I don't know how to access it when post-processing, but the exif data's all there somewhere. I know, cause when I put photos in Flickr I can see it all, including scene mode and teleconverter settings. Here's a link to a photo taken with an SX60;I ran into the same problem in Tv (shutter priority) mode...clipped/blown highlights. After doing some reading I'm going to try my next session with Tv with the histogram turned on in the display and see if EC (exposure compensation) can fix the problem.
This is not an unknown problem for me. My old Coolpix 4500 used to have the same problem (worse actually, they truly were "clipped" and badly transitioned highlights). My favorite subjects, a pair of white-tailed kites, will force me to figure this out.
I found the "real" manual online as well, so that has given me more insight on why I couldn't access certain special features.
I want to fiddle with the modes and scenes more. The sad thing is, I would have thought the "mode" would be something Canon would provide in the EXIF/XMP data, but it doesn't appear they do. Digital teleconverter settings, etc. would be nice in the photo data too, but...nope. Makes it tough to change settings in the field and then know what you did and tried when you see the shots back at home unless you take alot of notes.
I did a rough pass through my photos this morning...of 521 shots, 84 were decent enough for me, which is a 16% hit rate...for the distances involved, pretty good (I'm usually less than 10% digiscoping, and often 0-5% on keepers). Considering I was pretty aggressive in trying BiF and all over the range map (which I couldn't even do with the camera+scope setup), and using the 2x digital teleconverter most of the time, I consider this a big improvement.
I do rely on post-processing alot, a habit I've had for years since I'm no stranger to Photoshop and always had less-than-stellar cameras. So I have no problem bending the camera settings to get the most data and worry about getting the photo back in post-processing.
I understand SX60 RAW support may be in the latest Photoshop CS6 updates, so it may be high time I start trying that as well, except maybe for the action shots.
That's pretty cool. I looked again thought and can't find the information in Photoshop, at least not in the JPEGs. So either Photoshop isn't supporting some aspect of EXIF via their XMP-based File Info, or I'm just blind and can't see it (quite possible).I don't know how to access it when post-processing, but the exif data's all there somewhere. I know, cause when I put photos in Flickr I can see it all, including scene mode and teleconverter settings. Here's a link to a photo taken with an SX60;
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127980272@N06/15462021120/in/set-72157648590733867
If you scroll down a little and click on "show EXIF," it all appears just below.
That's pretty cool. I looked again thought and can't find the information in Photoshop, at least not in the JPEGs. So either Photoshop isn't supporting some aspect of EXIF via their XMP-based File Info, or I'm just blind and can't see it (quite possible).
I found some possible leads in the Advanced tab, but it appears to give things like "Mode: 2" which probably translates into a mode name, but doesn't help much without a lookup chart.
Any Photoshop users in the audience care to lend a hand?
Figures, I finally get to a point where it's worth staring at the data only to find getting at it still feels like the 1980s...
I've posted three shots to my gallery, my first "decent" shots with the SX60 from my first outing with it.
Of course these have been cropped, reduced, unsharp mask'd, and had levels and contrast adjustments as needed to give the photos more oomph. Pretty typical routine for me, especially since I shoot in such low-contrast weather so much of the time.
I'm not 100% happy with the macro photo because I know it's focus isn't quite right. I have done better with a Coolpix 4500's macro mode, here.
The other two are a bit grainier than I would have expected, but I was using the 2x teledapter which seems to induce this.
I obviously need to experiment more in both macro and non-macro. I've had over 10 years of experience with the Coolpix 4500, so I can't expect to know how the SX60 behaves in a single outing.
I used the macro mode on the dial and close-up to the subject. In macro mode the teleconverter is disabled (sensibly so IMHO).Do you do Macro close up or at 6 feet with maximum zoom? I find that on the SX50 the stand-off approach works better. Besides, it's less likely to spook the thing. I've also found that using the teleconverter actually lets me get physically closer and still get focus. Seems to be a quirk in the software. Again that's the SX50.
So what would be the recommendation, SX50 or SX60?
If have been reading a lot online and it seems the sx60 can't compete with the sx50 that's 2 years old. I'm tempted by the sx60 but it seems the sx50 takes a better picture. Seems strange to me that this could be the case.
I do not have an SX60. But I can say that having read these threads and a number of reviews on-line, I got a second SX50.
Some people seem to be having good luck with the SX60. But one review I saw shows showed side by side photos of the two at maximum zoom and the SX50 was significantly superior. On the other hand I'm not sure if anyone is sure whether some of the early production models may have had a production flaw. So I just don't know for sure.
Those that have the SX50, is the poorer EVF (to that on the SX60) that much of an issue?
I have read thread after thread and review after review and narrowed my choice down to a Nikon P600 but still have a nagging doubt that the Canon SX50 may perhaps be the best buy.
Those that have the SX50, is the poorer EVF (to that on the SX60) that much of an issue?
I have read thread after thread and review after review and narrowed my choice down to a Nikon P600 but still have a nagging doubt that the Canon SX50 may perhaps be the best buy.
Those that have the SX50, is the poorer EVF (to that on the SX60) that much of an issue?
I have read thread after thread and review after review and narrowed my choice down to a Nikon P600 but still have a nagging doubt that the Canon SX50 may perhaps be the best buy.
Those that have the SX50, is the poorer EVF (to that on the SX60) that much of an issue?
I have read thread after thread and review after review and narrowed my choice down to a Nikon P600 but still have a nagging doubt that the Canon SX50 may perhaps be the best buy.
I didn't have any problem with this idea at all. Photoshop uses the same user interface for cropping, among other things. Just takes some getting use to.Forgot to say, re the SX60; the improved EVF is really nice.....until you attempt to use the Frame Assist. For some reason Canon made most of the image go dark when the zoom is retracted, making this most useful function practically worthless in the new model.