SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images

Started Nov 10, 2012 | Discussions
VisionLight
Senior MemberPosts: 2,285Gear list
Like?
SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
Nov 10, 2012

With Superstorm Sandy and no power or communications for a week, followed by a Nor'easter and a half a foot of snow, I have not had a lot of time to play with my new SX50. But after two weeks of owning it, I have now taken about 100 images and can start my mini-review. (Note: all data and images are based on using mostly Tv mode, some Av mode and some P mode for flash. I have not tried AUTO. BUT, I may be expanding my horizons and (gulp) trying AUTO mode in the future. Even us old dogs can learn new tricks, so stay tuned for a possible thread on my observations.)

Initial observations:

I'm going to have to get used to the new button placements. With the SX40 I've learned to hit all buttons without taking my eye from the EVF. What I do like on the SX50 is that the picture review button is placed away from the right back edge of the camera. Many times while placing the camera in its bag, I've accidently hit that button and turned the camera on. The switch between the ISO and selftimer buttons is going to take a while since I use both often. The switch of the zoom assist button will also take a while, moving from my right thumb to my left thumb. I actually liked that button's placement on the SX40. But I'm also going to have to relearn how to hold the camera since my left thumb now naturally falls across the two zoom assist buttons. I have already hit them a couple of times by mistake. Now one thing I do not like is the new larger raised dots on the right thumb rest (15 higher larger dots on the SX50 vs 18 smaller dots on the SX40). I find the new layout uncomfortable and actually distracting. Otherwise, the new camera handles just like its older sister and is very familiar in my hands. I've even set the EC at a default of -1/3, just like the SX40.

SX50 vs SX40 telephoto images side by side:

In my SX40 mini-review 11 months ago, I displayed comparison pictures of a cupola on my friends property. Although she moved south and no longer owns the property, the new owner is also neighborly. So it's back to the cupola, which you'll see has been somewhat damaged by Superstorm Sandy. The comparative images were tripod mounted with IS left on for both cameras. Both are set at evaluative metering and all settings equalized between the cameras as close as possible, except that the SX50 is Superfine. Both compositions were also matched as closely as possible at 840mm and around 500mm. For most practical purposes, the images from both cameras are nearly the same. I'll get more into the Superfine in a moment, but some of you may see the slight difference here.



07_SX50_0035 490mm SUPERFINE - Tripod mounted SX50 from 100 feet at around 500mm



08_SX40_1335 485mm FINE - Tripod mounted SX40 from 100 feet at around 500mm



05_SX50_0033 772mm SUPERFINE - Tripod mounted SX50 from 100 feet at around maximum optical zoom of SX40



06_SX40_1334 840mm FINE - Tripod mounted SX40 from 100 feet at maximum optical zoom of 840mm

SX50 Superfine vs Fine:

Here are two comparisons for your judgement, one at 2400mm using 2.0TC and one at 1200mm. For general viewing, again they look pretty much the same. But in this case, doing a little pixel peeping, superfine does in deed carry the day. In the bright light of these examples I do not really see the increased noise (at least in the blue channel) that I've heard about. This of course bears further testing, especially in the green channel where noise may be more apparent. But so far, I do like Superfine and since its memory footprint doesn't bother me, I've set it as the default on my SX50.



04_SX50_0029 1200mm FINE - Tripod mounted from 100 feet



03_SX50_0028 1200mm SUPERFINE - Tripod mounted from 100 feet



02_SX50_0027 2400mm FINE - Tripod mounted from 100 feet




01_SX50_0026 2400mm SUPERFINE - Tripod mounted from 100 feet

Telemacro:

One of the first things I wanted to know about the SX50 was how its telemacro "feature" compared to the SX40. In my mini-review of the SX40 I posted images showing that the SX40 could focus on an object 1¾ inchs wide from 4½ feet away with its full optical zoom and 2.0TC (effective 1680mm lens in full frame equiv.). Here is a 1200mm image with additional 2.0TC with the SX50:



SX50 at 2400mm (2.0TC) from 4 1/2 feet gives a horizontal field of view of 1 3/8 inchs

So, a horizontal field of view of 1 3/8 inchs can be captured at the minimum focus distance of 4½ feet with the SX50. Since many of the uncropped images I've posted here over the last 10 months have been of flora and fauna only an inch or two in size, I guess I'm going to get even closer to nature in the coming year. I'm looking forward to it.

In addition,here is another close-up showing nice clarity of a back-lit fabric leave taken from about 10 feet at full optical zoom:



SX50 at 1200mm optical zoom from about 10 feet shows the details of a back-lit fabric leaf

Focus Speed and Zoom Assist:

Like most others have reported about the SX50, I also find that in medium to bright light that the focus speed and shot to shot handling has improved greatly from the SX40. Well done. HOWEVER, in side by side tests with the SX40 in dim to dark conditions, the SX40 has won every single time. In fact, sometimes I found the SX50 to be down right slow after the SX40 already obtained focus. Maybe it's just my unit, but I ask others who have both cameras to give it a try. Interesting results.

The speed of the zoom assist coupled with the faster focusing in bright to medium light really impresses me. The second zoom assist button also cme in very handy to stabilize the 240mm zoom. With the SX40 I was not very good in tracking birds in flight. But the other day three hawks were circling my home hunting for a final meal in the setting sun. Although I knew I would only get silhouettes in the fading light, I grabbed my SX50 and set the 2.0TC. Using the Zoom Assist set to medium, I was excited as it was finally easy to zoom in and focus on the gliding birds who were flying high enough to half fill the frame at 2400mm. Four shots and four in focus hits . Also took a fifth shot as one came gliding down through the treetops. Although I erased the first four as just silhouettes and tests, I liked the composition of the last one and it showed that the camera responded right on time to capture the hawk as it hit the opening.





Using Zoom Assist, I was able to track this hawk from about 200-300 feet high down through the treetops, zooming in and out, and was able to capture it just as it hit the opening, in focus no less.

Dynamic Range Correction and Landscapes:

As I reported in a reply to another thread, I like highlight control on the S100 and did not like shadow control on either the S100 or the SX40. In either case I felt the shadow control produced too blotchy and noisy a result for my taste and I would rather handle it in post. Since the SX50 now has both like the S100, I immediately set and liked the highlight control for brightly lit scenes. To reply to the other thread, I then tested shadow control in auto one more time. And I was surprised with what looked like better results than the other cameras. Now I did not yet push it to deeper shadows, but gave it easier targets to start. And it handled them quite well. The downside is that when both highlight and shadow is set, resulting images are very flat and need level or curve adjustment in post. But the added detail and dynamic range, at least so far, is worth it. Here are some landscape examples. See the captions for more data on each:





Highlight control was used to retain the details in the white snow of the plant that survived Sandy and emerged from the snow. The original was a little too blue, so I added a 50% No. 85 filter in Photoshop and tweaked the highlight levels to 245.



I went down to Swan Lake at the Preserve to check how much damage the storms did. This landscape used both highlight and shadow control with the original image being very flat but full of detail. I created four layers (the snow, the sky, the mountain and its reflection, and the skky reflection in the lake) and enhanced each separately to create the final image. I think it was worrth the trouble, given the good bones from the original.



This image from the Preserve was also taken with highlight and shadow control, adding detail and range to both the shadows and the snow. The flat results were also enhanced in photoshop by ading separate levels adjustments to the snow, the luminance levels of the combined grasses and highlights in the woods, and the trees themselves.



This image, taken from my kitchen window the evening after the nor'easter, had auto highlight control turned on to maintain details around the bright highlights. Its only post was the removal of the edge of a roof eave in the lower left side (can you find it or did I do a good enough job?) The image itself was certainly bright and colorful enough to need no other post. And I just love sunsets from the comfort of my window.



