Cheers Brian and thanks for the comparison shots:t: always good to read "real life" comparisons.
Rich
Rich
Last edited:
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Which Superzoom? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter ClarkWGriswold
- Start date
A quick search for the FZ200 shows the cheapest price to be c£317
Rich
Rich
I also returned my Fuji for exactly the same reasons as Brian. I never got the image quality that I used to get with my sx40 and the focusing on my particular camera was very hit and miss. I also had lots of problems trying to use it in shutter priory mode as it was not adjusting the aperture as needed, I had to keep refocusing to get it to work properly. Loved the feel and look of the camera compared to the plastic feel of my canon sx40.
Not sure what I am going to get now. The Sony looks nice but like the Fuji it's on the high price side for super zooms.
Biancone
to err is human
Interesting; not just my problem then! I too liked the handling very much, and in theory the speed of operation should have been ideal for my particular use. But it didn't work out in practice! To my eyes the SX50, in the right hands, can produce the best image quality of the current crop for many birding purposes, but the 2.8 aperture of the FZ200 should allow high shutter speed and low iso more often for the BIF/raptor shots I'm after. The fact that I went out and immediately got better images than the Fuji (or my old FZ45) makes me pretty optimistic...
Brian
wardy11
Well-known member
I have recntly bought the Canon SX50 HS which is turning out to be an excellent buy. Considering the price (£359 in the Uk minus a £50 cash back making it just over £300), I have found that the images I'm getting are exceptional and not too far short of DSLR's at more than 5 times the price!
When you factor in the ease of use, all the excellent features, including RAW, and the inmage stabiliser which Canon have on this camera, it is my opinion a no brainer and the best decision I have made in a long time.
I have submitted a phiotgraph of a Siskin in the gallery which shows what sort of quality to expect from what was a mere snapshot out of a window!
I'm sure there will be opinions on lots of other products that are available, but I would definitely recommend this camera to all.
When you factor in the ease of use, all the excellent features, including RAW, and the inmage stabiliser which Canon have on this camera, it is my opinion a no brainer and the best decision I have made in a long time.
I have submitted a phiotgraph of a Siskin in the gallery which shows what sort of quality to expect from what was a mere snapshot out of a window!
I'm sure there will be opinions on lots of other products that are available, but I would definitely recommend this camera to all.
pooleparrot
Ian Ballam
Agree with Wardy11, have had the SX50 since December and I am very happy with the results, although not as good as some other users(Roy C, Ian F etc) they are far superior to what I would get with my Canon DSLR. An example of a Cuckoo today, taken at full zoom with 2x teleconverter(JPEG), at a distance of at least 100metres and cropped and edited in Irfanview. A good record shot,although it won't win any prizes. The camera can produce some really sharp shots if you can get closer to your subject and not have to use the Teleconverters.
Ian
Attachments
Biancone
to err is human
Still optimistic about FZ200...
Not trying to compete with that surprisingly good cuckoo image, but here are a couple of images from yesterday which made me optimistic that I have chosen the right camera this time. My needs are quite narrow. I need something that I can rely on to produce better images of summer Honey-buzzards than my old FZ45 and reasonable shots of other raptors at any time of year. So I went for the wide aperture = high shutter speed of the FZ200 instead of the longer zoom of the SX50. The harrier was more than 250 metres away (measured on a map afterwards) and the sky was dull with grey and white cloud. With 1/1000 shutter selected, the camera used one step below widest aperture and kept low ISO. The image won't compete with one from a dslr + big lens, but I think it's a very pleasing for this category of camera, and certainly shows enough feather detail for me to recognise that individual again. My old FZ45 might have produced something a bit similar if in excellent light, but typically more grainy and fuzzy. The kite has a bad 'purple fringing' problem, but it was shot facing into the brightest part of the cloud cover, and with a couple of steps +EV (to get some details in the bird rather than just a black silhouette). But it still shows reasonable plumage detail. Both just jpegs, cropped heavily from original and resized to 800px maximum dimension. Anyway, I'm encouraged to think that when I manage to be less distant from the subject some rather good images might be possible!
Brian
Not trying to compete with that surprisingly good cuckoo image, but here are a couple of images from yesterday which made me optimistic that I have chosen the right camera this time. My needs are quite narrow. I need something that I can rely on to produce better images of summer Honey-buzzards than my old FZ45 and reasonable shots of other raptors at any time of year. So I went for the wide aperture = high shutter speed of the FZ200 instead of the longer zoom of the SX50. The harrier was more than 250 metres away (measured on a map afterwards) and the sky was dull with grey and white cloud. With 1/1000 shutter selected, the camera used one step below widest aperture and kept low ISO. The image won't compete with one from a dslr + big lens, but I think it's a very pleasing for this category of camera, and certainly shows enough feather detail for me to recognise that individual again. My old FZ45 might have produced something a bit similar if in excellent light, but typically more grainy and fuzzy. The kite has a bad 'purple fringing' problem, but it was shot facing into the brightest part of the cloud cover, and with a couple of steps +EV (to get some details in the bird rather than just a black silhouette). But it still shows reasonable plumage detail. Both just jpegs, cropped heavily from original and resized to 800px maximum dimension. Anyway, I'm encouraged to think that when I manage to be less distant from the subject some rather good images might be possible!
Brian
Attachments
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
I would say that shooting 2400mm from that distance this is darn goods Ian :clap: I have not even seen a Cuckoo for years and have never managed a shot of one so I would certainly settle for this.
Has anyone bought one of these Superzooms recently and if so where did you find the best prices? Roy mentioned a £50 rebate for UK sourced SX50's but they still work out a little dearer than DigitalRev etc.
I'm heading up to Sutherland in May and want to purchase one before the trip.
Thanks for any assistance,
Rich
I'm heading up to Sutherland in May and want to purchase one before the trip.
Thanks for any assistance,
Rich
I should have mentioned that my preference is the SX50 but its a close decision.
Rich
Rich
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
As previously mentioned, you need a UK invoice to get the cash back. I paid £289 for my SX50 (with a UK invoice!) and have recently been informed by Canon that my cash back application has been approved so will end up paying £239. When I receive my cheque I will divulge my source (it is not a Hong Kong based company).
squidge
Wha Whassssat
Anybody compared the canon sx50 with the Nikon p510?
I got the chance to hold the canon and the fuji hs50 and the fuji is much bigger than the canon. The fuji is nearly the size of a dslr so it defeats the purpose of what im looking for. I also found the manual zoom not very smooth on the fuji. I have held the Nikon p510 but I'd like to be able to compare it with the canon. Would the extra megapixels on the Nikon make up for the shorter zoom function 42x when compared to the canon 50x or does it fall short?
Regards Gerard.
I got the chance to hold the canon and the fuji hs50 and the fuji is much bigger than the canon. The fuji is nearly the size of a dslr so it defeats the purpose of what im looking for. I also found the manual zoom not very smooth on the fuji. I have held the Nikon p510 but I'd like to be able to compare it with the canon. Would the extra megapixels on the Nikon make up for the shorter zoom function 42x when compared to the canon 50x or does it fall short?
Regards Gerard.
Roy C
Occasional bird snapper
Gerard, I have no idea about the Nikon p510 so have not got a clue as to how good or otherwise it is. In theory a 16mp camera could give more 'cropability' than a 12mp one but with these small sensor cameras it is not clear cut. For a start more mp's that are crammed onto the sensor could well mean worst high ISO noise performance also the smaller the pixels the more likely you are to get 'pixel bleed'. Basic IQ counts for a lot especially when it comes to cropping fairly heavily. If an image has poor IQ to start with then cropping will only make it worst. Another thing which may or make not effect you is that the p510 does not appear to shoot in RAW.
As I am sure you know,to get the same optical focal length as the SX50 both the HS50 and P510 need to be up-rezed 20% (or cropped that much heavier).
Good independent reviews re SX50 v p510 seem difficult to come by so the best of luck whatever you go for. At the end of the day it is the ability of the person behind the Camera that counts the most, especially with these small sensor Cameras.
Have you had your cheque back yet. If so, who did you buy from, as my daughter wants a new camera. I took her to PC world to have a look at all the cameras, guess which one she likes haha
Similar threads
