Canon Powershot SX50 or Panasonic DMC-FZ200

wijcc

wijcc

wijcc

Soldato
Joined
10 Aug 2003
Posts
2,692
Location
London
Hi all... I am going on safari soon and am thinking of getting a new camera for the trip. I have shortlisted two cameras and am finding it hard to choose between the two - the Canon SX50 and Panasonic FZ200. With the Canon cashback promotion, the SX50 is £100 cheaper than the FZ200.
Which would you choose out of the two?
Thanks in advance guys :)
 
out of those two I would go for the FZ200, but the SX does have a higher zoom so would be better for something like a safari were you may not always be able to get real close
 
FZ200 all day long.

The constant f2.8 means the ability to use faster shutter speeds and lower ISO's than would be possible on the SX50 which ultimately means better image quality.

Additionally if memory server me right the aperture drop significantly quickly, at 180mm the SX50 is already at f5.6, where as the FZ200 retains f2.8 all the way out to 600mm. The difference is truly night and day.

Also I'd like to see anyone hand hold a shot at the ridiculous zoom level that the SX50 has, it will be hard enough on the FZ200's 600mm.
 
Last edited:
24x zoom is too little i think... so out of these three is better.. Canon SX50, Fuji HS30 & Panasonic DMC-FZ72 please?
 
All of the focal lengths in this post at 35mm equvilent, just so there's some meaning to the zoom numbers and focal lengths.

In short
FZ200 is 600mm at f/2.8, this is good
SX50 is f6.3 at 1200mm, waste of time
HS30EXR is 720mm, only 120mm more but f/5.6 at the long end, two full stops slower than the Panasonic. A shot that could be taken at 1/500th on the Panasonic would be taken at 1/125th of a second on this.
DMC-FZ72 is 1200mm, but at 1200mm it seems to be f/8 if I'm reading this correctly! - That turns a shot taken at f/2.8 at 1/500th of a second right down to 1/60th and it would be unusable.

Whilst it's easy to get caught up in the zoom marketing rubbish, getting usable results in anything other than bright sunlight at the long end will be nigh on impossible without a tripod. Get the FZ200, seriously.
 
As Janesy has stated the difference between the FZ200 and the rest is night and day.
Ignore the marketing garbage that the companies pedal to try and sell the cameras, they don't tell anything like the full story.

On the miniature sensors that bridge cameras have keeping the ISO as low as possible is absolutely crucial to retain anything like decent image quality.
Also at the stupidly ridiculous zooms that bridge cameras offer keeping the shutter as fast as possible is also crucial to avoid camera shake, both of these mean getting as much light to sensor as possible.

As I stated previously the SX50 is already at f5.6 at 180mm, which means the FZ200 can let FOUR times more light in at 600mm than the SX50 at 180mm, at 600mm the SX50 is at f6.3 and the FZ200 is letting FIVE times more light in.
Honestly their is no consideration or competition if the FZ200 falls into your budget.
 
ManCuBuS said:
As Janesy has stated the difference between the FZ200 and the rest is night and day.
Ignore the marketing garbage that the companies pedal to try and sell the cameras, they don't tell anything like the full story.

On the miniature sensors that bridge cameras have keeping the ISO as low as possible is absolutely crucial to retain anything like decent image quality.
Also at the stupidly ridiculous zooms that bridge cameras offer keeping the shutter as fast as possible is also crucial to avoid camera shake, both of these mean getting as much light to sensor as possible.

As I stated previously the SX50 is already at f5.6 at 180mm, which means the FZ200 can let FOUR times more light in at 600mm than the SX50 at 180mm, at 600mm the SX50 is at f6.3 and the FZ200 is letting FIVE times more light in.
Honestly their is no consideration or competition if the FZ200 falls into your budget.
Click to expand...


Not only this but for most compact the widest aperture is so small that the with the cameras tiny sensor diffraction effects are profound, you just get smeared details - which they compensation for by applying massive sharpening in the JPEG engine which just gives horrible results.

Most of the time on these bridge camera you are better off not zooming in more than about half the way on the lens and doing the rest in software (Cropping, and if you need more resolution something like genuine fractals).
 
I have the SX50. An earlier cashback twisted my arm in the same debate and although it's a nice little package for the money I paid, I'd choose the FZ200 even with the financial difference if I had the choice again.

A few random points...

1) Canon deliberately cripple the EVF. It is low res and nasty to use, and although the on screen focus aids are useful and reliable, the EVF is fuzzy enough to be annoying. It is also slow (refresh rate) and hard to use when using the zoom towards the long end.

2) I had to spend £80 (it might easily have been much more) getting the zoom repaired after a 3' fall onto soft grass. Ok, I asked for trouble, but something in the barrel was pretty easily displaced.

3) In sports mode the SX50 is surprisingly good at capturing action (eg dog or child coming towards you).

4) You have to frame your shots knowing that NO cropping will be possible, even at lowest ISO settings. Review samples prepared me for this with both cameras though.

5) I haven't had cause to regret the lack of f2.8 on the SX50. Even down to 1/20th of a second, the 50's image stabilisation is pretty impressive.

I'm sure I could think of a few more points, but overall I'd pay £100 in an instant to have the FZ200's EVF. Generally in reviews I prefer Canon image quality to Panasonic's, but on sensors this size there's not a lot in it.

Edit: One thing I will add though is that during a year when my back has given me no end of trouble, my DSLR has been useless to me. So having a compact package able to do a bit of everything has been very useful on the few occasions I've felt like carrying a camera.
 
Last edited:
If you've not tried them out, go see if you can. Zoom fully in, then take a photo as stable as possible. If both look equally clear, take another shaking ever so slightly - if they STILL look clear then go for what everyone has said :)

If one is way more sharp than the other, I'd go for that regardless of cost. But everyone's comments are fair, I'd probably go for the Lumix myself - or a mirrorless compact but then it's lenses etc. etc.

EDIT: Just re-reading some people have mentioned the auto sharpening to compensate, this should be easy to pick up if you get a bit of shaking going on, it'll look horrible. Also, some may be faster focusing - if you're going on safari I imagine that you'll need to be pretty quick on the ol' focus.
 
Last edited:
Thanks guys...i already have a samsung wb690 which has 18x zoom... so the FZ200 does not really have that much more zoom with 24x. That is holding me off getting the FZ200. There are lots of great pics taken with the SX50 for example online also it can't be that bad of a camera.

And i also put the wrong model number in my initial post... it is the Fuji HS50 and not the HS30 i was comparing.
 
Yes your Samsung was 18x zoom, but that only means the long end is 18x wider than the widest focal length. 24-432mm for the Samsung and 25–600 mm for the Panasonic so you gain 170mm which is quite a bit. As people have been saying, look at the focal lengths, not the zoom multiplier. You can have a 10-100mm lens and that will be 10x but you can have 35-280 which is 8x, but actually it's longer.
 
Last edited:
wijcc said:
Thanks guys...i already have a samsung wb690 which has 18x zoom... so the FZ200 does not really have that much more zoom with 24x. That is holding me off getting the FZ200. There are lots of great pics taken with the SX50 for example online also it can't be that bad of a camera.

And i also put the wrong model number in my initial post... it is the Fuji HS50 and not the HS30 i was comparing.
Click to expand...

So there are 4 people in here who all have a working knowledge of photography, its associated hardware and its application, who are advising to go one way yet you seem to be choosing the other.

Why even bother asking in the 1st place? :confused:
 
wijcc said:
There are lots of great pics taken with the SX50 for example online also it can't be that bad of a camera.
Click to expand...

Never trust the internet, you can fix some mistakes that cameras make easily. Always try before you buy, or at least ask someone who has the camera :)

There are some mirrorless I've seen online and thought "wowzers" - tried them out and the results aren't great. They're blurry, washed out, or just don't look right. Could be their screens, but it's the main reason I'm still without one.

If you haven't already, check out DigitalRev for prices. They're normally pretty good :)
 
but they are not uk based... so warranty is not with the manufacturer but with the company. Also if it is stopped by customs on delivery.. i might have to also pay for the tax on it. So that put me off using digitalrev, slrhut or other such grey importers.
 
From the Digitalrev website:

"When ordering goods from DigitalRev Limited, overseas deliveries may be subject to import duties and taxes, which are levied once the package reaches the specified destination. Any additional charges for customs clearance must be borne by you, unless an Import Handling Charge is included in the price of the goods"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom