I am also very interested in the responses to crazyfingers' post. I have a couple of slightly different but related questions.
The only digital camera I currently own is a sad little Nikon Coolpix L5 (ca. 2006)--definitely NOT adequate for bird photography! A decent DSLR with fast telephoto lens is WAAAYYY out of my reach for the forseeable future. My preliminary research suggests that the SX40 or SX50 are my best hope for getting some nice bird shots (without having to commit any felonies in pursuit of the goal!).
I'm pretty sure that in comparison to my current camera, I would be absolutely thrilled with either the SX40 OR the SX50. So my question is this: Given the similarity of the two models (and the sad state of my finances), is the SX50 really worth the extra $100-$200?
Also: is it true that the SX50 does not include a USB interface cable? Does this mean I'll need to buy a card reader? (Can anyone tell me the specific type of card reader needed, and its approximate cost?)
At this point, I'm leaning toward finding a really good deal on the SX40....but can anyone convince me that I should spring for the SX50?
I'm not super-knowledgeable about digital photography, so I'm not exactly sure I understand the benefits of being able to shoot in RAW with the SX50 (but I suspect it might be important enough to change my decision). If someone could dumb it down for me, I'd be grateful.
One more question: Do either of these models have any macro capabilities to speak of? I mean, can they take good-quality close-up macro shots of insects, flowers, lichens, rock textures, and the like? I don't think I've seen this addressed in any of the reviews or threads I've read so far.
I'm especially interested in hearing from people who are thrilled with their SX40s and don't feel any need to upgrade, and/or people who have had a chance to compare the two models side-by-side....But any and all responses are much appreciated!!