Flash:

It took some testing, but I finally was able to set the C1 mode of my SX50 with usable flash settings for 2 foot to 12 foot subject distances. First thing that I noticed is that setting white balance to AWB works better than setting it to Flash. Also that an FEC of -1/3 to -2/3 coupled with an EC of -1/3 also tended to give better results. With the SX40 I usually attached a Canon Speedlight for best results, but I wanted the convenience of not having to do so with the SX50. I'll still do that comparison, internal vs speedlight, but at a later time with the SX50. Here are some flash examples, first at close distance and then a wider field. The vine tomato was from about 2½ feet and results are pleasing to me. The kitchen utility area image shows the effects of different lightings in the room which was not corrected by the DIGIC5 processor (see the green on the near cabinets from the flourescent lights in the family area of the room and the red highlights from the overhead halogens). I've read that the DIGIC5 will automatically correct these differences in AWB under some circumstances, but apparently not when using Flash. By the way, the kitchen was a gift to my wife when I retired. I've been a photographer, worked in high finance and technology and various other fields, but I have always been first and foremost a carpenter. My shop may now be closed to the public, but I still custom designed and personally hand built the entire kitchen for her, using handpicked red oak timbers and age old techniques and joinery. I proudly tell people that, except for the wall studs and attaching my crown mouldings, there is not a single nail used in the entire kitchen (you're only seeing about a quarter of it). I do love photography, but designing and building cabinetry and furniture is where my head is really at. But I digress. Back to the pictures:



Vine tomato study with the onboard flash of the SX50 from about 2 1/2 feet.



The DIGIC5 did not correct for the multiple light sources in this SX50 onboard flash kitchen image. AWB however did a much better job than the Flash White Balance setting did. Overall, the flash did do a very nice job of lighting this wide image without all the room's lights turned on.

The Bottom Line (so far):

Except for the cupola pictures above, I haven't posted anything here showing the huge strength of the SX50's massive zoom with its tremendous wide range. That's basically a done deal and many have already celebrated it here. So will I in future threads. But I did want to give some initial observations of some of the other facets of this very versatile camera. And after two weeks of (limited) use, the bottom line is that it is definitely a keeper. It has enough new features to differentiate it from its older sister and yet still feels comfortably similar. Image quality appears to have improved, slight as it may be, with the superfine setting, and dynamic range can be helped with the combined highlight/shadow settings (again, with help in post). And I can't wait to start aiming its 2400mm (2.0TC) lens at nature's tinier offerings from 4½ feet. Top it all off with the deal I boughtit for at $383.99 (see http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50140830  ) and it is definately a great purchase.

So now as life starts getting back to more normal around here, I will be able to use it more and test its varied other capabilities. And thus report back here in the next thread. In the meantime, everyone else enjoy your new SX50s. It's a fun and capable camera.

Comments, observations and questions welcome,

Vision

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +4 more
Susan Taylor
Regular MemberPosts: 224
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

All I can say is "Wow!" I've never gotten this great and thorough a review (mini or not) from reading any other article online or in a printed magazine!  Although I sent my SX50 back (because I really didn't "need" the bigger zoom factor), I'm enthralled by all you've brought out about it that I can't begin to ever know.  Still I wonder if I could succeed with the older (but with a zoom more in my "need" range) SX40.  My mother should never have given me the camera and photography "gene"   Thank you so much for all your information and expertise!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Sue K
Regular MemberPosts: 140Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

Great photos and report but when you decide to move let me know, I'm ready to move in!!  Gorgeous kitchen!

-- hide signature --

Sue K

 Sue K's gear list:Sue K's gear list
Canon PowerShot SX200 IS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
c.hammett
Forum ProPosts: 11,428Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One -..... Placement of the review button
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

Thanks for the review.  I  was quite interested in your comment about the placement of the review button in the second paragraph of your review (quoted here):

"I'm going to have to get used to the new button placements. With the SX40 I've learned to hit all buttons without taking my eye from the EVF. What I do like on the SX50 is that the picture review button is placed away from the right back edge of the camera. Many times while placing the camera in its bag, I've accidently hit that button and turned the camera on-- ..."

I just returned from a trip to Italy, and I can't tell you how many times I turned the camera on with my thumb inadvertently on the review button when i put the camera in my bag.  I thought I was the only one !

carolyn

Ranger a.k.a chammett
http://www.pbase.com/chammett
'elegance is simplicity'

 c.hammett's gear list:c.hammett's gear list
Canon EOS 100D Canon EF-S 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dale Buhanan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,186Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

Great mini-review Vision.  You brought out many of the fine nuances of the camera, and I agreed with what you had to say.  I also have both camreas (still) but have not yet seen the low light focus speed observation that you made.  I'm going to go try that right now. I have found that outside the SX50 focuses considerably faster than the sX40 and I have also been quite impressed by what it can do.  Image quality is slightly better as you observed.

