Canon PowerShot SX 60 IS 100x Zoom Mentioned Again [CR1]

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,935
Canada
K13X5C said:
I have the SX50 and can say that an extended focal range, beyond the 24-1200, 50X optical zoom of the SX50, is not one of the improvements that the SX50 replacement needs, as I see it.
What it is does need is a wider maximum aperture, a cleaner button layout and ideally a larger sensor. I'm not holding my breath for the larger sensor, but surely a bit wider aperture is doable, as f/3.4 on a tiny sensor is quite limiting. It does a great job when scouting local locations because the zoom can pull in good detail from quite a distance and saves me a lot of walking time, but in low light situations, indoors at night for example, it's a tough go. Granted it is a point and shoot camera that is optimized for outdoors, and it is very good at that, and very few P&S are really good indoors, but a little more attention to low-light situations would expand it's uses nicely. It doesn't have to cut into the S120 territory to be more useful.
The SX50 button layout on the back is frustrating for those with larger hands, and older hands. I've missed shots because the wrong button was accidently brushed against and activated at just the wrong moment. I have DSLRs and other P&Ss and don't have that problem, it's just the SX50.
I find that I am forever accidentally turning on the self timer. Better buttons would be my number one improvement.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,935
Canada
Stig said:
ok, 2000mm got my attention, but I don't know much about these cameras... so, a question to someone who does...

how would a picture from SX60 at 2000mm compare to lets say 6D + lets say Tamron 150-600 at 600mm, cropped to the same frame?

thank you
I would go shoot a comparison between the SX50 and the Tamron....... But we are having a snowstorm here and the visibility is quite poor...

What I can tell you is that the AF and speed of the SX50 is poor in comparison, but on the other hand, I can't tuck the Tamron into a coat pocket.....
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
7,825
8,798
Don
You are so right about turning on the self-timer by mistake. The SX50 is a fantastic little camera (I set up thread showing how it could for static photos out-resolve a 100-400 on a 5DIII). But, my wife turns on the self-timer every time so I have just bought her a touch-screen driven Ixus, which is basically foolproof. The little Ixus 310HS performs very well and I have just posted some photos in the City and Street scenes section.

The most important improvement would be to speed up the AF by using dual pixel technology.
 
Mar 30, 2014
1
0
Hi all,

I love Canon superzoom Powershot family, I own S5, SX1, SX40 and SX50. (it's a hobby I keep them all) And I can't wait for SX60. What I would really love is:

1. More zoom enchancements (x60 or more) best would be getting 20mm ultrawide and better (>1200mm) ultrazoom(35mm equivalent) the more the better for me. If 20mm-2000mm is true the better for me. I am wildlife/ornithology fotoamateur as well as astronomy and that zoom would be a cross between camera/camcorder/telescope ;)

2. Definitively better EVF resolution! This is bothering me since S5 till now.

3. Faster, better picture quality (overall but mostly in lowlight),

4 At least 30frames/s in 1080p

Points 3. and 4. can be achieved -> sensor enchancements + Digic 6 should do the job.

5. Bring back mount for filters(I know it was not officially there but it was in all cameras including SX40 - I have lots of filters including Circular Polariser which I still use wih SX40 but I can't on SX50 - I do not know why some 'wise' guy took it off from SX50 - bring it back, please)

I do not care about:

1. Better resolution. With this sensor size 12MP is fine for me.
2. RAW as I use CHDK RAW anyway.
3. Printed manual.
4. Build in wi-fi -> can be sorted out by SD wireless card.

It would be great to see a supreme quality ultrazoom similar to SX1 with all SX60 features + extras(better build quality, weather sealing, manual focus/zoom wheel, etc.)

In some distant future I would love to see your x100 zoom patent applied:smileywink: (18mm-1800mm) with 1/2.3" sensor.

Also another product line with super zoom but larger sensor (like 1/1.7" ) and I do not care if this camera would be larger and heavier. I am a big boy - Just bring it on!

Keep up good job Canon. Your fan. :)
 

Stig

EOS 90D
Jan 27, 2013
150
0
Don Haines said:
Stig said:
ok, 2000mm got my attention, but I don't know much about these cameras... so, a question to someone who does...

how would a picture from SX60 at 2000mm compare to lets say 6D + lets say Tamron 150-600 at 600mm, cropped to the same frame?

thank you
I would go shoot a comparison between the SX50 and the Tamron....... But we are having a snowstorm here and the visibility is quite poor...

