Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.

[dilbert]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon_sx_50_review.shtml
...
"But what about image quality, Isn't something with a small sensor and a crazy zoom range too much of an IQ compromise?"
"No, it's no longer as big a compromise as it used to be".
...

[randym77]

According to reviewers at Amazon, the drawback to this camera is poor low-light performance.  Since previous versions did allow you to increase ISO, they think Canon intentionally crippled it to give people a reason to buy DSLRs.

Still, I'm tempted to try it.  Can't carry 30 lbs of lenses everywhere you go...

[Rienzphotoz]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon_sx_50_review.shtml
...
"But what about image quality, Isn't something with a small sensor and a crazy zoom range too much of an IQ compromise?"
"No, it's no longer as big a compromise as it used to be".
...

Nice review, thanks for sharing ... thinking of getting this camera instead of 28-300mm VC lens for occasional shots in the desert

[emag]

No mention that it's also capable of high frame rate video, with reduced resolution of course.  Put it all together and this is an ideal carry everywhere camera.  We don't all want to carry a DSLR and a bag of lenses every day.  Comparable in price to, f'rinstance, a Tamron 28-75/2.8.

[AlanF]

On Saturday, I am off the Hong Kong, Kuala Lumpur and Singapore on behalf of my College and with luck will get a day off for bird photography and some tourist stuff. So, I dutifully packed into my camera carrier the 5DIII, 24-105 and 100-400mm. Then, recalling I had just advised a tourist to Europe to take the minimum, I went to the local camera shop this lunch time and bought a Powershot SX50 HS, based on the review in  http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon_sx_50_review.shtml.

To my astonishment, the first two test shots I took of my usual test targets with the SX50 set to 1200mm (equivalent), auto and jpeg (before I had read the manual) outperformed the best images I have taken of them with the 5DIII and 100-400mm set at 400mm. Of course, when the SX50 was set to 400mm (equivalent), the 5DIII + L lens won. But, the extra reach of the SX50 at 1200mm makes it better for much of the bird stuff I do. Further, the focus is spot on every time and the IS is simply unbelievable. Here are the second and third photos ever taken with this SX50, compared with the 5D at 400mm.

[AlanF]

After reading the manual, I output in RAW and took the best close up of a robin - I have never got this close. Its at iso 1600, f/6.5 and 1/160 as the light was very bad. In bright light, this camera will be stunning.

All the photos are the full frame, but reduced to 1600 pixels width for uploading.

[bchernicoff]

Can you post the RAW image of the robin? I would love to take a look at it. I'm glad you are happy with your new camera!

[87vr6]

So please explain how that is "outperforming" it?

[AlanF]

Can you post the RAW image of the robin? I would love to take a look at it. I'm glad you are happy with your new camera!

I have uploaded two RAW files to Dropbox

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/gz3wtsf0iegy05b/Oo9t81Ac2-

[Drizzt321]

Try one more thing, locking the focus on fast movement such as birds in flight. I think there you'll find the SX50 might not outperform the 5d3. How was the lighting as well? Good lighting makes a big difference. Almost every camera takes nice shots with good lighting. It's when you've got complex lighting or it starts to fail, you'll probably see the SX50 being quite challenged.

[Don Haines]

So please explain how that is "outperforming" it?

For starters it costs $120,000 less than a DSLR and an 1200F5.6 lens

[AlanF]

So please explain how that is "outperforming" it?

Simply, the detail or resolution from the SX50 at 1200mm is better than the 5DIII +100-400mm at 400mm. If you take a crop from the 5DIII combo to give the same view as the SX50, the SX50 image is better. This is useful if you are taking a bird photo which requires heavy cropping from the 5DIII and 6x less from the SX50.

As I had in the first post, I am not implying the SX50 is better than the 5DIII but the extra reach at 1200mm beats out the 100-400mm at 400mm. That is quite remarkable and unexpected to me, and it means I can travel light. Normally, I would use the Canon 5DIII with a 600mm prime, and only use the 100-400mm when I had to travel with limited luggage. But, for work trips I'll just take the SX50 for from now on knowing I can get some spectacular shots.

[AlanF]

Try one more thing, locking the focus on fast movement such as birds in flight. I think there you'll find the SX50 might not outperform the 5d3. How was the lighting as well? Good lighting makes a big difference. Almost every camera takes nice shots with good lighting. It's when you've got complex lighting or it starts to fail, you'll probably see the SX50 being quite challenged.

The light was crap for the Robin shot (iso 1600 and 1/160) and dim for the brick wall. A 7D suffers at 1600 iso.  Most of my photos are not of birds in flight.

I have spent weeks doing AFMA on my very expensive lenses and the 5DIII and 7D, and the 7D focus is erratic. This cheapo is spot on focussing every time.

[Drizzt321]

Try one more thing, locking the focus on fast movement such as birds in flight. I think there you'll find the SX50 might not outperform the 5d3. How was the lighting as well? Good lighting makes a big difference. Almost every camera takes nice shots with good lighting. It's when you've got complex lighting or it starts to fail, you'll probably see the SX50 being quite challenged.

The light was crap for the Robin shot (iso 1600 and 1/160) and dim for the brick wall. A 7D suffers at 1600 iso.  Most of my photos are not of birds in flight.

I have spent weeks doing AFMA on my very expensive lenses and the 5DIII and 7D, and the 7D focus is erratic. This cheapo is spot on focussing every time.

Well, it actually uses Contrast AF, which is known as being more accurate. Usually slower than the Phase Detect in dSLR's. Also it can have trouble tracking subjects in motion, so that's the other bit.

And yes, I'd say that being able to have a much longer effective focal length will generate better quality images due to the higher resolution for similar field of view if you were to crop the 5d3 + 400mm to the equivalent of 1200mm. The 600mm + 2x TC might be another story all together though   But certainly a LOT more costly, that's for sure.

[dilbert]

SX50 Review:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon_sx_50_review.shtml

"But what about image quality" my friend asked? "Isn't something with a small sensor and a crazy zoom range too much of an IQ compromise?"

A good question, but my answer was and is a flat-out "No, it's no longer as big a compromise as it used to be". In the past I always wanted Superzooms like the SX50 to produce better image quality than they were capable of, and was more often than not disappointed. But after a few weeks with the SX50 I can honestly say that for many photographers image quality will be found more than adequate, especially when the incredible reach of this lens is taken into consideration.