I have FZ200, now looks can get a SX50 on eBay for approximately $165-00 with 2 batteries.
Do anybody has compared the image qualities between them? I am tempted by the LONGER TELEPHOTO LENS. I have been fans for FZs (started with FZ1, have had more than 10 thereon) but never had Canon. Please give advise.
Don't know anything about the FZ200 but the Canon SX50 is a really good camera. When I bought mine I gave a lot more than $165 and would do it again.
MadMikeOne
Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City
If you need the extra 600 reach on the Canon, go for it. If not, stay with your Panasonic. The panasonic is MUCH better in low light due to the 2.8. I like my Canon, but it really SUCKS in low light. If you usually shoot in bright light and NEED that extra reach, then I would suggest the Canon.
Let us know what you decide.
Robert leung wrote:
I have FZ200, now looks can get a SX50 on eBay for approximately $165-00 with 2 batteries.
Do anybody has compared the image qualities between them? I am tempted by the LONGER TELEPHOTO LENS. I have been fans for FZs (started with FZ1, have had more than 10 thereon) but never had Canon. Please give advise.
This is a good site for comparing image quality, and you can zoom in on them.
http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
May I suggest you consider removing yourself from the light and step into the dark side! PANASONIC why you ask because it's the right thing to do.I own fz200 its sweet
Thanks, the new dream is gone.
I better stick with my old toys.
MadMikeOne
Loc: So. NJ Shore - a bit west of Atlantic City
Robert leung wrote:
Thanks, the new dream is gone.
I better stick with my old toys.
FWIW - I think you made the right choice!
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.