Canon SX50: I am camping and met up with a fellow and I am in awe of his Canon SX 50 capabilities. My 650D with a 300mm lens was pathetic in comparison. I'm a newbie so perhaps my...

Whyfret1 Loc: Easton, MD

I am camping and met up with a fellow and I am in awe of his Canon SX 50 capabilities. My 650D with a 300mm lens was pathetic in comparison. I'm a newbie so perhaps my perspective is due to naivety. Where I am going with this? I am asking for feedback regarding the SX versus another option. I want the zoom potential but would also like more MP if possible.
Any and all opinions welcomed

James56 Loc: Nashville, Tennessee

Whyfret1 wrote:

I am camping and met up with a fellow and I am in awe of his Canon SX 50 capabilities. My 650D with a 300mm lens was pathetic in comparison. I'm a newbie so perhaps my perspective is due to naivety. Where I am going with this? I am asking for feedback regarding the SX versus another option. I want the zoom potential but would also like more MP if possible.
Any and all opinions welcomed

Well why not try a Sony....20.2 MP, but don't let that fool you now!!!!. Most superzooms (including the Sony) rely on digital zoom...for those extreme shots. Up close ...it's killer But like the Canon, you get tons of digital noise beyond 200x. Stick with Optical zoom and you'll be OK image quality wise. They're fun cameras, easy to carry...lots of range. You won't need to carry a slew of cameras or lenses. There are several others in the super zoom field as well. Nikon has the 520...you gotta respect a Nikon. Fuji has some models as well that merit a look. Great low light range. There's a big SX50 following here on UHH, and its highly respected...including me. Best thing is to head to a good camera retailer and check them all out. However, I've got to say this to all my Canon SX50 owners and fans on UHH...love you guys and gals! Superzooms are fun and I respect you all...I shoot Sony (sorry) but love you all just the same.

DOOK Loc: Maclean, Australia

I have an SX50 & love it. As James says, other manufacturers have similar cameras & most are great (I just think the SX50 is the greatest of the great, but maybe I'm a little biased).

I have DSLRs & a plethora of lenses, but I do at least half of my shooting with the SX50. My D7100 & lenses might be a tad sharper, but the SX50 is much more versatile. I don't advocate choosing one over the other. The way I see it, a DSLR & an SX50 can compliment each other, & each has its own comfort zone. :D

Wahawk Loc: NE IA

I too am a satisfied user of the SX50, can't find any "non-user" issues with any of my pics. I am just waiting to see what the next model is like. There is supposed to be an SX60 coming out soon and rumors say it will be 16mp instead of 12mp, which would be nice if the other features are also improved in some way, but personally I can't think of any way to improve the SX50 except in the mega-pixel and low-light areas.

The photos at 50x and below will definitely be better than 'most' of the ones taken between 50x (max optical) and 200x (max optical+digital). However, the user's techniques can dramatically affect those results as well!!!!

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

Whyfret1 wrote:

I am camping and met up with a fellow and I am in awe of his Canon SX 50 capabilities. My 650D with a 300mm lens was pathetic in comparison. I'm a newbie so perhaps my perspective is due to naivety. Where I am going with this? I am asking for feedback regarding the SX versus another option. I want the zoom potential but would also like more MP if possible.
Any and all opinions welcomed

I think you are just dazzled. :)

Sure, the SX50 is a popular, nice camera for what it is, but the quality just aint gonna rival a decent DSLR with a decent lens in most cases.

Not sure what 300mm lens you have, that makes a difference...the 650D is a great camera and all you have to do is go to flickr and search "650D" and see what amazing images you can make with it.

It's more about the person behind the lens than the gear...

If you want zoom potential..get a nice zoom lens but don't junk the system...

JPL

Whyfret1 wrote:

I am camping and met up with a fellow and I am in awe of his Canon SX 50 capabilities. My 650D with a 300mm lens was pathetic in comparison. I'm a newbie so perhaps my perspective is due to naivety. Where I am going with this? I am asking for feedback regarding the SX versus another option. I want the zoom potential but would also like more MP if possible.
Any and all opinions welcomed

The only thing where the SX50 can do more than your 650D is zooming in. I guess that is what you think is awesome. Your 650D does everything else better. So if the only thing that matters for you is zooming in or if that is what is most important for you, you should get a SX50. But if IQ, low ISO capabilities, enlargements, fast lenses, wide angle, more control over what you do etc, does matter then you continue with your 650D. And then if you want both, get both!

bee7474 Loc: Selah, Wa

I have printed and hung 13x19 pictures side by side. One was taken with the SX50, the other with 5 D Mark II and a 100-400 is L lens and I bet you can't tell the difference. Bee

maydincanada Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada

I have a canon sx40 and love the zoom, however I dislike the fact that I have to stand really far from my subject to get a good picture using the zoom.......and then holding the camera still is a problem too when zooming. other than that, I dont use many of the features. I had an HP 945 and it was very slow, but the pictures were superior to the canon! go figure

bee7474 Loc: Selah, Wa

I have the macro lens that fits the SX50 that works. Bee

cameranut64 Loc: Murrells Inlet, SC

Don't forget the Fuji HS50, 16 MP, 42X (1000 mm). I have one and like it a lot.

Terry

RetiredPhotog Loc: South West Ohio

Whyfret1 wrote:

I am camping and met up with a fellow and I am in awe of his Canon SX 50 capabilities. My 650D with a 300mm lens was pathetic in comparison. I'm a newbie so perhaps my perspective is due to naivety. Where I am going with this? I am asking for feedback regarding the SX versus another option. I want the zoom potential but would also like more MP if possible.
Any and all opinions welcomed

Hi Whyfret, I like wise have an SX50 which I truly love. It is my play camera for things I want to get a picture of far away and not too worried about the quality of the picture because at 200 x and 3/4ths of that being digital zoom things get quite grainy. If you shoot at 50 x which is the optical zoom quality stays very good. The image stabilization is also another great feature enabling you to hand hold getting decent images even at the 200 x.

If I am shooting for excellent quality of pictures I will use my Nikon D7100 for serious work. :thumbup:

RetiredPhotog Loc: South West Ohio

bee7474 wrote:

I have the macro lens that fits the SX50 that works. Bee

Hey bee, I am not familiar with the macro lens who makes it? Would imagine its fits like one of the lens filters. I have a set of filters for mine. I do fairly decent macros with mine as is.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

I will bet you are right!

bee7474 wrote:

I have printed and hung 13x19 pictures side by side. One was taken with the SX50, the other with 5 D Mark II and a 100-400 is L lens and I bet you can't tell the difference. Bee

ole sarg Loc: south florida

I will bet you are right!

bee7474 wrote:

I have printed and hung 13x19 pictures side by side. One was taken with the SX50, the other with 5 D Mark II and a 100-400 is L lens and I bet you can't tell the difference. Bee

maydincanada Loc: Saskatchewan, Canada

I feel my zoomed in pictures using "p" mode are far clearer than the ones I take in auto mode.....