well as I once did, but I don't see the problem in my pictures taken with an SX50. I have attached an example, some of the real experts might be able to point out some problems, but I don't see it. This was shot late in the day at f5.6, 1/500, ISO 1600, -0.7 step, 141mm, pattern metering.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

JPL wrote:

... but the image quality will still be bad compared to a dslr.

There are a great many happy SX50 users who will disagree with labeling the image quality as "bad" :)

On the other hand, it's true you really shouldn't be comparing SLR results to the SX50.

Dlevon Loc: New Jersey

Ka2azman wrote:

A month ago I bought a SX50, and have been learnin... (show quote)

Sorry to ask a dumb question, but have you cleaned your lens? I have a couple of friends who always complaining about their pictures and I had to keep reminding them about clean lenses. Sometimes I saw finger smudge on their lenses. They forgot! They asked, wouldn't cleaning their lenses often ruin them?

Ka2azman Loc: Tucson, Az

Linda From Maine wrote:

Why don't you upload a few examples and click "store original" so we can compare?

Here is a link to a couple of my recent shots that I consider to be about as good as any I've gotten. You can click download, then the magnifier to see if they look similar.

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-130820-1.html

Thank for the attention,
Should I post Raw or a converted picture (TIFF , JPEG)

Ka2azman Loc: Tucson, Az

Dlevon wrote:

Sorry to ask a dumb question, but have you cleaned your lens? I have a couple of friends who always complaining about their pictures and I had to keep reminding them about clean lenses. Sometimes I saw finger smudge on their lenses. They forgot! They asked, wouldn't cleaning their lenses often ruin them?

Thanks for the reply, but yes I do have a clean lens.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

Ka2azman wrote:

Thank for the attention,
Should I post Raw or a converted picture (TIFF , JPEG)

Jpeg, please.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

Wait don't you see the decline in image quality, the extremely pixelated rendition of the flower, the lack of color rendition all because of the size of the sensor and the fact that the camera does not cost hundreds more than a DSLR and the accompanying lenses?

You don't?

Me neither!

Jimande wrote:

Admittedly, I don't see as well as I once did, but I don't see the problem in my pictures taken with an SX50. I have attached an example, some of the real experts might be able to point out some problems, but I don't see it. This was shot late in the day at f5.6, 1/500, ISO 1600, -0.7 step, 141mm, pattern metering.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

Others do not seem to complain about this. You may have a defective camera. If it is but a month old, you are still probably under warranty.

Ka2azman wrote:

A month ago I bought a SX50, and have been learnin... (show quote)