October 01, 2014, 05:20:29 PM

Author Topic: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.  (Read 28943 times)

AlanF

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1089
    • View Profile
Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm
« Reply #90 on: April 23, 2013, 08:46:27 AM »
Nice testing. I think we are coming to some agreement that in reasonable conditions the SX50 is a useful piece of kit to have available and really can take on a 5D/100-400L. I am going to throw it my bag whenever I travel or leave in the car. The whole camera costs about the same as a 2xTC III and weighs less than twice.
5D III, 70D, Powershot SX50, 300/2.8 II, 1.4xTC III, 2xTC III, 70-200/4 IS, 24-105, 15-85, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 150-600.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm
« Reply #90 on: April 23, 2013, 08:46:27 AM »

woodduck

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #91 on: April 23, 2013, 09:46:56 PM »
Any comparisons to a high res aps-c using the 100-400 and 1.4 converter?

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 8753
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #92 on: April 23, 2013, 11:06:03 PM »
Any comparisons to a high res aps-c using the 100-400 and 1.4 converter?

There is another topic with images.
 
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=14011.msg260995#msg260995
 
Maybe a mod will merge them?
 

ems1

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm
« Reply #93 on: April 25, 2013, 11:10:53 AM »
But, the 7D guys who get wonderful bird photos from it limit themselves to iso 320 or, at the very most 400, if they are going to crop. I use 200 iso or at most 320

Wrong, they regularly use 800 iso on the 7D without any problems.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2013, 11:58:37 AM by ems1 »

Mt Spokane Photography

  • Canon EF 600mm f/4L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 8753
    • View Profile
Re: SX50 outperforming 5DIII +100-400mm
« Reply #94 on: April 25, 2013, 11:45:13 AM »
But, the 7D guys who get wonderful bird photos from it limit themselves to iso 320 or, at the very most 400, if they are going to crop. I use 200 iso or at most 320

Wrong, they regularly use 800 iso without any problems.
ISO 800 is usable, but barely, and then only in good light.  Certainly not something I'd use regularly.  Anything over ISO 200 begins to lose detail.  The images below were taken in bright light.  In dim light ISO 800 was so miserable that I deleted them all. 
 

 
Crop:  The detail is getting lost.  NR will make it look better at the expense of detail.  It completely breaks down at ISO 1600.
 

dartjeff

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #95 on: May 02, 2013, 10:18:29 PM »
I'm surprised by this outcome. I cropped the pictures so that they all showed the same area. It appears to me that the SX50 picture quality of a similarly distanced object is roughly the same as my 5D Mark III with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter, and looks much better than my 7D with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter. 

I would have thought the 7D would have performed the best since it was shooting at a 1250mm equivalent, equal to the 1249mm equivalent of the SX50, but with presumably better picture quality.

Anyone have thoughts? The only thing I can think is that I was handholding all the cameras and maybe the SX50 has better IS than the IS on the 100-499??  And the SX50 is obviously a lot lighter and would be prone less to shake.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us




Uploaded with ImageShack.us




Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3323
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #96 on: May 03, 2013, 02:49:48 AM »
I'm surprised by this outcome. I cropped the pictures so that they all showed the same area. It appears to me that the SX50 picture quality of a similarly distanced object is roughly the same as my 5D Mark III with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter, and looks much better than my 7D with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter. 

I would have thought the 7D would have performed the best since it was shooting at a 1250mm equivalent, equal to the 1249mm equivalent of the SX50, but with presumably better picture quality.

Anyone have thoughts? The only thing I can think is that I was handholding all the cameras and maybe the SX50 has better IS than the IS on the 100-499??  And the SX50 is obviously a lot lighter and would be prone less to shake.
From what I can see, the images made with 7D & 5D MK III seem a bit more blurrier than the SX50 ... I think this is most likely due to the IS issue as you mentioned (i.e. the IS not being able to sufficiently cope with the weight of the DSLR+big lens+2X tele-converter combo) ... it would be nice to see the same images made using a tripod.
That being said, the SX50 seems to be a really handy tool in certain situations ... I just ordered the Nikon D7100 and a few other accessories (should be delivered tomorrow) ... will have to wait till I sell my current D7000 to buy this little beauty Canon SX50.
« Last Edit: May 03, 2013, 02:55:20 AM by Rienzphotoz »
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #96 on: May 03, 2013, 02:49:48 AM »

ecka

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 650
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #97 on: May 03, 2013, 03:04:00 AM »
I'm surprised by this outcome. I cropped the pictures so that they all showed the same area. It appears to me that the SX50 picture quality of a similarly distanced object is roughly the same as my 5D Mark III with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter, and looks much better than my 7D with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter. 

