I'm looking for a good used bridge camera for bird identification and have narrowed by choices to the Canon SX40-70 models and the Panasonic FZ300 and FZ80D. I've read comments here regarding the Canon choices and the impression I have gotten is that the SX40 and SX50 are the better options than the newer models. There are quite a few SX40 HS's for sale online. I would appreciate any opinions from current or previous owners of any of these cameras.
Hey, Arch, I do have a few opinions about the SX50 - the SX70 - and also the Panasonic FZ300 ... as well as the FZ200, and some of the Sonys, specifically the RX10MkIII and the RX10MkIV. I'm a long-term fan of bridge cameras, by the way - and am probably a little more of a serious photographer than a birder. The Sonys are probably the best available bridge cameras because of their larger (1") sensors, and their superb Zeiss lens, which also has a 'fast' and fixed aperture of only f/2.8, a plus for trying to photograph in lower light. They probably also have the best AF (AutoFocus) of any bridge camera. But they also cost around 4 or 5 times more than the Canons - and the lens doesn't have anywhere as much 'reach' as either the SX50, the SX70, or the FZ80. In addition to being the priciest of the bunch, the Sonys are also the heaviest, weighing almost as much as a mirrorless Olympus with a zoom lens. I used both the RX10iii and the RX10iv some years ago and enjoyed them - but was often frustrated by the lens just not having sufficient 'reach' to get me close to distant birds. Additionally, the prices of used ones have ballooned in crazy ways over the last few years, and new ones almost need a major bank loan to purchase. The final deal-breaker for me was Sony menus, which I find incredibly complex. People who only shoot Sonys claim they are easy, once you get the hang of all the menus - but every time I tried to figure them out, they drove me nuts.
I've never owned an FZ300 but have played around with them, as well as playing around with their immediate (and less expensive) sibling and predecessor, the FZ200. The FZ300 has a very good EVF (Electric Viewfinder), and relatively quick focusing (though not quite as crazy fast as the Sonys). Its fixed f/2.8 aperture helps for lower light shooting. But the big downside is the 'length' of the zoom - it 'only' reaches the equivalent of 600mm - so if you really long to get a little closer to distant birds, it's just not long enough. Obviously, if you're only shooting much much closer birds, that's not a problem - but most photographers, myself included, always wish we had longer lenses. But at the same time, the longer lenses are almost always much much larger and way more heavier, which goes against have a lighter camera that's easier to carry, to hike around with, and to use. I find Panasonic menus much easier and simpler than Sony menus by the way. I've never shot with an FZ80 by the way but looked at them and my overall impression was that they were decent but not that great. For example, and this is more a subjective opinion than objective fact, but the FZ300 has a much nicer EVF than the FZ80, and feels better 'in hand'. Of course, its lens doesn't reach as far, which is the FZ80's claim to fame. I'm guessing also they may be available for not that much money, since they're an older, long-since discontinued camera, with slower AF and a semi-antiquated small sensor. But they do have a long zoom reach on the lens--
Speaking of long telephotos which really have more of a 'reach' - and can get you, the photographer, closer to the subject... there are the Canons. As you may know, an entire generation of birding photographers and naturalists have used, loved, and still love their SX50's. I currently own one myself, as well as its newer, more advanced (and considerably more expensive) sibling, the SX70. Both cameras have truly excellent optical quality, in spite of have such a tiny sensor. Arguably the SX50, though it's much cheaper than either the SX70 or the SX60, may have the best optical quality of them all - although I think the SX70 comes close. (The SX60, according to the many users, had problems. Without getting too technical, many theorized that increasing the length and reach of the zoom - from the 50x of the SX50 to the 65x which is shared by both the SX60 and SX70, created problems - as did increasing the number of Mp (megapixels). Supposedly the 12Mp sensor of the SX50 hits a 'sweet spot' - and its pixels both contain more information and resolve it more clearly, than the later models. This is probably a gross and partially incorrect oversimplification by the way, sorry.)
The main differences, apart from price (the SX60 costs somewhat more than the SX50, and the SX70 costs a lot more) are-- the SX70 has a much better EVF and a higher quality rear screen than the SX50. It also acquires focus a little more quickly. Which is not to say that the SX50 is slow - but the SX70 is just faster. Both cameras can shoot both jpeg and RAW files. RAW has more 'information' and slightly better quality, but requires a little more work to process in your computer. Both render jpegs very nicely, though. I think the SX70 has improved video capabilities, but since I never shoot video, I couldn't begin to talk about them. Both also handle and operate quite easily. Canon IMHO is very good at making usable controls and easy-to-use and easy-to-understand menus, Lumixes are relatively easy too, with Olympus and Canon having the most difficult ones to understand, navigate, or master. For me, the SX50 and SX70 both feel - and handle - very similarly, and very nicely. The difference in 'reach' - between a 50x zoom and a 65x zoom - sounds more impressive than it is in real life. Both zooms get you much closer to distant birds than the FZ300 or the aforementioned Sonys. The big downside of both SX Canons - as well as the Lumix FZs - is that, since they all have relatively small sensors, using higher ISOs to shoot with (which one usually only is forced to do in much lower light situations) - will also create photos with more 'noise'. If your main focus is getting decent and generally sharp photos of distant birds for identification purposes, noise isn't that much of a big deal. But to create those jaw-droopingly beautiful and ultra-crisp avian portraits... no small bridge camera can compete with DSLRs or interchangeable-lens high-end mirrorless cameras, which all have much larger sensors - and thus much lower noise, at high ISOs.
In my shooting with both the SX50 (for a few months) and the SX70 (a few weeks), both cameras seem to do quite nicely up to ISO 200 - which is typical bright daylight situations. In overcast light, or in darker conditions (say, under a thick shadowy forest canopy), you generally have to use higher ISOs - in order to also be able to use the higher shutter speeds that are necessary to freeze bird movement. And most ISOs over 400 display noticeable 'noise'. No camera is perfect though. One other quick note - apart from the larger, heavier, and much more expensive Sonys - which feature very quick AF or autofocusing - almost no small-sensor bridge camera (including all the ones you mentioned) have quick enough AF to do BIF (Birds In Flight) well. You can try - but it's a lot harder tracking moving birds and having the camera continually re-autofocus itself - not a strong feature of any smaller bridge camera. Speaking of AF and moving birds, both the SX50 and the SX70 have an incredibly cool feature (that to my knowledge neither the Lumixes nor the Sonys) do - a small button on the side of the lens which Canon calls 'Frame Assist'. When you press it, it zooms out (to a wider FOV or field-of-view) which allows you to track the flying or fast-moving bird which may have just hopped, skipped or flown out of your 'frame' - and move your camera accordingly to track it - and then simply releasing the FA button zooms you back to full telephoto so you can get (hopefully) a close up on the bird. A different way to explain this, is: when you are at extreme telephoto - 1200mm on the SX50 - it's almost impossible to 'track' a moving or flying bird with that magnification - so with other cameras you're obliged to turn the zoom ring or lever to do the same things (zooming wider and then back to telephoto) but nowhere near as easily or simply as the Canon Frame Assist button allows you to do.
One other quick point - if you're at full zoom - around 1200mm - you have very little depth of field (or how much of your photo will actually be in focus) - and though both the SXs have IBIS or built-in anti-shake control, the truth is that unless you use faster shutter speeds - at least 1/400 or 1/500 of a second, sometimes 1/1000, sometimes faster - you risk either to have a slightly blurred picture - or a sharp picture of a slightly blurred faster-moving bird. The good news is, the more you do it, the more you practice, practice and practice - generally, the sharper and better your photos get. And, just for the record, the wider-angle end of the zoom seems slightly sharper - and also allows use of slower shutter speeds. I've also never used or handled an SX40 (the predecessor to the SX50) but most who have or did, seem to agree that the SX50 was a quantum improvement over the earlier camera. Obviously great photographers somehow seem to manage to get good pictures with any camera they use, no matter how old or out of date it might be - but from everything I've read, the SX50 is simply light-years ahead of its SX40 predecessor in most of the areas that matter to photographers.
My conclusion: I personally think the SX50 and SX70 are two of the most enjoyable - and versatile - cameras, for both bird ID and general photography - that I've used in a long time. I'm currently selling my SX50 but keeping the more expensive SX70, for really only one reason: as a photographer, I'm obsessed with viewfinders - and I'm also getting older so, arguably, my eyes aren't what they once were - and, long story short, the SX70's viewfinder is easier on my eyes. Although, to be honest, the SX50's EVF and screen haven't bothered me all that much... but as I said, I'm borderline obsessed.
I think the SX50 is probably the bargain of the bunch - superb quality + still extremely affordable. (The SX40 is cheaper but not as good, the SX70 is more advanced but doesn't, as far as I can tell, create 'better' or 'sharper' photos.) Its only other quirk worth mentioning is that, to switch between EVF and rear screen views, you have to press a small button on the back of the camera - whereas the newer SX70 has automated this, so that the EVF turns on automatically when you move your eye to it.
Hope this partially answers some of your questions - and sorry for the rambling nature of my comment.
Also, I'm guessing that, in spite of its many critics and bad reviews, a good photographer could probably get some good pictures with the SX60 as well. I've just never handled or used one, myself, so I'm trying to limit my remarks to cameras I've actually used, handled, owned - or in some cases, still own and use regularly.
