Question: Low light performance comparison between the SX40HS and the SX50HS

Started Oct 30, 2012 | Questions
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
Laif New Member • Posts: 7
Question: Low light performance comparison between the SX40HS and the SX50HS

I just received the SX40 from Amazon, today, and am seriously thinking about returning it in favor of the SX50.

The only reservation I really have, is the higher minimum aperature of the SX50. Some reviewers on Amazon agree that compared to the SX40, the SX50 is much harder to use in low light situations. One even goes so far as to say that because of this, the camera really isn't a good all-around camera, but should only be considered a specialty tool for birders and other wildlife photographers.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R39AVZ1B09VG8Q/

Can anyone here confirm or deny this?

ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Dansby Junior Member • Posts: 28
Re: Question: Low light performance comparison between the SX40HS and the SX50HS
1

I've had my sx50 for a week ,I think it does a decent job.

garage party

ViragSharma Junior Member • Posts: 44
Re: Question: Low light performance comparison between the SX40HS and the SX50HS
1

Laif wrote:

I just received the SX40 from Amazon, today, and am seriously thinking about returning it in favor of the SX50.

The only reservation I really have, is the higher minimum aperature of the SX50. Some reviewers on Amazon agree that compared to the SX40, the SX50 is much harder to use in low light situations. One even goes so far as to say that because of this, the camera really isn't a good all-around camera, but should only be considered a specialty tool for birders and other wildlife photographers.

http://www.amazon.com/review/R39AVZ1B09VG8Q/

Can anyone here confirm or deny this?

On paper it seems low light performance is not going to be good. But if you see pic from both cam , then you hardly able to make difference. also chekc following thread

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50126881

Panet Regular Member • Posts: 131
Re: Question: Low light performance comparison between the SX40HS and the SX50HS
1

I think that the difference is more conversational than practical.

At wide angle maximum, SX40 has f/2.8 and SX50 f/3.4, but how often does one use f/2.8 in this focal distance?

At 40mm., SX40 has f/4.5 x SX50 has f/3.4.

At 200mm, SX40 has f/5, SX50 F/5.6.

At 525mm. SX40 has f/5.8 up to 840mm, versus SX50 f/5.6 way up to 950mm

A tie, I would say...

Laif OP New Member • Posts: 7
Re: Question: Low light performance comparison between the SX40HS and the SX50HS
1

Thanks for your help!

Are you using the camera's flash, there - or just the indoor lighting?

Dansby Junior Member • Posts: 28
Re: Question: Low light performance comparison between the SX40HS and the SX50HS
1

Laif wrote:

Thanks for your help!

Are you using the camera's flash, there - or just the indoor lighting?

just the garage light

RDCollins Contributing Member • Posts: 955
Re: Question: Low light performance comparison between the SX40HS and the SX50HS
1

Panet wrote:

I think that the difference is more conversational than practical.

At wide angle maximum, SX40 has f/2.8 and SX50 f/3.4, but how often does one use f/2.8 in this focal distance?

At 40mm., SX40 has f/4.5 x SX50 has f/3.4.

At 200mm, SX40 has f/5, SX50 F/5.6.

At 525mm. SX40 has f/5.8 up to 840mm, versus SX50 f/5.6 way up to 950mm

A tie, I would say...

Your measurements at 40mm don't quite comport with those in this thread:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3288973

-- hide signature --

Doug Collins
Hermosa Beach, California

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads