Canon SX50 Specs (1 Viewer)

[DavidNB]

Got that Roy,cheers,will set one of the other set ups for super fine,i read that early on in this thread.What i am finding is that i am having to crop a lot to allow uploading.

I don't think you have to crop. I think what you have to do is use either the in camera or CD software to resize the image, and save it as something different, so you keep one version for uploading, and one to keep.

Or you can do what I am more used to in other forums, which is to link to URLs in my Photobucket account.

I don't know if I would be allowed to link directly to the image here, as you can on other boards I frequent, so I tend to just post the link, as I am too lazy to learn exactly how to do what I've just suggested you do.

David

 

[Roy C]

Got that Roy,cheers,will set one of the other set ups for super fine,i read that early on in this thread.What i am finding is that i am having to crop a lot to allow uploading.

Like has already been said Chris, there is a difference between cropping and re-sizing - BF will not allow 1600 pixel wide images and also there is a restriction on the file size you can upload as well. Here is what I and most others on here do I suspect:-
1) Crop the image to the composition you want - remember the rule of thirds and also for most bird pics the bird should always be looking/flying into space rather than having equal or more space behind it.

2) After cropping (and processing) and when you want to upload to the web just resize your cropped photo to around 800 to 1000 pixels on the long side.

3) Save the jpeg at a quality level that gives you a file size of around 200kb - this can be done by using 'save for the web' or 'save as'. I much prefer using 'save as' because it is then just of case of altering the quality slider until you reach your desired file size. It should also be noted that using 'save for the web' strips the EXIF info so another reason to use the straight forward 'save as' INHO.

BTW that Castle shot is nice Chris.

 

[pshute]

Was out early this morning,light was poor and still very cold on the moor top about 6 miles from home.Tried the camera out again on a few red grouse.
Getting to really like this camera,still need to sought a few things out.

Just curious, were the grouse shots hand held, or on a tripod? If they're from 300m then they're pretty good, especially if you reduce them down a little to hide the motion blur. But I'm wondering if they could have been even better by using a tripod.

And what ISO, shutter and aperture? If you're not sure then Irfanview is a good program for viewing the EXIF information in the image, also for simple cropping and resizing.

 

[Brian Stone]

Worth mentioning to anyone new to the camera if you are forced to shoot at full zoom, handheld at 1/30s or similar use the continuous shooting option (5th down on the FUNC SET menu). Vastly increases the chances of one of the shots being when the camera was steadier or the bird not moving (hopefully both!). Only any use in JPEG mode as the burst rate isn't high enough otherwise.

In my tests in low light situations I've found it is better to get the shutter speed up by increasing the ISO if you can. Try not to under-expose. The attached shot was taken in twilight at ISO3200 and is a <50% crop!

 

[Roy C]

And what ISO, shutter and aperture? If you're not sure then Irfanview is a good program for viewing the EXIF information in the image, also for simple cropping and resizing.

'pshute' have you not got an EXIF viewer? the EXIF is all there in the image all you have to do is to right click and all will be revealed.

 

[Had.enough]

For a bird the size of a grouse I would estimate that you would need to get within 30 feet max for nice detail.
I suspect a bird photographer with, say, a Canon 500mm f4 lens and a 7D camera (£5k worth second hand!) would be looking to get even closer than that.

Which is all of course a complete no-no for Black Grouse in the UK.
So well done Greenwell, for exercising restraint in this situation.

Peter

 

[goodallian]

Doesn't seem to work for me Roy? I have Opanda installed.

Ian

 

[greenwell]

Just curious, were the grouse shots hand held, or on a tripod? If they're from 300m then they're pretty good, especially if you reduce them down a little to hide the motion blur. But I'm wondering if they could have been even better by using a tripod.

And what ISO, shutter and aperture? If you're not sure then Irfanview is a good program for viewing the EXIF information in the image, also for simple cropping and resizing.

The shot i put on here of the black grouse was Auto,f6.5,ISO800,928KB,1600x1200. I did take some shots after this one on manual but this was the best picture.I had a monopod with me but did not use it, but i had to be quick as the cock was after the hen and they were going away from me quiet quick.
Yes i am sure you would get short shrift were i was as the locals will not stand for these birds being disturbed especially at this time of the year,it was also blowing a gale,about 6deg wind chill and raining,not the best weather to do a set up in.
Roy thank you again for the info will try what you say,regarding the EXIF reading,i am on a Mac,i have now altered the mouse settings so i can right click.That then brings up a list for save as ext,but no file,tried using control and clicking but does the same.Mind when i put the arrow over the picture i do get a box with some info in it,is this the EXIF you mean?.
I will try a few pics after tea to see what i can do.

 

[Roy C]

Doesn't seem to work for me Roy? I have Opanda installed.

Ian

Ian, you need a EXIF viewer for web images, there are plenty of free ones available for downloading - you just need to make sure you get the right one for your browser.

 

[Roy C]

Roy thank you again for the info will try what you say,regarding the EXIF reading,i am on a Mac,i have now altered the mouse settings so i can right click.That then brings up a list for save as ext,but no file,tried using control and clicking but does the same.Mind when i put the arrow over the picture i do get a box with some info in it,is this the EXIF you mean?.

Chris, see my post above re the EXIF viewer. I do not know about Mac's but I would be highly surprised if there was not one available.

 

[Roy C]

Which is all of course a complete no-no for Black Grouse in the UK.
So well done Greenwell, for exercising restraint in this situation.

Peter

I agree 100% :t: I have seen too much of bird photographers scaring away birds over the years which is why I sold all my long lenses and gave up bird photography more than a year ago. I have even heard of one top bird snapper that will make sure that a rarity is chased out of the area after he has got his shots - presumably to make sure no one else get a shot #pathetic.
You also find a lot of bird snappers these days searching the internet looking for other peoples rarity finds so that they can jump in the car get a shot. Unlike the birders with scopes who will keep their distance, the bird snappers always have to get nearer it seems. these people will rarely if ever share any finds that they make.

I remember a couple of years ago when there were two pairs of Dartford warblers nesting on my local patch, they were feeding so close to a well used footpath that some folks were even getting shots with their mobile phones. I posted a few shots (taken from the footpath) on the web and was amazed at the number of bird snappers from all over the country who wanted info on the location so they could come down and have ago at it. I never did give anyone the location of course as I knew it would be carnage with a load of photographers there.

I reckon even shooting from hides can cause disturbance to birds which is why I have never done it.

Nowadays I sometimes use an astroscope set-up for snapping waders in the estuary from a public footpath, I rarely get nearer than 150 feet and most times it is more. Other than that I just have the little SX50 for occasional snaps when I am on my daily walk around my estate.

BTW I was just pointing out how near you would need to get for a detailed picture and not advocating that you should get that near - I am a volunteer RSPB warden and have often had to have a word with folks getting too near to the birds.

 

[Mike Beer]

I also use a Mac but have no idea what EXIF viewer is. I do like all the information that keeps coming through regarding this camera although a lot goes over my head, especially the shortened versions like EXIF. But we all have to start somewhere.

Mike.

 

[Mike Beer]

On another note the one thing that bugs me a lot is the positioning of the video button, I keep hitting it by mistake and do not find out it is on until I try the AF on a bird :-C Anyone else have this problem?

All the xxxxxx time I thought it was just me.

Mike.

 

[greenwell]

Well said Roy agree 100%.Out with the dog after tea and spotted the first ever great spot woodpecker i have seen here,the perfect shot on the side of a tree with the evening sun on him,just going to press the trigger and it was gone,never mind it was nice to see.
Had a load of goldy;s in the garden tonight so will see what the pics are like.
A couple from yesterday,the nuthatch was way high up and in the shadows but nice to see them about.
I have been a fisherman all my life so have always been keen on wild life,but now i am enjoying being able to look back on what i see and this camera is giving me a lot of pleasure,also its real nice to show the grand kids,teach them early and what to respect and then they will i hope learn to enjoy nature after all its one of the few free pleasures left these days.
Yes i keep catching the self timer button and also the rec on a few occasions
Chris.

 

[Roy C]

I also use a Mac but have no idea what EXIF viewer is. I do like all the information that keeps coming through regarding this camera although a lot goes over my head, especially the shortened versions like EXIF. But we all have to start somewhere.

Mike.

Mike, a EXIF viewer is a piece of software that you can use to interrogate any jpeg image on the web for the EXIF data (e.g. the shooting information that was used to create the image like Camera, shutter speed, aperture, ISO and loads of other stuff).
The only times it does not work is where the originator of the image has stripped the EXIF when creating the jpeg - actions like 'save for the web' does this OR where the web site has disabled right clicks (although there are ways of overcoming this).
As an example I can see that 'greenwells' Chaffy shot above was taken at 1/160 sec, f6.5 and ISO 800. There is also loads of other data like exposure mode, white balance, exposure compensation.............. Oh! another thing is that it was taken at full optical zoom plus the 2x digital converter.

 

[Mike Beer]

Mike, a EXIF viewer is a piece of software that you can use to interrogate any jpeg image on the web for the EXIF data (e.g. the shooting information that was used to create the image like Camera, shutter speed, aperture, ISO and loads of other stuff).
The only times it does not work is where the originator of the image has stripped the EXIF when creating the jpeg - actions like 'save for the web' does this OR where the web site has disabled right clicks (although there are ways of overcoming this).
As an example I can see that 'greenwells' Chaffy shot above was taken at 1/160 sec, f6.5 and ISO 800. There is also loads of other data like exposure mode, white balance, exposure compensation.............. Oh! another thing is that it was taken at full optical zoom plus the 2x digital converter.

Thanks for explaining for me, I have looked at greenwells chaffy, through Photoshop elements but cant find your information, on my pictures I can see limited information in Iphoto. I have enough trouble getting my pictures at a reasonable standard. I was expecting far to much taking pictures at long distance.

Mike.

 

[Mike Beer]

Roy C

I have added a poor picture taken at a long distance, can you see the info on this picture. I may have made it a bit small. Again I think I was expecting to much.

Mike

 

[Roy C]

Roy C

I have added a poor picture taken at a long distance, can you see the info on this picture. I may have made it a bit small. Again I think I was expecting to much.

Mike

Yep, I can see all the shooting info:- 1/60 sec f6.5, ISO 800 etc........ also I see you shot at 4x digital zoom!!!. Out of interest Mike you will never get good image quality using digital zoom like that, especially shooting what amounts to 4800mm at 1/60 sec.
It depends what you are after in a shot (e.g. good quality or just a record shot for ID purposes). If you want any sort of reasonable quality I suggest that you stick to the optical zoom only. If you do need more than the optical maximum of 1200mm I would suggest that you will do better using the built-in digital converter which gives better results than using digital zoom.

For this shot at the focal length and shutter speed to say 'Again I think I was expecting to much' is the understatement of the year if not the decade LOL.

 

[Roy C]

Thanks for explaining for me, I have looked at greenwells chaffy, through Photoshop elements but cant find your information, on my pictures I can see limited information in Iphoto.

Mike.

You will not see it Mike, you need a web browser type EXIF viewer so you can just click on any jpeg pic on the web and extract the EXIF (providing it has not been stripped by the originator).

 

[DavidNB]

I'll post this as an example of a poor picture, but only because I'm being unrealistic about the range where one can get a reasonable picture. Incidentally this is a target, apart from the individual bird, that I've taken at a variety of settings with all my cameras, just to see what they will do ETA it is certainly the best I have taken.

This one is taken at superfine, it will have been subject to photobucket compression, it's got good light, it was not taken with a tripod, but supported by a metal railing, it has not been cropped, and it has had nothing done in any editor. It was at full zoom with the in camera 2x widget.

To the closest 10 feet, as measured on Google Earth, it was 1150 feet from where it was taken, and I think it as good as I can do. Certainly good enough to tell what bird it is, but it's not a difficult one.

I'd say, and I wonder if I will have any dissenting voices, that to do significantly better with this camera is unrealistic.

OTOH, it is, I think, remarkable enough.

http://i419.photobucket.com/albums/pp275/dble_photo/IMG_2252_zps29053fd9.jpg

To put it in perspective, it was taken from the railings near the bandstand in this pic from wiki, and is of the top of the larger rock at the back of the island pictured (not the one a mile and a half away)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:St._Catherine's_Island_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1455808.jpg

David