Canon SX50 Specs (1 Viewer)

[mzettie]

I was sure it was a Sharpie. You think Coopers?

I find them hard to distinguish without seeing the tail. Got any shots of the whole bird?

 

[crazyfingers]

I find them hard to distinguish without seeing the tail. Got any shots of the whole bird?

I got a photo of the tip of the tail from the one on Jan. 11. Not today. I posted all the usable different photos I have in the Q&A here.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=3150362&posted=1#post3150362

 

[mzettie]

I got a photo of the tip of the tail from the one on Jan. 11. Not today. I posted all the usable different photos I have in the Q&A here.

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?p=3150362&posted=1#post3150362

Thanks for the link, lots of good input. In the field, I tend to rely (probably too much) on tail shape when the bird's perched, and head projection when it's flying. The great thing about photos though, is they let you study birds in a way you usually can't in "real time."

I'm inclined to agree with those who think the second set of shots are of a Cooper's. In addition to what's already been mentioned, I'd add that the eye is well forward of center of the head, and the culmen forms a continuous line with the rather long, flat crown. And of course the tail appears to be rounded, as per Cooper's.

I don't see that many Sharpies, but head shape in the first series seems right for the species. Size is hard to guage in photos, but the culmen meets the crown at an angle rather than in a continuum, and it has a" wide-eyed" rather than "vicious" countenance.

 

[HermitIbis]

Re SX40 vsSX50 in low light; a poster on DPReview mentioned that if you back off slightly from full zoom on the SX50, the F stop moves fairly quickly from 6.5 to 5.6. Here's a link to his follow -up post with specifics; http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/55091832

A very useful hint. I tried it out today (based on AV mode) and was satisfied with the results. On a day with thick clouds and constant rain, the conditions were even worse than on the days before. Still, I felt it was an improvement regarding shutter speed and images. Will continue to experiment, maybe adding RAW to the mix.

That link says "I worked it out - the focal length which it drops back to F5.6 is 171.56mm". My setting for C1 is a little better, at 172mm. I claim a new record!

 

[Stephen Prower]

Zoom step at which aperture rises from f5.6 to f6.5

HermitIbis

The 'exact' focal length of the zoom step immediately before the aperture closes down from f5.6 to f6.5 on the SX50 is, I think, given by the poster on DPR as '171.56mm' because when you do a trial shot and look at the EXIF readout, that is the figure that appears as the 'Focal length'.

If it helps, I got to the exact step by using slow zoom (Hold down 'Frame assist - Lock' whilst moving the zoom lever), and watching for the point when the aperture figure changes at the bottom of the display.

Stephen

 

[pshute]

HermitIbis

The 'exact' focal length of the zoom step immediately before the aperture closes down from f5.6 to f6.5 on the SX50 is, I think, given by the poster on DPR as '171.56mm' because when you do a trial shot and look at the EXIF readout, that is the figure that appears as the 'Focal length'.

If it helps, I got to the exact step by using slow zoom (Hold down 'Frame assist - Lock' whilst moving the zoom lever), and watching for the point when the aperture figure changes at the bottom of the display.

Stephen

I'm wondering if this notion that the aperture suddenly changes at a particular zoom level is false. The F value = focal length / effective aperture diameter, so it should change continuously with every change in zoom. I suspect it's just that the camera only records standard F stops, so there appears to be a jump.

I'm also wondering if it does in fact improve sharpness to zoom out a little. The lens will be a little faster if you do, allowing for a faster shutter speed and therefore less motion blur, but now you've got a smaller image. That image will get blurrier as you enlarge it back to the size you wanted in the first place. If you don't mind it being smaller then maybe just leaving the zoom on maximum and shrinking the image would have hidden the motion blur anyway.

Ie this technique might just be swapping motion blur for reduced resolution.

That's my theory, unproven in practice. It definitely doesn't apply if you compensate for the lower zoom by moving closer instead of enlarging later. Moving closer always helps.

Thoughts?

 

[HermitIbis]

If it helps, I got to the exact step by using slow zoom (Hold down 'Frame assist - Lock' whilst moving the zoom lever), and watching for the point when the aperture figure changes at the bottom of the display.

