recommend me a lense filter for canon sx50 hs

a 67mm UV filter
not sure what make to say though as some are no better than putting a piece of clear glass on the camera lol.
http://www.lenstip.com/113.4-article-UV_filters_test_Description_of_the_results_and_summary.html
to be honest you have a lens cap so that protects it when not in use and when in use most of the time its round you're neck
the real world chances of damage are slim and if the filter breaks, the glass will more than likely scratch the lens anyway.
shops like to say you need them as its a money earner
had cameras for last 25+ years 35mm film and bridge cams n now the D5100 and have yet to scratch or damage a lens
 
Last edited:
To be honest the sx50's optics are not so brilliant that I'd want any kind of filter on mine. Ok, there's a risk the main element will get damaged, but part of being an enthusiastic photographer is developing a "sixth sense" for protecting your kit.

When I started out 30+ years ago I was paranoid about this kind of thing, chiefly because I couldn't afford to replace my camera easily (I'm not rich now, but I'm less scared of mistakes). But I soon proved to myself that my pictures were better without unnecessary glass in the way, and I don't even have a filter on my 100-400L, which I definitely couldn't afford to replace now they're more like £1100 instead of the £700 I paid for mine.

Anyway, sx50... nice light all rounder, with a lot of entertaining sub-modes (particularly the one where you can take a self portrait triggering the self timer with a wink!) but optically it doesn't need any obstacles putting in its way. I'd recommend leaving it naked and just be careful.

As for beach shots... the only thing you have to worry about there is grit in the zoom mechanism, not glare or whatever. Years ago I lost a 35mm compact camera to "crunchy gears" syndrome after a trip to the beach.
 
andicole0 said:
I don't want to hijack the thread but can I ask what you think of the SX50?

Andi.
Click to expand...

tbh i've not had a proper play with it yet . had it about 7 weeks now , but not had a chance to take it out for a spin due to weather and i dont have a case for it.

i bought it for teh zoom more than anything .. also got a fuji s4500... so i traded less mp for more zoom ....and i assume a better camera

once i get my case and a tripod i can give it a good going over

i took to the fuji on a basic level quite quick .. but i hate reading manuals .. and this ones more complicated lol
 
Last edited:
TALON1973 said:
wont a lense filter help if taking pics near a beach tho ?
Click to expand...

Yes, it's a known phenomenal that you get uber lens flare in you go within 50 feet of a stick of rock.

Seriously, a circular polarising filter can be used to reduce the amount of reflection and glare coming off the sea (or any reflecting surface).

An ND filter can be used to make your exposure longer which can make moving water look all smooth and velvety.

An ND grad can be used to darken the sky so you can correctly expose both the sky and the ground.

A UV filter can protect your lens from sand.

To get the most out of any of these (especially the ND and ND grad) you will need to have an under standing of exposure. To use the ND you will also need a tripod and either bulb mode or the ability to set long exposure.

I would get googling, and also have a lookie on youtube to better understand what the filters do.

You will also find coloured/tinted filters. They're a through back from film days and you're far better of tinting the pictures in post production.
 
andicole0 said:
what you think of the SX50?
Click to expand...
I'll chip in FWIW. Obviously all bridge cameras are great little toys, and occasionally you find some real sweet spots in terms of performance.

I have yet to find the sx50's sweet spot. :-) Ok, the long end is sharper than I expected, and the range is very nice (I use it more at the wide end so far) but the overall image quality always makes me regret not having my DSLR with me when I meet a photo opportunity.

But a camera in the hand is worth ten back at home, which is why I cracked when the sx50 was in the Amazon sales. I got £50 Canon cashback as well, and for £250 I have no serious complaints. Well, apart from the poor EVF the horrible ergonomics (try before you buy is my advice). The grip is nasty and you have to be very careful where your thumb rests, because it's very easy to end up accidentally altering settings. Yesterday I even managed to set the darned thing to ISO 6400 without realising it until I debugged the wild over-exposure.

The EVF is probably a bigger issue, because composition is half the battle. The on screen display does a good job of providing tools to confirm focus and so on, but I hate being unable to trust my eyes... though the deep depth of field on small sensor cameras makes that less of an issue. I've had few instances where focus has been missed. However there's a part of me which wishes I'd stumped up much more money for the FZ200. It had a much more friendly EVF resolution.

To be fair though, the rear screen is very clear and useful for people who like waving their camera around, and for fussy sods like me it's pretty easy to fire up the screen and check pictures. In this respect it's far better than my 40D.

The sx50 i capable of some good things though. In sports mode it can track a dog running quickly towards you as long as you're not zoomed in very much. Good light helps too, obviously. I'm less impressed by the macro performance, and the zoom doesn't focus very closely at max. So small birds etc nearby can be an issue.

What else? More fancy gimmicks than you can shake a stick at, some of which are quite intriguing, like the focus tracking. Manual focus mode is ok for a camera like this, but still a faff. Oh, and of course it suffers from the usual Canon "waste a button" syndrome... who the flip ever uses the print button on their kit? :-)

That reminds me of the silly rotary dial around the menu buttons. Totally awful bit of design. A separate rear thumb wheel, as on a DSLR, would be much more useful and less prone to errors.

Mmm... this is reading pretty poorly isn't it. But don't get me wrong, I think cameras like this are technological marvels. However the ergonomics on this camera are suspect, and there is no cure for the laws of physics... small sensors create pictures which are great full screen. But you do not crop.

Enough from me, other than to return to the topic briefly and say that polarising filters are the only filters which ever go anywhere near my lenses. I haven't been tempted by one for my sx50 yet though, and they're no good as general protection because of the amount of light they cut out.

PS https://picasaweb.google.com/103830313279701032127/22ndJanuary2013 is a collection of unedited jpgs from Tuesday which I put up for family rather than critique. I hope to wring better results out of the RAW shots I have to accompany some of those, but so far I've not found the RAW output much better than the jpgs. ie the jpg engine does a pretty good job of maximising the potential from such a small sensor.

The collection does show that in great conditions the camera is capable of decent shots. Whether the photographer is is a different question. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom