Canon SX60HS in Action (4 Viewers)

I've been following this thread since it started. And I've been thinking I wanted to buy a new 'bridge' camera since the early spring when I decided that constantly carrying an SLR was taking me away from my main interest: actually birding. I am no clearer whether the SX60 is really not very good or there are just quite a few 'duff' ones out there or any nearer deciding whether to but a SX50 or and a SX60.

Is it just me?

Steve Babbs said:

I am no clearer whether the SX60 is really not very good or there are just quite a few 'duff' ones out there or any nearer deciding whether to but a SX50 or and a SX60.

Is it just me?

Click to expand...

Not just you, I felt the same way. Finally decided since the point (for me) for even bothering with a bridge camera was digiscoping without the bulk, that "reach is king" and went with the SX60. I suspect that the "drawbacks" cited by others are still far better than the results I get at the far end of the reach of my digiscoping setup, so my expectations are just set differently.

After realizing I just wasn't happy with even 700mm lenses on a DSLR (it wasn't far enough reach for my needs), it made picking the SX60 easier. One or two other cameras reach a bit farther, but they had show stoppers for me in terms of day-to-day use or UI, and having RAW appealed to me.

Granted, the "SX50 is better than SX60" comments bug me at some level, but if I focus on "is the SX60 better than my digiscoping setup for comparable range" I get less worried about it.

YMMV.

Now, when I get the camera in a couple weeks, we'll see if my gamble paid off. ;-p

Robert l Jarvis sorry for not replying sooner, the deer shot was shot at 183.73, the bullfinch 206.61,the buzzard 247 ,slight cropping was applied in all pics, I picked up my sx 40 today and couldn't believe how bad the evf was compared to the sx 60, im intending taking pics from both cameras in bad lighting to check the results,really bad lighting here yesterday here are 4 pics all taken at full optical zoom

Hey Marco - have you got the camera back yet?
Here's some from Pagham today taken in actual sunshine......! All taken at full optical with 2x converter on. Whimbrel about 30ft, Goldeneye alot further!

pooleparrot said:

Neil, Off subject , but you're Common Sandpiper pic is some type of Plover, not sure what Plovers you get in you're neck of the woods!

Click to expand...

Sorry if I missed this. You're right. Greater Sandplover.
Neil.

Hi BBB - yes it's back and I've done a little shooting. Initially I'd say an improvement, but I'm going to test it methodically in that light stuff we have round here occasionally. Too busy this weekend, but I'll post results as soon as I'm done

birdboybowley said:

Hey Marco - have you got the camera back yet?
Here's some from Pagham today taken in actual sunshine......! All taken at full optical with 2x converter on. Whimbrel about 30ft, Goldeneye alot further!

Click to expand...

Is that a Pied Billed Grebe behind the Goldeneye? And then the Whimbrel. We have all three of those species here. Interesting how some birds are on both continents and some not.

Cheers Marco - look forward to reading your views on the fix
Crazy - close, but it's a Little Grebe and our Whimbrel's different....depending on your taxonomic disposition!

kawwauser said:

Robert l Jarvis sorry for not replying sooner, the deer shot was shot at 183.73, the bullfinch 206.61,the buzzard 247 ,slight cropping was applied in all pics, I picked up my sx 40 today and couldn't believe how bad the evf was compared to the sx 60, im intending taking pics from both cameras in bad lighting to check the results,really bad lighting here yesterday here are 4 pics all taken at full optical zoom

Click to expand...

Those shots look pretty decent TBF.

birdboybowley said:

Hey Marco - have you got the camera back yet?
Here's some from Pagham today taken in actual sunshine......! All taken at full optical with 2x converter on. Whimbrel about 30ft, Goldeneye alot further!

View attachment 524588View attachment 524589View attachment 524590View attachment 524591

Click to expand...

Very good images, the Whimbrel shots are damned good, well done.

Those are some nice photos for full zoom and even the 2x converter. I'd guess that meant you were reaching out more than 300m?

Were those handheld or monopod/tripod?

One of the tips for better images at the long end seems to be to keep the digital teleconverter (at least the 1.6x and not the digital zoom) turned-on full time. Given I'm always after long distances, it was my plan to have one set of settings for "digiscoping" (long range) and one for close-in and BiF/moving shots.

My SX60 delivery is delayed (Holidays are not the greatest time for shipping), so might not arrive today as planned. Not that it matters much, weather has been horrible (wet, dark, and gloomy).

I did get the separate order for the memory cards, batteries, filter ring (just in case), lens hood, and remote shutter release.

Cheers Cal,
They were all handheld and full optical zoom with the 2x converter on. I sometimes find the 1.6x gives better results, depending on light

birdboybowley said:

They were all handheld and full optical zoom with the 2x converter on. I sometimes find the 1.6x gives better results, depending on light

Click to expand...

Nicely done, I think that is quite good quality for a 2x digital teleconverter...that makes long shots as long as what, 2600mm (35mm equivalent)? I figure from experience, that's good for almost 3/4 km if the subject isn't moving around too much.

Here's a couple to show what the camera can do for getting purely a record shot at distance.
The first was taken on full optical with 2x converter on. For a laugh, the second was in Auto mode with full digital zoom (260x) and it's actually not that bad!!
I guess the Hawfinches were c100m away....maybe more

What is the current thinking from you guys. Buy the SX60 or just keep the SX50?
Thanks

I'd have to say that after my first chance to take out my new SX60 I've been very happy. I pushed it in over-contrasty and over-gloomy weather, max zoom using the 2x digital teledapter, tripod and handheld, and considering I'm still learning how to use the camera, not bad. I'll post shots when I get a chance.

I think once I get everything figured out it will work fine as my "digiscoping without the scope" camera. In other words "I need to shoot at 1/4 mile or more."

My learning so far:

--Blowing out highlights. I need to figure out what I'm doing wrong or can be done to compensate. I'm using primarily Shutter Priority mode.

--Unlike my other cameras where "every feature is customizable in every mode," the SX60 seems to only allow a subset of features in each mode. Like I discovered the auto-tracking feature in Auto mode, but apparently it can't be used in Shutter Priority mode. Same for many other features from mode-to-mode.

--Worst printed manual ever. It doesn't even appear to go over all the camera features in much details (including menu options), nor does it have a sample screen showing what all the icons and colors mean. I am guessing (hoping) a more thorough manual exists as a PDF elsewhere.

--Don't try to shoot BiF with the digital teledapter on...the graininess prevents crisp shots. Tracking birds at those distances and keeping it steady is darn near impossible anyway.

--The digital teledapters do have a flaw: they do give a good photo that in Photoshop is good looking at 50% or smaller magnification. But over that, and through 100% there is obvious pixelation. So the digital teledapter is like magic for screen-sized images, but not-so-much for printed resolutions.

--The autofocus burst mode is nice and works like a charm. Does seem to focus between each shot, and do it well even out at quite a distance.

--Yes I did use a tripod on the longer shots. Mostly I find using a tripod and the screen to be better to find and track birds at long distances easier than hand-held and through the viewfinder. Really, this is no different than I did with my digiscoping setup. On the plus side, I can use a much lighter tripod.

--The button on the side for the "zoom out and find your subject" is a wonderful feature for finding birds at a distance and then zooming back in. VERY handy.

--The other button for "IS assist at long range" works like this, for the curious: what it appears to do is "slow down and track" based on the center zone. It keeps you from the natural tendency to over-correct for the shake of your body and hands by slowing-down the perceived motion and reactions by a split second. It does seem to somehow keep an eye on whatever is in the center and assume you want to stay near it. If you use this mode with very slow, relaxed and deliberate motions it makes it easier to take shots that without it would be jittery. NOW I understand why it exists separately from the main IS routines. For me, it seemed a bit more like a mild form of tracking assist combined with a split second delay in apparent motion/movement on screen to keep the user from going crazy trying to micro-compensate for every little exaggerated/magnified motion.

As always in this discussion, YMMV.

lleider said:

What is the current thinking from you guys. Buy the SX60 or just keep the SX50?
Thanks

Click to expand...

The other question for a UK buyer is: if the decision is made to go for the SX60 do I buy it now while Canon are doing a £50 cash back (which makes it £350) or is its price going to drop more than £50 in a few months anyway? And how long do cash back offers usually last?

I certainly don't feel like buying a 'grey' import in case it has to be returned.

Returns are no probs with DigitalRev for example - and the Canon warranty is an international one so not a problem either

I was out with my sx60 last week in dull conditions,i took some pics in tv mode and av mode and noticed most looked incorrectly exposed ,the ones that were correct didn,t look good either,some birds were flying past and I put the camera on sports mode,i missed the shot and went on forgetting to change modes,all the pics I took in sports mode were correctly exposed,i went out yesterday and left it on sports mode in better lighting,i took some perched bird shots and a couple of landscapes and all looked ok ,while standing at a pond taking pics of gulls I switched back to tv mode and tried a shot see first pic below,this is similar to the shots I was getting last week,i took both gull shots from the same spot,the first gull exif tv mode,,201.32mm/ 1/400 /f8 /iso 500, the second gull sports mode 201.32mm / 1/1250 /f8 /iso 500, the robin was a considerable distance away

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.