I'm going to go check out the low light focus speed on both cameras and see what mine do.

Lovely kitchen.  It looks exactly the same color as ours does with many of the same kind and size of cabinets.  I think your is a bit larger however.  Very nice work you did.

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

 Dale Buhanan's gear list:Dale Buhanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD500 Canon PowerShot G5 Canon PowerShot G6 Canon PowerShot G9 Canon PowerShot Pro1 +33 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ken1
Contributing MemberPosts: 842Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

I appreciate your testing and review Vision.  Your review is very helpful in determining the best settings for this camera.  I look forward to your future tests and opinions as well.  Thanks.  Ken

 Ken1's gear list:Ken1's gear list
Sony RX100 II Sony Alpha NEX-6
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dale Buhanan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,186Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to Dale Buhanan, Nov 11, 2012

Dale Buhanan wrote:

Great mini-review Vision. You brought out many of the fine nuances of the camera, and I agreed with what you had to say. I also have both camreas (still) but have not yet seen the low light focus speed observation that you made. I'm going to go try that right now. I have found that outside the SX50 focuses considerably faster than the sX40 and I have also been quite impressed by what it can do. Image quality is slightly better as you observed.

I'm going to go check out the low light focus speed on both cameras and see what mine do.

Lovely kitchen. It looks exactly the same color as ours does with many of the same kind and size of cabinets. I think your is a bit larger however. Very nice work you did.

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

I just did a focus speed comparison between my SX40 and SX50 in very dim light.  I was looking through the door into a closet and trying to focus on the handle of a suitcase about 10 feet away with both cameras.  The light to focus was marginal and both camera struggled a little.  I got perhaps 20% focus failures with both cameras 1/5), so the light was really dim in there.  It was close enough though that I could see the sX40 had a green focus assist lamp and the SX50 has a blue focus assist lamp.  Curious...  I hadn't been aware of that before.

Anyway, the speed seemed to be pretty much the same for both of the cameras under these conditions to me.  It was marginal, but the focus assist lamps no doubt helped.

Conclusion, outdoors in good light, the SX50 is about twice as fast.  Indoors in very dim light, both cameras seemed about the same to me.  If they were going to lock, they both locked about as quickly.  If they were not able to lock, the both took about the same amount of time to give up.

It surely made it obvious that the EVF on the sX50 is about 20% larger than the SX40. I could also read text with the SX50, that was too small to read with the sX40 at the same zoom setting.  So, the EVF has been improved.  That being said, it is still pretty lousy, but a step in the right direction.

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

 Dale Buhanan's gear list:Dale Buhanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD500 Canon PowerShot G5 Canon PowerShot G6 Canon PowerShot G9 Canon PowerShot Pro1 +33 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gopal Venkat
New MemberPosts: 21
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

Thanks for the review. Look forward to more tests from you on this one.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisionLight
Senior MemberPosts: 2,285Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to Susan Taylor, Nov 11, 2012

Susan Taylor wrote:

All I can say is "Wow!" I've never gotten this great and thorough a review (mini or not) from reading any other article online or in a printed magazine! Although I sent my SX50 back (because I really didn't "need" the bigger zoom factor), I'm enthralled by all you've brought out about it that I can't begin to ever know. Still I wonder if I could succeed with the older (but with a zoom more in my "need" range) SX40. My mother should never have given me the camera and photography "gene" Thank you so much for all your information and expertise!

Thanks Susan, I really appreciate your comments.

I did read in your thread that the 50 was going back, and I think that for you it was a good decision. Ther 50 may have a few more bells and whistles, but the 40 that you already have is still a fun and very capable camera. And it certainly produces wonderful results as we have seen from all the talented people around here.

And I'm happy you have the photography "gene" like so many others of us around here. The people, as well as the information and images, are why I like hangin' round this forum.

