Can't believe this is 50 and 100x
Mar 14, 2016 10:55:41 #
joer wrote:
The data shows that both shots were taken at 215mm. Its digital enlargement that increases the size.
Actually its very good image quality considering the size of the sensor. I think a lot of shooters would be hard pressed to match it with their DSLR.
Actually its very good image quality considering the size of the sensor. I think a lot of shooters would be hard pressed to match it with their DSLR.
The data shows the actual focal length of the lens with its max of 215mm. You must multiply by a factor of 5.6 to obtain the 35mm format equivalent! No digital enlargement in this case.
Mar 14, 2016 11:32:05 #
Mar 14, 2016 11:48:45 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
BebuLamar wrote:
When camera manufacturer say a lens is 100x zoom they mean that it has the zoom ratio of 100 that is the longest focal length divided by the shortest focal length is 100.
Except that here the optical zoom ratio is actually 50X... and in order to achieve 100X a digital zoom of 2X is added.
Digital zoom is typically done by using only part of the imaging sensor... so it greatly reduces resolution whenever it's used.
The actual focal length range of the 50SX's zoom lens is 4.3mm to 215mm. Manufacturers commonly use 35mm film/"full frame" equivalents for comparisons, because "point n shoot" and "bridge"cameras of this type use a wide variety of different size sensors (at least a dozen different sizes that are typically smaller than APS-C used in DSLRs... often a whole lot smaller). In this case, Canon equates the 50SX's lens to 24mm to 1200mm on 35mm film (or a so-called "full frame" DSLR). That would also be equivalent to about 15mm to 750mm on Canon's own APS-C cameras.
Any way you look at it, the optical zoom ratio is 50X.... that's the longest focal length divided by the shortest.
I see the 50SX has a 4X digital zoom, though I don't know if that's fully usable on the longest focal length... if it were it would be insanely long equivalent to 4800mm on full frame, using a camera with a top shutter speed of 1/2000. Imagine it would be hard to get a steady shot, even with IS.) Canon also uses "ZoomPlus" digital zoom... which I have no idea how it works, but rather than simply crop the sensor smaller with a very large reduction in resolution, it somehow manages only slight drop in resolution when the digital zoom is used.
There's a pretty thorough review of the SX50 HS on DpReview: http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canon-powershot-sx50-hs
Mar 14, 2016 11:51:38 #
cameranut wrote:
I received my Canon 50x hs camera on the 9th., one... (show quote)
those are very nice photos
keep it!!!
Mar 14, 2016 11:56:11 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
Bloke wrote:
....Not sure if Canon make a 1200mm, but I think I saw their 600mm selling for something north of $10,000....
Canon no longer makes it, but... yes... they did make a full frame capable 1200mm f5.6L at one time. They were sold by special order only and it's rumored that only a couple dozen were ever made. Maybe that's because they cost close to $100,000 new and didn't even have IS!
B&H Photo had one a while back, was offering it for $125,000 if memory serves. They have an article about the lens on their website... including some photos of it in use which should REALLY make the OP appreciate their 50SX! http://www.bhphotovideo.com/explora/photography/features/bh-photographic-journey-legendary-canon-ef-1200mm-lens
Mar 14, 2016 12:04:09 #
amfoto1 wrote:
Canon no longer makes it, but... yes... they did m... (show quote)
Don't mean to correct you Alan but they just recently sold that 1200 mm 5.6L for 180,000 dollars. Apparently it took over a year to grow the synthetic fluorite crystals for the coating per lens. Truly a beast.
Love your analogies sir. You spend an immense time dedicating time to your posts helping others. Big respect!!!
.
Mar 14, 2016 12:16:48 #
Bloke wrote:
Before sending it back, you might want to consider the price of the equipment you would need to get *that* close without the SX50... Not sure if Canon make a 1200mm, but I think I saw their 600mm selling for something north of $10,000. You could buy a telescope and fit a camera to it, but it probably wouldn't work for moving around.
For the price, this thing gives the best bang for the buck out there!
For the price, this thing gives the best bang for the buck out there!
Best $199 I've spent on camera equipment, absolutely best bang for the buck. :)
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-310012-1.html
Mar 14, 2016 12:36:16 #
Mar 14, 2016 13:11:45 #
Hey, what did you pay for your camera? I am not familiar with your model, but on google price looks like $250 - $350; forgive me if I am wrong.
Your 100x photo is very pleasant. As a dedicated bird photographer, if I went to shoot that same bird from the same distance it is likely I would choose my 1DX and 600mm F4, and likely would get a somewhat better photograph, but my gear cost about $18,000. That is a lot for small improvements, but my goal is to get my photos published in bird books and magazines. What is your goal? Nice picture?? Well you got that. Be happy.
Seriously, in the 100X photo your camera may have focused on the twigs in front of the bird because they look real crisp. One advantage of my gear is that I can get spot focus and get it on the bird.
I think you should be very pleased with your camera and the results. What you see in magazines come at a very high price in gear and time spent getting the shot. For example, I have some fabulous shots of loons with their babies; some have been published, some have won prizes. Cost to get those? 25K of gear, Flight to Toronto, Rental car for a week; motel & meals for a week, hiring a fishing guide with a boat for 5 days, spending 5 long days in that boat, humped over a camera. But, I achieved my photographic goals and had a great experience, and it was within my budget. I fell in love with loons when I was young, then moved to the South, so for me this trip was fulfillment of a long held dream. And it was worth it to me.
So define your photographic goals, check your budget, and see if you can make your goals. If you just want some pictures out in your backyard, I think you are doing pretty dang well.
Keep shooting, and good luck.
Your 100x photo is very pleasant. As a dedicated bird photographer, if I went to shoot that same bird from the same distance it is likely I would choose my 1DX and 600mm F4, and likely would get a somewhat better photograph, but my gear cost about $18,000. That is a lot for small improvements, but my goal is to get my photos published in bird books and magazines. What is your goal? Nice picture?? Well you got that. Be happy.
Seriously, in the 100X photo your camera may have focused on the twigs in front of the bird because they look real crisp. One advantage of my gear is that I can get spot focus and get it on the bird.
I think you should be very pleased with your camera and the results. What you see in magazines come at a very high price in gear and time spent getting the shot. For example, I have some fabulous shots of loons with their babies; some have been published, some have won prizes. Cost to get those? 25K of gear, Flight to Toronto, Rental car for a week; motel & meals for a week, hiring a fishing guide with a boat for 5 days, spending 5 long days in that boat, humped over a camera. But, I achieved my photographic goals and had a great experience, and it was within my budget. I fell in love with loons when I was young, then moved to the South, so for me this trip was fulfillment of a long held dream. And it was worth it to me.
So define your photographic goals, check your budget, and see if you can make your goals. If you just want some pictures out in your backyard, I think you are doing pretty dang well.
Keep shooting, and good luck.
Mar 14, 2016 13:14:10 #
dasphoto
Loc: Lancaster County, Pennsylvania
Bobspez wrote:
The 50x is 50 times your lowest focal length. On a... (show quote)
Nicely summarized and stated! I do think the OP's images are very good considering they are handheld.
Mar 14, 2016 13:19:43 #
Bultaco wrote:
Not on mine.
Correct: 1200 is the end of the optical zoom range.
Mar 14, 2016 13:19:57 #
wotsmith wrote:
Hey, what did you pay for your camera? I am not f... (show quote)
Your picture makes me want to run and hide. Simply gorgeous!
Mar 14, 2016 13:27:00 #
WessoJPEG wrote:
Send it back.
If all you ever got out of that camera was as good as your 2nd shot, you could be ecstatic , and should be ecstatic. My 150-450 would NOT do any better, and that's sad. Cuz it cost me plenty. Both very good photos & I don't know WHAT you were hoping for.. I'd say, keep the camera it probably didn't cost more than 6bills. Those two pictures are worth that. RJM
Mar 14, 2016 13:43:38 #
Mar 14, 2016 14:09:13 #
windshoppe wrote:
Correct: 1200 is the end of the optical zoom range.
Per Canons website the optical zoom ends at 50X ...600mm
From 120studio.com review
Up to "100x" zoom, the DIGITAL zoom is called "ZoomPlus". You will see a yellow bar. This has actually pretty high quality for digital zoom, which I would otherwise avoid. Beyond the 100x range, the bar will turn blue. This is digital zoom that takes the camera up to an effective 200x zoom,
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.