Stephen, I had actually followed your fine description at dpreview how to set up the 171.56 mm. Many thanks - such a step-by-step advice is useful for someone like me who doesn't know the first things about cameras.

I'm also wondering if it does in fact improve sharpness to zoom out a little. The lens will be a little faster if you do, allowing for a faster shutter speed and therefore less motion blur, but now you've got a smaller image. That image will get blurrier as you enlarge it back to the size you wanted in the first place. If you don't mind it being smaller then maybe just leaving the zoom on maximum and shrinking the image would have hidden the motion blur anyway.

Ie this technique might just be swapping motion blur for reduced resolution.

That's my theory, unproven in practice. It definitely doesn't apply if you compensate for the lower zoom by moving closer instead of enlarging later. Moving closer always helps.

pshute, I have no idea whether the f (internally) changes continually and is only displayed with the standard values. I can only confirm that it makes a small difference in shutter speed - two birds were patient enough today for my little experiment, and in many shots the 215mm allowed only a shutter speed of 1/40 second, while the 171.56mm were a little faster with 1/50 second. Just anecdotal evidence, and not a big jump. But in rainy conditions it can help a bit. - In average, the birds in my park are pretty close when I take a photo, so sacrificing some reach is OK, at least during the winter.

"Moving closer always helps." How true, and in summer I really prefer portrait photos of birds. One example below (juvenile nuthatch), the bird was surely closer than 3.5 meter, minimal focus distance of the famous Canon 400mm f5.6 prime lens. I had seriously considered to buy that lens, but it would be VERY frustrating to step back in such a situation...

Stefan (alias HermitIbis)

 

[mzettie]

I'm wondering if this notion that the aperture suddenly changes at a particular zoom level is false. The F value = focal length / effective aperture diameter, so it should change continuously with every change in zoom. I suspect it's just that the camera only records standard F stops, so there appears to be a jump.

I'm also wondering if it does in fact improve sharpness to zoom out a little. The lens will be a little faster if you do, allowing for a faster shutter speed and therefore less motion blur, but now you've got a smaller image. That image will get blurrier as you enlarge it back to the size you wanted in the first place. If you don't mind it being smaller then maybe just leaving the zoom on maximum and shrinking the image would have hidden the motion blur anyway.

Ie this technique might just be swapping motion blur for reduced resolution.

That's my theory, unproven in practice. It definitely doesn't apply if you compensate for the lower zoom by moving closer instead of enlarging later. Moving closer always helps.

Thoughts?

I've been wondering along those lines too, guess we'll all have to do some comparisons and pool data. I too have a feeling it might be more useful when the subject's fairly close. One reason I say that is that when subjects are far away, I usually have to resort to digital zoom to get the camera to recognize what I want it to focus on. Will be interesting to see if the 5.6 will have any effect when using telephoto modes.

 

[Stephen Prower]

--------
Stefan

Sorry to be late replying! I spent Sunday 'in the field'. Got up at 5.00am and back home at 7.30pm. So cold I preferred to keep my gloves on. So missed a chance of a Barn Owl in flight Left to Right at about 10-20 metres. Damn! Today spent recovering.

Glad to be of help!

I have only been using the SX50 for nine months, and am still experimenting with techniques: the latest 'two-eyed' shooting with the EVF.

Likewise there remains always something new to learn from the forums!

--------
Pshute

I have to pass on the theoretical benefits of f5.6 at 958mm zoom versus f6.5 at 1200mm zoom.

And I haven't yet had the chance to investigate what practical advantages there may be in starting up in f5.6/958mm on the little birds in my back garden or the local park.

I do note though, at close range--eg photographing a cooperative Robin--full zoom will often frame the bird too tightly, ie cut off head, tail or feet. It is then fiddly and awkward to zoom out to expand the frame the precise amount to capture the whole bird. The process takes too many milliseconds for most birds. They move or change pose. You lose bird or eyelight.

On the other hand, zooming in is a more 'natural', and so quicker, action for me on the SX50. So if I do need immediately to zoom in to 1200mm from a 958mm start, there's no awkwardness, and of course, no need for precision. I just ram the lever over, and it instantly 'slams the lens hard up against the buffers'!

This of course applies to any pre-set figure of zoom.

So maybe, at any rate, I shall end up with a useful new way of setting up the SX50 -- plus, if I choose 958mm or less as the pre-set figure, and find it the right figure for my subject, f5.6 as a 'bonus'.

--------
Stefan

A new tip that has occurred to me: If in the course of shooting, you change the zoom figure from the pre-set on your C1 or C2 mode, you can reset it again quickly by turning the mode control to your other C mode, and back again.

The procedure is of course only quick if you haven't altered any other settings beside the zoom figure!

But it may still be quicker than precisely resetting the zoom from scratch.


Stephen

 

[HermitIbis]

If in the course of shooting, you change the zoom figure from the pre-set on your C1 or C2 mode, you can reset it again quickly by turning the mode control to your other C mode, and back again.

Stephen, this is indeed what I do, about every five minutes or so. Yesterday I had (e.g.) C1 set at 171.56mm with the 1.5 teleconverter, while C2 was at 215 mm (= full zoom) with 2.0. C1 was mainly meant for quality shots, C2 for record shots. Varying the setting a little or just going from C1 to C2, and back, is fast.

I'll continue to experiment, to find out a way to photograph Gold Crests. Good photos are rare, but I hope to improve my hand-eye coordination for sunnier days.

Stefan

 

[Raptorash]

Hi, pse forgive me if this question has been asked and answered before. Has anyone found a way of locking off the self-timer button on the SX50? I find the ball of my thumb is always engaging the self-timer.

Cheers in advance.
Ash

 

[mzettie]

Hi, pse forgive me if this question has been asked and answered before. Has anyone found a way of locking off the self-timer button on the SX50? I find the ball of my thumb is always engaging the self-timer.

Cheers in advance.
Ash

I had that problem with the video button. I'd put a little piece of velcro on it, cause it was so flush with the camera I couldn't find it while looking through the evf. That worked, but created a problem cause I wear a harness that holds the camera beneath my binoculars. Sometimes when dropping the camera for the bins, I'd bump the video button without knowing it and end up with a nonsense video and low battery (I leave the camera on when birding.) Solved the problem by putting a foam corn protector (for toes) around the button.

Obviously you can't do that to the self timer, but a bumper on the side of it might work. I just tried cutting a corn protector in half. trimming it to make an arc that hugs the right side of the function dial. It wasn't high enough to keep my thumb off the wheel, so I trimmed the other half and put it on top of the first, and that seems like it might work.

You could probably use moleskin instead, layering til it's high enough. And a coat of black fabric paint would improve the aesthetics. If nothing else, it would alert you that your thumb is straying close to the timer button.

BTW, a little piece of stick-on velcro can make the frame assist button easier to find.

 

[HermitIbis]

Someone offered his SX50 in an internet auction, the ring with the self-timer function being filed down. The user found the button annoying and solved the problem in this "brutal" way. The sixth photo shows the result.

http://www.ebay.de/itm/Canon-PowerS...D&orig_cvip=true&rt=nc&_trksid=p2047675.l2557

Hardly a convincing solution, the camera was sold for a low price. What Raptorash probably wants is a solution which doesn't require "hardware". Could chdk help to disable the function?

 

[Raptorash]

Mzettie - thanks for the suggestion of the plaster approach.

BTW does Velcro in the US come routinely with self adhesive backing? Don't fancy gluing anything to buttons on the camera, as I have had bad vibes before from getting glue onto optical eqpt - I find if you ever want to sell on kit secondhand to fund an upgrade, buyers (certainly here in the UK), are leery of any bodges.

HermitIbis - my file will stay firmly in the toolbox - too drastic a remedy. As you say, a software solution would be far and away the best.

rgds
Ash

 

[mzettie]

Mzettie - thanks for the suggestion of the plaster approach.

BTW does Velcro in the US come routinely with self adhesive backing? Don't fancy gluing anything to buttons on the camera, as I have had bad vibes before from getting glue onto optical eqpt - I find if you ever want to sell on kit secondhand to fund an upgrade, buyers (certainly here in the UK), are leery of any bodges.

HermitIbis - my file will stay firmly in the toolbox - too drastic a remedy. As you say, a software solution would be far and away the best.

rgds
Ash

Most velcro sold here is stick-on, I'd be leery of using glue too. Fortunately, 3M and Scotch sell all kinds of products with removable adhesives, so I can rig my camera every-which-way with little risk. Ends up looking pretty funny but I really don't care, as long as the results are good.

BTW, when you say "plaster" I think "bandaid." The corn protectors I referred to are made out of foam and are about 1/8 in. (3 cm) thick.

 

[HermitIbis]

I'll continue to experiment, to find out a way to photograph Gold Crests.

Another attempt, photos taken on Saturday. The bird was 5m away, 1/160 second, full zoom. Not a rare bird, but restless. Only 3-4 seconds, then it is gone.

 

[Stephen Prower]

Goldcrest

HermitIbis

Goldcrest

That's a fine start!

I quite often see a Goldcrest in the field when out with binoculars. Almost every time I spend a frustrating five minutes, standing just 10-20 feet or so away from the bird, trying merely to get a good i/d sight of it in profile or with the crest showing -- but utterly failing!

So, humiliatingly, down it has to go in the book for the umpteenth time as 'Goldcrest/Firecrest?'.


Stephen

 

[HermitIbis]

I quite often see a Goldcrest in the field when out with binoculars. Almost every time I spend a frustrating five minutes, standing just 10-20 feet or so away from the bird, trying merely to get a good i/d sight of it in profile or with the crest showing -- but utterly failing!

Stephen,

I've made the same experience often enough. In the first days of January I met three Goldcrests during a walk in the forest. In an area of ~ 5x5 meters there stood two little "Christmas trees" covered with snow, and I spent ten minutes with the three birds, trying to get a good photo. They must have visited about every single twig of these trees, but I failed miserably. It was great birding fun, but at the same time also showed my lack of talent as a bird photographer.

In another thread, JKarpin2 has proposed to use a mode called "ISO priority": http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=298551 . Two days ago I did a kind of comparison shooting, setting C1 on "ISO priority" and C2 on the 172mm mode mentioned earlier in this thread. My tentative conclusion was that for birds which tend to sit motionless (Dipper, Robin), ISO priority can be an excellent alternative, in particular if the light is poor. Because of the slow shutter speed the success rate goes down, but the remaining keepers may be worth it. I am not so sure whether it works with Goldcrests...

Photo 1: zoom position at 172mm, f5.6, 1/125 second, iso 800.
Photo 2 ("ISO priority"): full zoom at 215mm, f6.5, 1/50 second, iso 400.

Stefan

 

[Stephen Prower]

ISO priority

Stefan

ISO priority

We move on from how to cut down on time framing small birds!

I read JKarpin2's post too.

I'm thinking about it for small garden birds. My present setup, as inspired by the Kenn Threeds, is Aperture priority f6.5 and 1200mm, going down handheld in low light to 800 ISO and a speed of 1/50 sec (or lower).

I don't like the jiggling about with Exposure Compensation and ISO setting as light and background to the shot change, but am not optimistic that there is a solution.

It would be nice though to automate the first grab shot before resetting the camera. So often that is all that one gets!

I shoot RAW, and post-process in Canon DPP (that copy that came with the camera), and FastStone.

So far in my first year with the SX50, the lowest hand held speed at which I have achieved a reasonable number of decent quality shots at 1200mm is 1/50 sec, see eg the attached 'In your face' Blue tit crop.

In line with your post, therefore, I shouldn't for my type of shooting pass over ISO priority without trying it to see if it assists.

Maybe in February I shall find time to experiment.


Stephen

 

[Steve Babbs]

Hi guys. I'm sure I'm being dumb but I seem to be struggling a bit with getting used to Canon SX50 after using a SLR for so long. The problem is when I want to change the AF point. It looks like it should be and I should press the AF frame selector button but when I do nothing happens. I shoot in AV mode. Any help much appreciated.

Steve