I would have thought the 7D would have performed the best since it was shooting at a 1250mm equivalent, equal to the 1249mm equivalent of the SX50, but with presumably better picture quality.

Anyone have thoughts? The only thing I can think is that I was handholding all the cameras and maybe the SX50 has better IS than the IS on the 100-499??  And the SX50 is obviously a lot lighter and would be prone less to shake.
From what I can see, the images made with 7D & 5D MK III seem blurry ... I think this is most likely due to the IS issue as you mentioned (i.e. the IS not being able to sufficiently cope with the weight of the DSLR+big lens+2X tele-converter combo) ... it would be nice to see the same images made using a tripod.
That being said, the SX50 seems to be a really handy tool in certain situations ... I just ordered the Nikon D7100 and a few other accessories (should be delivered tomorrow) ... will have to wait till I sell my current D7000 to buy this little beauty Canon SX50.

All three are blurry, because at such distances the light is traveling through a very blurry air mixture (a lot of it). No matter how stable your gear is, even if you use the best optics in the world, you are going to get this kind of blur anyway.
FF + primes !

Rienzphotoz

  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • *******
  • Posts: 3323
  • Peace unto all ye Canon, Nikon & Sony shooters
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #98 on: May 03, 2013, 03:38:17 AM »
I'm surprised by this outcome. I cropped the pictures so that they all showed the same area. It appears to me that the SX50 picture quality of a similarly distanced object is roughly the same as my 5D Mark III with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter, and looks much better than my 7D with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter. 

I would have thought the 7D would have performed the best since it was shooting at a 1250mm equivalent, equal to the 1249mm equivalent of the SX50, but with presumably better picture quality.

Anyone have thoughts? The only thing I can think is that I was handholding all the cameras and maybe the SX50 has better IS than the IS on the 100-499??  And the SX50 is obviously a lot lighter and would be prone less to shake.
From what I can see, the images made with 7D & 5D MK III seem blurry ... I think this is most likely due to the IS issue as you mentioned (i.e. the IS not being able to sufficiently cope with the weight of the DSLR+big lens+2X tele-converter combo) ... it would be nice to see the same images made using a tripod.
That being said, the SX50 seems to be a really handy tool in certain situations ... I just ordered the Nikon D7100 and a few other accessories (should be delivered tomorrow) ... will have to wait till I sell my current D7000 to buy this little beauty Canon SX50.

All three are blurry, because at such distances the light is traveling through a very blurry air mixture (a lot of it). No matter how stable your gear is, even if you use the best optics in the world, you are going to get this kind of blur anyway.
Several years ago I've made images using 400D + Sigma 50-500 (at 500) + Sigma 2+ convertor (i.e effective FOV @ 1600mm) on and they were a lot sharper than the above pics ... although I agree with you that atmosphere will cause haze/blur with such huge distances, images will be sharper (than the above 3 images) if you use a proper tripod.
Canon 5DMK3 70D | Nikon D610 | Sony a7 a6000 | RX100M3 | 16-35/2.8LII | 70-200/2.8LISII | 100/2.8LIS | 100-400LIS | 40/2.8 | 50/1.4 | 85/1.8 | 600EX-RTx2 | ST-E3-RT | 24/3.5 T-S | 10-18/4 OSS 16-50 | 24-70/4OSS | 55/1.8 | 55-210 OSS | 70-200/4 OSS | 28-300VR | HVL-F43M | GoPro Black 3+ & DJI Phantom

ecka

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 650
  • Size matters ;)
    • View Profile
    • flickr
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #99 on: May 03, 2013, 04:07:26 AM »
I'm surprised by this outcome. I cropped the pictures so that they all showed the same area. It appears to me that the SX50 picture quality of a similarly distanced object is roughly the same as my 5D Mark III with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter, and looks much better than my 7D with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter. 

I would have thought the 7D would have performed the best since it was shooting at a 1250mm equivalent, equal to the 1249mm equivalent of the SX50, but with presumably better picture quality.

Anyone have thoughts? The only thing I can think is that I was handholding all the cameras and maybe the SX50 has better IS than the IS on the 100-499??  And the SX50 is obviously a lot lighter and would be prone less to shake.
From what I can see, the images made with 7D & 5D MK III seem blurry ... I think this is most likely due to the IS issue as you mentioned (i.e. the IS not being able to sufficiently cope with the weight of the DSLR+big lens+2X tele-converter combo) ... it would be nice to see the same images made using a tripod.
That being said, the SX50 seems to be a really handy tool in certain situations ... I just ordered the Nikon D7100 and a few other accessories (should be delivered tomorrow) ... will have to wait till I sell my current D7000 to buy this little beauty Canon SX50.

All three are blurry, because at such distances the light is traveling through a very blurry air mixture (a lot of it). No matter how stable your gear is, even if you use the best optics in the world, you are going to get this kind of blur anyway.
Several years ago I've made images using 400D + Sigma 50-500 (at 500) + Sigma 2+ convertor (i.e effective FOV @ 1600mm) on and they were a lot sharper than the above pics ... although I agree with you that atmosphere will cause haze/blur with such huge distances, images will be sharper (than the above 3 images) if you use a proper tripod.

Your pictures may have been sharper due to better atmospheric conditions as well. You are right, a proper tripod does help. However, I don't see any motion blur problems here. A good handholding technique works great for fast shutter speeds like 1/1600sec (SX50), 1/1250sec (7D) and 1/800sec (5D3).
FF + primes !

Damon

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
SX50 Ruby-throated hummingbird today
« Reply #100 on: May 04, 2013, 11:11:28 PM »
This little bugger is fun to use (the camera). I will try and catch some humms in full light tomorrow. Or maybe try and even get the exposure right so I don't blow the breast highlights.  :P
Shot in RAW
1/160
F/5.6
iso 200
~400mm


9VIII

  • 5D Mark III
  • ******
  • Posts: 628
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #101 on: May 10, 2013, 01:38:38 AM »
I'm surprised by this outcome. I cropped the pictures so that they all showed the same area. It appears to me that the SX50 picture quality of a similarly distanced object is roughly the same as my 5D Mark III with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter, and looks much better than my 7D with 100-400 + Canon 2X teleconverter. 

I would have thought the 7D would have performed the best since it was shooting at a 1250mm equivalent, equal to the 1249mm equivalent of the SX50, but with presumably better picture quality.

Anyone have thoughts? The only thing I can think is that I was handholding all the cameras and maybe the SX50 has better IS than the IS on the 100-499??  And the SX50 is obviously a lot lighter and would be prone less to shake.


The compact may be getting better results because of there being an insanely good little lens in front of it, and you're not light limited (just a guess).
The 5D3 is getting better photos because you're not in a focal length limited situation. If you can get the same framing off both cameras the full frame sensor will usually be better (if the lens is sharp enough you might just get equivalent results). It's once you need to crop the full frame image to the same size as the crop sensor that the crop camera should give better results.


Sorry, I just typed a bunch of stuff we already knew. So, I'm as puzzled as you are.

Just blame the performance difference between the 5D3 and 7D on the extra percentage of awesome in the 5D3.
« Last Edit: May 10, 2013, 01:45:28 AM by 9VIII »
-100% RAW-

dartjeff

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #102 on: May 10, 2013, 12:01:57 PM »
I'm still puzzled on why the SX50 would outperform the 7D since they are both at the same focal length.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #102 on: May 10, 2013, 12:01:57 PM »

Damon

  • SX50 HS
  • **
  • Posts: 8
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #103 on: May 11, 2013, 11:54:41 PM »
Some new friends dropped by today. First time I have seen Rose-breasted Grosbeaks in the Pine Barrens of NJ where I live. Came to my feeders. Got out the trusty new SX50 of course and voila. Opened the window and took from my kitchen inside the house, handheld at 1200mm ~30 ft. away. Minimal post processing--minor crop to get suet feeder out & iso 200 so I reduced the noise a tad. Shot in raw--the way to go. 1/160 f/6.5

Small columbine flower ~ 10-15 ft. at 1200mm too, handheld. Noise reduction, minor sharpening, no crop 1/250 , f/6.5 iso 400. This camera if pretty freakin unbelievable.


I won't be blowing these up to posters but I don't do much of that anyway. I am beginning to get spoiled zooming out to everything now.

D

CanNotYet

  • EOS M2
  • ****
  • Posts: 160
    • View Profile
Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #104 on: May 13, 2013, 05:08:33 AM »
Have anyone tried this in a concert-like setting, (i.e. indoors, dark venue, lit stage)?
I am curious how it would perform, as you can basically zoom in so much that the poor lighting around the stage would not matter.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Canon SX50 Review - Best Superzoom yet.
« Reply #104 on: May 13, 2013, 05:08:33 AM »