Vision

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisionLight
Senior MemberPosts: 2,285Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to Sue K, Nov 11, 2012

Sue K wrote:

Great photos and report but when you decide to move let me know, I'm ready to move in!! Gorgeous kitchen!

-- hide signature --

Sue K

Thanks Sue. But you may have to get on a line for the house. People have actually come up the drive and asked to see the gardens and the designs in the house. I've never had to advertise, just relied on word of mouth. But if you do happen to be on a line, just tell them you know the owner. 

Vision

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisionLight
Senior MemberPosts: 2,285Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One -..... Placement of the review button
In reply to c.hammett, Nov 11, 2012

Hi Carolyn,

Yes, I have felt your pain with that button. But no more now with the SX50. Another thing that I've found with the newer camera is that it is slightly smaller. The SX40 was always just a little snug going into the case and I had to "notice" how I was placing it for best fit. The SX50 on the other hand just slides right in. It also feels slightly lighter in the hand. I'll have to remember to write this in my next mini-review take two. Thanks for the comment.

Vision

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisionLight
Senior MemberPosts: 2,285Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to Dale Buhanan, Nov 11, 2012

Thanks for the very kind words, my friend, both about the mini-review and the kitchen.

I've also set up a more stringent test of the low light focusing speed. We'll compare notes in my reply to your following post below.

Vision

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jim
Jim
Senior MemberPosts: 1,661Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

A nice, practical succinct review. Nicely done, Vision.

Jim

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisionLight
Senior MemberPosts: 2,285Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to Dale Buhanan, Nov 11, 2012

Dale Buhanan wrote:

I just did a focus speed comparison between my SX40 and SX50 in very dim light. I was looking through the door into a closet and trying to focus on the handle of a suitcase about 10 feet away with both cameras. The light to focus was marginal and both camera struggled a little. I got perhaps 20% focus failures with both cameras 1/5), so the light was really dim in there. It was close enough though that I could see the sX40 had a green focus assist lamp and the SX50 has a blue focus assist lamp. Curious... I hadn't been aware of that before.

Anyway, the speed seemed to be pretty much the same for both of the cameras under these conditions to me. It was marginal, but the focus assist lamps no doubt helped.

Conclusion, outdoors in good light, the SX50 is about twice as fast. Indoors in very dim light, both cameras seemed about the same to me. If they were going to lock, they both locked about as quickly. If they were not able to lock, the both took about the same amount of time to give up.

It surely made it obvious that the EVF on the sX50 is about 20% larger than the SX40. I could also read text with the SX50, that was too small to read with the sX40 at the same zoom setting. So, the EVF has been improved. That being said, it is still pretty lousy, but a step in the right direction.

OK, Dale, this time I did a test almost exactly like yours shooting into a dark space. And had fairly comparable results. I did go a little further though in testing the results by focusing on objects of different reflective values. Both cameras were set-up side by side at a distance to compose the target object with a nearly identical composition to eliminate any difference from angle of incidence. The luminance level was lowered until neither camera could attain focus on any object, then increased slightly. First test was a white object with a definitive pattern. This test came up with the same results as yours. Both cameras reached focus at the same time, and reasonably quickly. After refocusing each camera to infinity, the second test was a grey object with a less definitive pattern. Attaining focus was slower now, but once again about even for both cameras. The third test was the original object in my test from the other day. It is medium dark brown with definitive tan and black details. Both cameras struggled some, but on the first try the SX40 attained focus a little before the SX50. So I tried it again after refocusing to infinity. This time the cameras were about even. Third time - even as well. I wanted to get three evens to call it a day, but on the fourth time, guess what? The SX50 gave its all and beeped first. So overall, we'll call the "dark test" a draw.

But I wasn't finished. I changed the luminance level to the point where the focusing of both cameras would just begin to struggle. This time I used multiple takes of different objects at various levels of tan to dark brown, all with definitive patterns, and also an orange as a brighter object in the same general color space. This time however, there was a clear winner. It was the SX40 in each of the brown and tan tests. Not by much, but enough to notice. On the other hand, the orange test was won by the SX50.

Now I guess I could test a whole bunch of other colors, but I don't think the timing differences really warrant it. In practical terms they're not really all that different and when shooting in low light it is always just good photography to be aware and careful of focusing. But there does seem to be a color bias between the two cameras, possibly having something to do with the different colors of each's assist beam (blue vs green).

And thanks for pointing out the difference in the EVF. I hadn't really paid attention to it yet and was going to do so before my next mini-review. But, yes, it does appear larger and easier to "read" in the SX50. Also noticed that the eye relief is slightly further. With the SX40 I tended to smudge my glasses on the bezel to see the whole frame. With the SX50, that's not happening. I like that.

So thanks again Dale for your contribution to this thread. It's great that together, all of us can learn more, understand more, and take better pictures.

Vision

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
VisionLight
Senior MemberPosts: 2,285Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to Ken1, Nov 11, 2012

Ken1 wrote:

I appreciate your testing and review Vision. Your review is very helpful in determining the best settings for this camera. I look forward to your future tests and opinions as well. Thanks. Ken

Ken,

Glad you found the information helpful. I also just went through your SX50 noise thread and found that very helpful as well. I tend to be mostly a bright to medium light, low ISO nature and landscape photographer these days, but when I do go low light, I now have the benefit of your tests. Thanks.

Vision

 VisionLight's gear list:VisionLight's gear list
Canon PowerShot S100 Canon PowerShot SX40 HS Canon PowerShot SX50 HS Canon EOS 5D Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dale Buhanan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,186Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

VisionLight wrote:

.

OK, Dale, this time I did a test almost exactly like yours shooting into a dark space. And had fairly comparable results. I did go a little further though in testing the results by focusing on objects of different reflective values. Both cameras were set-up side by side at a distance to compose the target object with a nearly identical composition to eliminate any difference from angle of incidence. The luminance level was lowered until neither camera could attain focus on any object, then increased slightly. First test was a white object with a definitive pattern. This test came up with the same results as yours. Both cameras reached focus at the same time, and reasonably quickly. After refocusing each camera to infinity, the second test was a grey object with a less definitive pattern. Attaining focus was slower now, but once again about even for both cameras. The third test was the original object in my test from the other day. It is medium dark brown with definitive tan and black details. Both cameras struggled some, but on the first try the SX40 attained focus a little before the SX50. So I tried it again after refocusing to infinity. This time the cameras were about even. Third time - even as well. I wanted to get three evens to call it a day, but on the fourth time, guess what? The SX50 gave its all and beeped first. So overall, we'll call the "dark test" a draw.

But I wasn't finished. I changed the luminance level to the point where the focusing of both cameras would just begin to struggle. This time I used multiple takes of different objects at various levels of tan to dark brown, all with definitive patterns, and also an orange as a brighter object in the same general color space. This time however, there was a clear winner. It was the SX40 in each of the brown and tan tests. Not by much, but enough to notice. On the other hand, the orange test was won by the SX50.

Now I guess I could test a whole bunch of other colors, but I don't think the timing differences really warrant it. In practical terms they're not really all that different and when shooting in low light it is always just good photography to be aware and careful of focusing. But there does seem to be a color bias between the two cameras, possibly having something to do with the different colors of each's assist beam (blue vs green).

And thanks for pointing out the difference in the EVF. I hadn't really paid attention to it yet and was going to do so before my next mini-review. But, yes, it does appear larger and easier to "read" in the SX50. Also noticed that the eye relief is slightly further. With the SX40 I tended to smudge my glasses on the bezel to see the whole frame. With the SX50, that's not happening. I like that.

So thanks again Dale for your contribution to this thread. It's great that together, all of us can learn more, understand more, and take better pictures.

Vision

Excellent response, my friend!  You are a very careful experimentor with a good grasp of what you are testing and trying to find out.  You did a more thorough job with the tests than I did, but our results are the same.  That's certainly gratifying.  If I hadn't been convinced with my own tests, I certainly would be with yours.

Another thing that I noticed when doing the focus tests that I did was that where the green box was placed on the handle made quite a lot of difference in whether they would lock up or not.  For example, if the box was centered on the handle focus was more sure than if it were over near on edge.  Not sure why, but it may have something to do with how much line area is covered by the box and thus help the processor resolve the focus by providing a ibt more information.  But it pointed out to me that exactly where the focus box is placed on the target makes a difference in how well the camera is able to focus.  (My handle was black by the way with stitched white thread.  Both cameras were at 400mm.)

Another thing of interest was that after I had done the tests I snapped a picture wth both cameras to see what I would get.  I was using auto ISO, slow ramp up rate, and light was such that both cameras went to ISO1600 with an exposure time of 3/4 sec.  Both pictures were 'tolerable' but the SX50 picture was noticably the better of the two.  Unfortunately, I didn't save either photo, they would be interesting to show you, but just deleted them like I had all the other experimental pictures I had been taking around the room that evening trying out this and that.  Not keepers, just for my curiosity.

As an aside, another observation:  I like the grip on the SX50 better than the SX40.  It feels like it is a little deeper and more comfortable, but there is a little shelf at the top of the grip that the shutter button is on.  This little shelf sits on your middle finger and supports the camera even if you let your grip tightness slacken.  It makes the grip very positive and the camera can't slip down out of your hand.  There is a hint of a nub of one on the inside of the grip on the SX40, but on the SX50 it has matured into a full grown little shelf.  I like that.

Thanks again for your great mini review., vision.  I have read through it and studied your pictures 3 times now. I also have bookmarked it.

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

 Dale Buhanan's gear list:Dale Buhanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD500 Canon PowerShot G5 Canon PowerShot G6 Canon PowerShot G9 Canon PowerShot Pro1 +33 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Dale Buhanan
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,186Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

VisionLight wrote:

Ken1 wrote:

I appreciate your testing and review Vision. Your review is very helpful in determining the best settings for this camera. I look forward to your future tests and opinions as well. Thanks. Ken

Ken,

Glad you found the information helpful. I also just went through your SX50 noise thread and found that very helpful as well. I tend to be mostly a bright to medium light, low ISO nature and landscape photographer these days, but when I do go low light, I now have the benefit of your tests. Thanks.

Vision

Ken's post seems to have been deleted. I have no idea why. It says that either the moderators deleted it or the OP withdrew it. Anyway, I went to study it and it is now missing. Did you remove it Ken?

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

 Dale Buhanan's gear list:Dale Buhanan's gear list
Canon PowerShot SD500 Canon PowerShot G5 Canon PowerShot G6 Canon PowerShot G9 Canon PowerShot Pro1 +33 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Augustin Man
Senior MemberPosts: 2,934Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to VisionLight, Nov 11, 2012

Your review is excellent, thank you for your effort!

Happy shooting,

Augustin

 Augustin Man's gear list:Augustin Man's gear list
Olympus SP-810 UZ Nikon Coolpix P510 Canon PowerShot SX50 HS
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ken1
Contributing MemberPosts: 842Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to Dale Buhanan, Nov 11, 2012

Dale Buhanan wrote:

VisionLight wrote:

Ken1 wrote:

I appreciate your testing and review Vision. Your review is very helpful in determining the best settings for this camera. I look forward to your future tests and opinions as well. Thanks. Ken

Ken,

Glad you found the information helpful. I also just went through your SX50 noise thread and found that very helpful as well. I tend to be mostly a bright to medium light, low ISO nature and landscape photographer these days, but when I do go low light, I now have the benefit of your tests. Thanks.

Vision

Ken's post seems to have been deleted. I have no idea why. It says that either the moderators deleted it or the OP withdrew it. Anyway, I went to study it and it is now missing. Did you remove it Ken?

-- hide signature --

kind regards
Dale

No I didn't delete it.  Here are the photos.  They are clearly marked.

http://kgravett.smugmug.com/Other/SX50-NR-Modes/26362952_wFXksg#!i=2197664379&k=Wvgqj5k

 Ken1's gear list:Ken1's gear list
Sony RX100 II Sony Alpha NEX-6
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Ken1
Contributing MemberPosts: 842Gear list
Like?
Re: SX50 Mini-Review Take One - Initial Observations, SX50 vs SX40, and Images
In reply to Ken1, Nov 11, 2012
 Ken1's gear list:Ken1's gear list
Sony RX100 II Sony Alpha NEX-6
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads