FZ200 vs SX50Hs - which is better?

Started Apr 17, 2013 | Questions thread
Rodger1943 Forum Pro • Posts: 11,403
Re: FZ200 vs SX50Hs - which is better?

archsom wrote:

Rodger1943 wrote:

Hi archsom,

Its difficult to say which is the better camera. I use my FZ200 mainly for birds, but have used it extensively for landscapes as well. There are times (quite often in fact) where I would love more zoom, and I get that using the izoom feature, which gives pretty good results, but then I think the Canon has a similar feature, so it could still outreach the FZ200. This is an important feature for many people.

But, is handheld zoomed shots at 50x at all feasible? Will it be same in normal daylight as well as low light/dusk?

I think 50x handheld is feasible in good conditions and I have seen shots from the Canon that prove that, but in lower light I doubt it. Of course you don't have to use the full 50x do you?

The FZ200 should be faster to focus and faster to use, as it has a quicker focus system and faster burst rates, particularly with its 5.5 fps and autofocus between shots. Also, you don't see very many birds in flight shots from the Canon.

One question here --- is it better to use the EVF or the LCD while doing speed photography (eg birds in flight or fast movement shots)? Any pointers here?

Personally, I prefer the viewfinder, as for me to use the LCD screen I need to wear glasses. I know some people prefer the LCD screen as they say, quite correctly, that you can see what's going on around you as you are using the camera and makes it easier to track whatever you're shooting.

One reason for that, is that at its fastest burst rate 13 fps, which is just slightly faster than the FZ200 (12 fps) the viewfinder on the Canon blacks out completely while your taking the shots, effectively rendering you blind. The FZ200 has a much better viewfinder featuring 1.3 dots compared to around 200, 000 for the Canon. The buffer clearing speed maybe a bit deceptive. I normally shoot jpeg and with the FZ200 you can continue to take shots, even though the buffer is still clearing. I don't know if the Canon can do that or not. Anyway, the outcome is that the clearance of the buffer isn't all that important most of the time. If you take raw then the buffer will take about 15-20 seconds to clear and you can't take any more shots until its finished.

So, maybe the store camera was set to RAW images, since portion of the LCD was blocked with the dialog box stating that the buffer was being cleared.

I never shoot raw and I have never seen that dialogue box, so the camera must have been on raw or raw plus jpeg, which is even slower to clear than just raw alone.

The zoom stages on playback are fixed and can't be altered, sounds like the Canon wins there.

There may be reasons why the FZ200 was slower in focusing and some of those have already been mentioned, especially if the switch was set to macro, or it the focus was set to 23 area focus, which is the default setting for the iA setting.

One thing I'm certain - the side switch wasnt set to macro mode. The default 23 area focus setting, now that I'm not too sure about!

I can't comment much on this, as I wasn't with you to see whether the 23 area setting ws used or not.

One item that hasn't been discussed was that the FZ200 has a side lever that can be used for zoom or focus (I have a toggle between the two set into one of the function buttons). The side lever gives you the opportunity to zoom with the left hand while pulsing the shutter button to achieve focus. Alternatively, when used for manual focus the side lever is much faster than the wheel on the back of the Canon.

I did use the side wheel to zoom, and it was also more convenient to use while recording video. I must try the focussing with the side wheel.

I use the side lever for both zoom and focusing. As I said I have a function button set up so I can quickly change between focus and zoom. For me it depends on the circumstances. If I am in an area where there is a lot of forest, then I'll probably have the lever set to focus, but if its an open area and theres' a possibility of getting a bird in flight, then I'll set it to zoom.

To sum up a rather long rant, the FZ200 should be faster in just about every aspect of its use, but the Canon out reaches it by almost double.

Is the double reach of the canon really worth overlooking the FZ, considering my shooting interests, as I have already mentioned before? Otherwise, I think the FZ will suit me ok, albeit with a few compromises.

I can't specifically answer that for you, but in my case, yes I think the FZ200 is the better camera in almost every aspect except zoom and price. Some people find that long zoom irresistible and I can see why.

I think the FZ200 is the better of the two, but its your priorities that count. As already mentioned a new FZ series will be out about the 20th July.



-- hide signature --

Panasonic FZ200

Thanks for the in-depth feedback.

-- hide signature --


-- hide signature --

Panasonic FZ200

 Rodger1943's gear list:Rodger1943's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Panasonic FZ1000 Panasonic Leica 100-400mm F4.0-6.3 ASPH +2 more
selected answer This post was selected as the answer by the original poster.
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow