Canon SX50 Specs (1 Viewer)

[HokkaidoStu]

I got this camera a couple of days ago, I'm still trying to familiarize myself with the settings etc.

Here are 2 pics taken from the same spot, just snaps with no cropping and minimal post processing, one taken with a 7D/500 f4 combo and the other with the SX50. For large stationary birds in good light the SX50 isn't bad at all.

 

[Paul - Herts]

Interesting comparison. I am guessing the shot of the bird facing to the right was taken with the SX50?

 

[HokkaidoStu]

I am guessing the shot of the bird facing to the right was taken with the SX50?

And you would be guessing correctly....................

 

[Paul - Herts]

Cheers Stu. Guess based on the increased dof from the smaller sensor - both good shots!

 

[crazyfingers]

I went down the street to check on the Mute Swan family. There were 6 chicks at the start but now only three. Speculation among the old ladies who have been so happy to see the chicks this spring is that the two large snapping turtles that hang out close to the nest may have gotten the three missing chicks from below. There are also large mouth bass in the pond and I guess a fox or a heron might have gotten them but I tend to agree with the old ladies that the 3 chicks were most likely lost to the snapping turtles.

Anyway, today there are still three chicks. But the swans are on the far side of the pond.

So yes here is another demo of the reach and quality of the SX50.

The first photo shows 2 adults and 3 chicks. The 3rd chick is the bump sticking it's head out from the front of the right-hand adult.

The second photo is from where I took the photo. You might be able to see 2 white dots in the very center of the photo near shore exactly on the opposite side of the pond.

It is sad that there are no longer 6 chicks.

The third photo is of the original 6.

 

[Andy1979]

I have wondered about flight shots with this camera. I appreciate it is unlikely to pick out a distant bird against the skyline and the manual focus would take too long, but I was surprised I managed to get the attached shot of a Balearic Shearwater at Durlston CP, Dorset this morning!

 

[pshute]

I got this camera a couple of days ago, I'm still trying to familiarize myself with the settings etc.

Here are 2 pics taken from the same spot, just snaps with no cropping and minimal post processing, one taken with a 7D/500 f4 combo and the other with the SX50. For large stationary birds in good light the SX50 isn't bad at all.

Good test, thanks for posting that. It would be interesting to see how they compare from further away, where the 500/f4 has run out of zoom but the SX50 hasn't.

 

[eddy the eagle]

Canon SX50HS

A couple of photos taken this morning to demonstrate the zoom qualities of this marvelous little camera.The first shows this distance to the pylon where the Osprey was sitting the second shows what is possible at full digital zoom.Great camera....Regards Eddy.

 

[HokkaidoStu]

Good test, thanks for posting that. It would be interesting to see how they compare from further away, where the 500/f4 has run out of zoom but the SX50 hasn't.

I suspect a crop from the 500/f4 would still be quite a bit better than the digital zoom of the SX50. Well it better be, considering the massive price difference.................

 

[Roy C]

I suspect a crop from the 500/f4 would still be quite a bit better than the digital zoom of the SX50. Well it better be, considering the massive price difference.................

If shooting from extreme distances then I am not so sure. At 'normal' shooting distances a lens like the 500/4 will yield far better fine detail than the SX50 that's for sure but over a huge distance with big crops I would not be surprised if the SX50 did not do better than a lens like the 500/4 even if it had a tc attached.

Attached shows a shot from around 200 yards (600 feet) with the SX50, hand held at 2400mm (full frame equivalent FOV), both shots from the same spot. Not sure a crop from the 500/4 would do as well but may be wrong. I do know that a cropped shot from my old 300/2.8 IS MkI + 2x tc would not be as good as the SX50 from this sort of distance.

 

[HokkaidoStu]

Looking at that Cormorant pic it must be a good camera for 'record shots', I'm surprised more non DSLR birders don't carry one around. Better than digiscoping for capturing evidence of a rarity..................

 

[Roy C]

Looking at that Cormorant pic it must be a good camera for 'record shots', I'm surprised more non DSLR birders don't carry one around. Better than digiscoping for capturing evidence of a rarity..................

Yes, it also surprises me that more birders who digiscope for record shots do not carry one of these around when out birding with a scope - its a lot easier and faster than setting up the digiscope and results are quite good for record shots.

 

[2slo]

If shooting from extreme distances then I am not so sure. At 'normal' shooting distances a lens like the 500/4 will yield far better fine detail than the SX50 that's for sure but over a huge distance with big crops I would not be surprised if the SX50 did not do better than a lens like the 500/4 even if it had a tc attached.

Attached shows a shot from around 200 yards (600 feet) with the SX50, hand held at 2400mm (full frame equivalent FOV), both shots from the same spot. Not sure a crop from the 500/4 would do as well but may be wrong. I do know that a cropped shot from my old 300/2.8 IS MkI + 2x tc would not be as good as the SX50 from this sort of distance.

Interesting thread. Last week I decided to see what I could get at extreme range with my 500mm f/4 (IS II version). I set up my 1D mk IV (APS H sensor so 1.3 crop factor) with my 500mm + 2x TCIII + 36mm, 20mm and 12mm extension tubes + 1.4x TCIII, thus giving effectively 1820mm @ f/8.. I set this up on a tripod and used a remote shutter release:



First off I did some tests in my back garden. The first shot below is uncropped on my 5DIII at 50mm (roughly what we see with unaided vision) the target being the writing on the lens box on the wall next to the cat. The second shot below shows a 100% crop of the same image to better show what I was aiming at. The 3rd shot below shows the result from the 1820mm set up. Uncropped and slight sharpening applied only. The distance for the three shots was the same in each case, approx 14 yards:



So then I took this set up out to try on a live subject, in this case a slow moving Canada goose. The subject was approx 120 yds away and I used liveview on full mag to focus manually. I pushed the shutter speed up to 1/5000 sec to offset minor movements in the equipt and again used a remote shutter release. ISO 1600:



I don't think the result was too bad considering what I used. I know I could improve it by reducing the shutter speed with a resultant decrease in ISO. When I go out with my 500mm I always carry the two convertors and now I've started carrying the ext tubes to allow the convertors to be stacked as well (you can't stack the sIII TCs without using at least one tube).

 

[Roy C]

Interesting thread. Last week I decided to see what I could get at extreme range with my 500mm f/4 (IS II version). I set up my 1D mk IV (APS H sensor so 1.3 crop factor) with my 500mm + 2x TCIII + 36mm, 20mm and 12mm extension tubes + 1.4x TCIII, thus giving effectively 1820mm @ f/8.. I set this up on a tripod and used a remote shutter release:

View attachment 498763

First off I did some tests in my back garden. The first shot below is uncropped on my 5DIII at 50mm (roughly what we see with unaided vision) the target being the writing on the lens box on the wall next to the cat. The second shot below shows a 100% crop of the same image to better show what I was aiming at. The 3rd shot below shows the result from the 1820mm set up. Uncropped and slight sharpening applied only. The distance for the three shots was the same in each case, approx 14 yards:

View attachment 498760 View attachment 498761 View attachment 498762

So then I took this set up out to try on a live subject, in this case a slow moving Canada goose. The subject was approx 120 yds away and I used liveview on full mag to focus manually. I pushed the shutter speed up to 1/5000 sec to offset minor movements in the equipt and again used a remote shutter release. ISO 1600:


View attachment 498764

I don't think the result was too bad considering what I used. I know I could improve it by reducing the shutter speed with a resultant decrease in ISO. When I go out with my 500mm I always carry the two convertors and now I've started carrying the ext tubes to allow the convertors to be stacked as well (you can't stack the sIII TCs without using at least one tube).

The Canada is not bad from that distance Mark and there is no doubt the 500/4 is a mega good lens but it was still not taken from anywhere near as far as the Cormorant I posted and my finished shot was also cropped quite a bit. The SX50 shot from 200 yards + was taken hand held with normal AF at 2400mm. I used to use stacked converters when I had a 300/2.8 IS and the results were very good (used MkII converters so no need for the ext tube) but they were not up to much cropping so could not get much more than the 1344mm fov on the 7D.

 

[Roy C]

Interesting thread. Last week I decided to see what I could get at extreme range with my 500mm f/4 (IS II version). I set up my 1D mk IV (APS H sensor so 1.3 crop factor) with my 500mm + 2x TCIII + 36mm, 20mm and 12mm extension tubes + 1.4x TCIII,

View attachment 498763

Mark I meant to ask earlier, why do you used three extension tubes. I know you need one to stack the MkIII converters but why three? or is it just to reduce the MFD.

 

[2slo]

Mark I meant to ask earlier, why do you used three extension tubes. I know you need one to stack the MkIII converters but why three? or is it just to reduce the MFD.

Simply that Roy, to minimise the MFD if a bird landed near me.

 

[jayman_1975]

This is my first attempt with my new SX50

 

[pshute]

If shooting from extreme distances then I am not so sure. At 'normal' shooting distances a lens like the 500/4 will yield far better fine detail than the SX50 that's for sure but over a huge distance with big crops I would not be surprised if the SX50 did not do better than a lens like the 500/4 even if it had a tc attached.

Attached shows a shot from around 200 yards (600 feet) with the SX50, hand held at 2400mm (full frame equivalent FOV), both shots from the same spot. Not sure a crop from the 500/4 would do as well but may be wrong. I do know that a cropped shot from my old 300/2.8 IS MkI + 2x tc would not be as good as the SX50 from this sort of distance.

It would be great if someone with this lens and an SX50 could do some side by side tests at very long distances so we know for sure. Much better than theorising.

I suspect one variable that might affect the results is lighting. If the SX50 has to use high ISO then the grain might reduce any advantage it has over the 500mm lens. It has after all, only a 215mm lens if you consider the true focal length, and the rest is up to the high density sensor and some software.

 

[ClarkWGriswold]

This is my first attempt with my new SX50

View attachment 498845

Nice:t:

 

[rob lee]

As there are`nt too many in flight shots taken with this camera on the thread, I thought I`d post a few examples here from my recent trip over to the Farnes. All pics taken in sport mode, cropped & sharpened. Obviously the good light helped, but I think these are more than acceptable, bearing in mind the small sensor limitations etc. As was mentioned earlier, I`m another ex digiscoper since getting this camera & in flight was never really on the agenda with that set-up.

Rob.