What I can tell you is that the AF and speed of the SX50 is poor in comparison, but on the other hand, I can't tuck the Tamron into a coat pocket.....

thank you very much, that would be great... and I'll gladly wait for better weather :)
 

Lee Jay

EOS 7D Mark II
Sep 22, 2011
2,206
143
100 said:
Lee Jay said:
PicaPica said:
i had a fuji superzoom bridge and it looked just bad at the long end.

Check this out. This is a T2i+100-400L+1.4xTC III versus an SX50. These are 100% crops from more than 800 meters away.

1200mm%20comparison.jpg

A T2i has a 1.6 crop factor so a 100-400L @400mm will get you to 1.6 x 400 = 640mm.
Combine that with the 1.4x TCIII and you get 640 x 1.4 = 896mm
No where near 1200mm so these 2 photos cant both be 100% crops @1200mm equivalent
You need another 1.4 extender to get to 1200mm with the T2i

Yes, they can, and they are. The T2i is 18MP versus the 12MP of the SX50.
 

Lee Jay

EOS 7D Mark II
Sep 22, 2011
2,206
143
Lee Jay said:
100 said:
Lee Jay said:
PicaPica said:
i had a fuji superzoom bridge and it looked just bad at the long end.

Check this out. This is a T2i+100-400L+1.4xTC III versus an SX50. These are 100% crops from more than 800 meters away.

1200mm%20comparison.jpg

A T2i has a 1.6 crop factor so a 100-400L @400mm will get you to 1.6 x 400 = 640mm.
Combine that with the 1.4x TCIII and you get 640 x 1.4 = 896mm
No where near 1200mm so these 2 photos cant both be 100% crops @1200mm equivalent
You need another 1.4 extender to get to 1200mm with the T2i

Yes, they can, and they are. The T2i is 18MP versus the 12MP of the SX50.

Let's do the math. 400mm * 1.414 * 1.62 crop * (5184px/4000px) = 1183mm equivalent.
 

ajfotofilmagem

EOS 5D Mark IV
Aug 23, 2013
2,382
83
Bahia Brazil
A camera with 100x zoom is intended for entertainment only. Including voyeurs. ??? It can also be useful for men with small dick complex. :eek: Seriously. There could be two different versions: One more wide angle, such as 20-1000mm (equivalent). And another more tele like 35-2000mm (equivalent). Since the maximum aperture of the lens were not darker than F5.6 I could have fun with them. As much as the zoom increases, there is always the desire to be bigger. As for the size of my di-k... ::) Well I wish it were a little bigger. ;D
 

Marauder

EOS RP
Dec 15, 2013
297
0
I first got my feet wet with digital photography with a cheap little Canon A430 pocket camera. At first, I just used it as basic snapshot camera, then I began to experiment with macro and different modes. This lead me to want "something a little better," so I bought a Canon SX10 superzoom "bridge" camera in 2009. And THAT'S when I began to get more adventurous! Love the SX10 and it lead me on the path to DSLR's--the T3i and then the 7D.

This is a common path for a "bridge" camera user, as it whets the appetite for more flexibility and control, so it often leads one to wanting to get into a DSLR. Yet I've never lost my affection for the classic Superzoom bridge cameras. I bought a brand new in the box SX50 some months ago, from Kijiji (a sort of Canadian Craigslist), for only $200 all in.

I must say it's impressive--not a replacement for a DSLR and good lens, but Superzooms give tremendous versatility in a small package. If my primary goal is photography, then my two DSLR's come with me. Usually with a general purpose lens, like the 15-85 or 40mm pancake on the T3i and the 100-400 on my 7D. Under those circumstances I may also have the SX50 and/or Panasonic FZ200 in the car. Sometimes I'll just take one of the SLR's out with me, with one of the Superzoom's along as a "just in case" the lens on the SLR isn't right for a sudden, and unexpected situation.

An example, if I expect even-odds on both Telephoto and wide-angle shots, then the T3i with general purpose lens and the 7D with 100-400 go with me. This is a heavy and bulky combo though, but worth it if I KNOW I want both wide angle and telephoto. But, if I am primarily after one type of subject, then I choose whichever DSLR fits the primary goal and use one of the Superzooms as a contingency second body. So, if I plan to do some landscape shots, I might take the SX50 or FZ200 as an "emergency" telephoto camera, in case a hawk or animal suddenly springs up where I don't expect it to. It may not be as "good" as the 7D and 100-400, but it beats the 15-85 or the 40! Or, if I am primarily after a telephoto target, I might bring along one of the superzooms as a contingency wide angle camera, to take a shot of an interesting building or vista I didn't expect. It is a lot easier to carry an SLR and superzoom than it is to carry two SLR's! And I've kicked myself often enough for missing a shot for want of the appropriate focal length selection!!!

Another use for the Superzooms is to have a versatile camera with you when you aren't in the mood to haul bulky and equivalent equipment with you. If I'm going for a walk where photography is NOT the primary goal, and I don't feel like lugging a pair of SLR's and their lenses around, I grab one of the Superzooms. I may take few shots, or none at all, but at least I've got a camera with a very useful range of focal lengths with me, in case the singing frog from the Bugs Bunny cartoon makes an unexpected appearance!! ::) And it can be so liberating to "travel light," yet still have the ability to shoot from wide-angle to super telephoto with one (relatively) small camera.

I often bring out the Superzooms when I just don't feel like hauling a lot of equipment with me---especially when I'm longing for the simple "good old days" when the old SX10 was my pride and joy--a single body with a 28mm to 560mm reach. It didn't take the same quality of photos I can get with my DSLR's (or as the newer SX50 and FZ200 for that matter!), but it did still take some gorgeous photos. For stationary subjects in good light, it worked very well. I got some great shots of herons with it, and the two new ones have also worked well as "backup" wildlife and landscape cameras.

I bought the SX10 new in 2009, but both the SX50 and FZ200 I purchased for VERY good prices off Kijij. In addition, I also bought a Fujifilm X10 from Kijiji as well--which has a fast lens and makes a very good low light camera that is compact and easy to take places where I wouldn't want to carry a bulky SLR. It's rather challenging to change cameras and systems (the FZ200 layout is logical, but designed to frustrate a long time Canon user to no end! LOL), but that's part of the "fun" as well. I'm not a pro--I shoot as a hobby and FUN is where it's at for me. I find using different pieces of equipment and deciding which camera is the right tool for the moment at hand is a part of the "fun." I also clearly have a bad case of GAS (Gear Acquisition Syndrome) but hey, that's a part of the FUN factor for me too!

Regarding the layout of the SX50, I concur that it's too easy to hit the wrong button. As a matter of fact, it's amazing how much better the old SX10 fits the hand than either the SX50 or the FZ200 do. It's larger than either, and it has a much larger, deeper and more comfortable grip than either, so the new cameras don't have it ALL over the old one.

I'd like to see a larger camera in the SX60, but I don't think that's likely as there is a strong bias towards compact electronics. I'm quite anxious to see how the SX60 performs when it does arrive. It's not "in the centre of my RADAR" the way the 7D II or the 100-400 II are, but it's still something interesting to me. Superzooms are great as a "bridge" for the novice shooter towards DSLR's--and they can remain compelling and fun tools, even after you've 'graduated!' ;D
 

Marauder

EOS RP
Dec 15, 2013
297
0
Don Haines said:
Marauder said:
Don Haines said:
ajfotofilmagem said:
A camera with 100x zoom is intended for entertainment only. Including voyeurs.
Quite true....

What an awesome shot Don! And LOL at voyeur! What was used for this shot?

It is a very capable toy camera.
SX50 handheld at 1200mm.... from a kayak....

I figured it was the SX50. Beautiful shot! It really is a remarkable camera for the size and for the $$'s! :D
 

privatebydesign

EOS-1D X Mark III
CR Pro
Jan 29, 2011
9,791
4,408
ajfotofilmagem said:
Don Haines said:
ajfotofilmagem said:
A camera with 100x zoom is intended for entertainment only. Including voyeurs.
Quite true....
I'm sure "Robert Capa" would have made the photo of the birds copulating with a 28mm lens. :eek: Do not ask me how it would come so close. :p
Capa%2C_Death_of_a_Loyalist_Soldier.jpg

Anybody could do as Capa did there, stage the shot with no enemy fire for miles, not saying he wasn't a true combat photographer, just that holding that image up as an example is fatally flawed. Unlike the many thousands of close combat images shot nowadays with 16-35mm lenses.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,935
Canada
privatebydesign said:
ajfotofilmagem said:
Don Haines said:
ajfotofilmagem said:
A camera with 100x zoom is intended for entertainment only. Including voyeurs.
Quite true....
I'm sure "Robert Capa" would have made the photo of the birds copulating with a 28mm lens. :eek: Do not ask me how it would come so close. :p
Capa%2C_Death_of_a_Loyalist_Soldier.jpg

Anybody could do as Capa did there, stage the shot with no enemy fire for miles, not saying he wasn't a true combat photographer, just that holding that image up as an example is fatally flawed. Unlike the many thousands of close combat images shot nowadays with 16-35mm lenses.
Was that a staged shot?
 

Orangutan

EOS 5D Mark IV
Sep 25, 2010
2,140
3
Don Haines said:
privatebydesign said:
ajfotofilmagem said:
Don Haines said:
ajfotofilmagem said:
A camera with 100x zoom is intended for entertainment only. Including voyeurs.
Quite true....
I'm sure "Robert Capa" would have made the photo of the birds copulating with a 28mm lens. :eek: Do not ask me how it would come so close. :p
Capa%2C_Death_of_a_Loyalist_Soldier.jpg

Anybody could do as Capa did there, stage the shot with no enemy fire for miles, not saying he wasn't a true combat photographer, just that holding that image up as an example is fatally flawed. Unlike the many thousands of close combat images shot nowadays with 16-35mm lenses.
Was that a staged shot?

Some evidence suggests that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Falling_Soldier
 

100

EOS 90D
Nov 9, 2013
183
11
Lee Jay said:
100 said:
Lee Jay said:
PicaPica said:
i had a fuji superzoom bridge and it looked just bad at the long end.

Check this out. This is a T2i+100-400L+1.4xTC III versus an SX50. These are 100% crops from more than 800 meters away.

1200mm%20comparison.jpg

A T2i has a 1.6 crop factor so a 100-400L @400mm will get you to 1.6 x 400 = 640mm.
Combine that with the 1.4x TCIII and you get 640 x 1.4 = 896mm
No where near 1200mm so these 2 photos cant both be 100% crops @1200mm equivalent
You need another 1.4 extender to get to 1200mm with the T2i

Yes, they can, and they are. The T2i is 18MP versus the 12MP of the SX50.

If we follow your "logic" the original Rebel (6 MP) doesn’t have the same 35 mm equivalent focal length as the T2i (18 MP) because it has 1/3 of the T2i’s megapixels...
I’m sorry, but megapixels are not a factor in focal length equivalence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35_mm_equivalent_focal_length
 

Lee Jay

EOS 7D Mark II
Sep 22, 2011
2,206
143
100 said:
If we follow your "logic" the original Rebel (6 MP) doesn’t have the same 35 mm equivalent focal length as the T2i (18 MP) because it has 1/3 of the T2i’s megapixels...
I’m sorry, but megapixels are not a factor in focal length equivalence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35_mm_equivalent_focal_length

Fine. Call it whatever you want. This was the SX50 at 215mm versus the T2i at 560mm. The image scale (angle subtended by each pixel) was very nearly identical between the shots.

Or, if you prefer, this was the T2i at 560mm cropped to match the field of view of the SX50 at 1,200mm equivalent. Same thing.

The point is, the SX50 at the long end held its own against a Canon full-frame L-zoom telephoto used at virtually its maximum resolving power. Not bad for a $450 camera/lens combination with a 50x zoom range.
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,935
Canada
100 said:
I’m sorry, but megapixels are not a factor in focal length equivalence.

But it does factor into the number of pixels on target....

An SX50 puts 4000 pixels across a full image. At it's long end (1200mm equivalent) it puts as many pixels on target as a 12Mpixel FF camera through a 1200mm lens.... or as many pixels on target as a 12Mpixel crop camera with a 750mm (1200/1.6) lens... or as many pixels on target as a 70D with a 548mm (1200/1.6)*(4000/5472).... The extra pixels allows you to crop the image an additional 1.37X to give the same number of pixels on Target.
 
<-- start Taboola -->