Advice sought on upgrading from Canon S90 and SX10

I've long enjoyed my Canon S90 (my camera for every day photos) and SX10 (mostly for daytime outdoor photos) cameras, but I've been thinking it is time to upgrade to newer cameras. My first thought was the S120 that one of my friends upgraded to--we've taken photos at the same events and I can see that it is quicker, smaller and faster; and, reading the reviews, it looks like a worthwhile upgrade from the S90.

Then I saw the reviews of the Canon G7X and its larger sensor and the greater opportunities for bokeh. It also looks like it is very good in low light (I usually leave my S90 at ISO 400).  So now I am thinking that it might be a better upgrade for my S90; and perhaps somewhat less expensive than the Sony RX100 III. I understand that the G7X is larger than the S120; but, then, so is the S90.

I've enjoyed the superzoom SX10 (had a Canon S2 before it), but I find that it is really best suited for pictures in good light. Its lens goes from F2.8 to F5.7; and its pictures seem to turn out better at ISO 100 or ISO 200 (there is a fair bit of grain at ISO 400, more than what the S90 shows).

I saw that refurbished Canon SX50's were available at a very good price; but, in reading about them on dpreview and elsewhere, I've seen some say that the SX50 is best for its extreme zoom (I love those moon shots) but that the Panasonic FZ200 is perhaps a better all-around camera with its constant F2.8 across its 24mm-600mm lens. The SX50 sounds like it has a better IQ, but the FZ200 may be a better video camera replacement.

Another factor: I have a Panasonic PV-GS200 8mm tape camcorder, but I was thinking of upgrading that as well; and perhaps the FZ200 might serve there too.

Most of what I shoot are snapshots and portraits, though I do occasionally try landscapes, wild life and more artistic photographs.

So, the question: what should I get?

The FZ200 is about $447 (though I saw it on sale for $364 on ebay); the G7X is about $699. Would it be better to look at DSLR or a mirrorless system and a decent zoom lens (and hobble on with my S90)?

Thanks for any advice.

G7x can now be had on ebay for $500. That will be a obviously a bigger step up than s120. S120 can now be had for $300 or less.

damian5000 wrote:

G7x can now be had on ebay for $500. That will be a obviously a bigger step up than s120. S120 can now be had for $300 or less.

Is ebay is a safe way to buy cameras vs. the big stores? I've used ebay for smaller purchases, but cameras are pricey.

Thanks.

stevenic wrote:

get a sx 50 a good allrounder including close up shots. nice up to iso 800. cheers steve

Steve,

Would the SX50 even at ISO 800 be enough to do indoor shots in low light (vs. ISO 400 on the brighter FZ200 F2.8 lens)?

Thanks.

stevenic wrote:

Have a look at cameralabs review on the canon sx50 comparing both and I think overall the sx50 has better image quality. I use mine for portraits and indoors. Its pretty good for a point and shoot. It starts to get noisy above ISO800 but still reasonable images up to ISO1600 ( see image resource review).

Here is an image at ISO800 on auto SOOC with no PP.

Wow. I am amazed. Thanks for sharing, Steve.

Is ISO 800 enough to take pictures indoors zoomed without flash?

"the G7X is about $699. Would it be better to look at DSLR or a mirrorless system and a decent zoom lens"

If money is an area of high concern, yes an entry level DSLR with a good kit zom will cost less and take better pictures than  a G7X.  (or mirrorless... refurbished Olympus models on the Olympus website are a particularly good bargain. (like an EPL5)

G7X is a very good camera.  I have one.  AF speed is acceptable.  Better than other Canon point and shoots I have had in the past.   But you do pay a premium for the compact size.

Honestly, it depends on what your priorities are.

Even the G16 lets in a LOT more light than the S90 (f/2.8 at full zoom v f/5.6 is 4x the light)

The G7X gives you the same aperture AND a much larger sensor so your low-light performance will be far better as a result i.e. ISO 3200 will be acceptable if not good.

Other 1/1.7" sensors simply cannot compete.

Why this matters is not so much noise and low light but freezing motion, chasing moving targets and such.

The kicker for me is flash use - or bounce flash use. This turns a good p&s into a fantastic one.

cb

Thanks to everyone for your advice! You've given me a lot to think about:

• Steve and Murry, you're making me waver in my thoughts about the FZ200; the refurbished SX50 is at least $150 less than the lowest price FZ200 that I can see and you make some very good points about the image quality and the low light capabilities of the SX50...
• B1ackhat, I appreciate the cautionary note about grey market item warranties--I hadn't thought about that. I think I'd like to stay more in the G7X form factor rather than the G1X Mark II; I will have to think some more about it after your comments since I was hoping to shoot in JPEGs rather than in RAW.
• OpticsEngineer -- I hadn't thought about an Olympus mirrorless refurb. Maybe this would give better low-light, indoor photo options in a smaller (though not pocketable) package. I don't know if the S90 has spoiled me--I used to lug my Minolta SLR everywhere back in the day.
• cb -- you wrote "freezing motion, chasing moving targets and such"--these are indeed among my priorities.

Video is also a factor; and I have to confess that the Panasonic FZ200's panorama feature sounds nice (it is always a pain to stitch together panoramas in post processing).

Lots to consider :-/ (but thanks for the advice!).

Wow. That's a huge difference.

I haven't shot in RAW since trying it on my Canon S2 way back when. At the time it didn't seem worth all the trouble.

Unfortunately, DxO looks pretty pricey for software. And it's Windows based (I primarily use ubuntu Linux). Still, wow--it really makes the image sing.

Food for thought... thanks!

Looks like there are some open source/Linux alternatives to DxO , though whether they could do anything as neat as DxO I have no clue today (maybe I should shoot some RAW images and try them vs. the trial version of DxO...).

B1ackhat wrote:

NewMexicoKid wrote:

• B1ackhat, I appreciate the cautionary note about grey market item warranties--I hadn't thought about that. I think I'd like to stay more in the G7X form factor rather than the G1X Mark II; I will have to think some more about it after your comments since I was hoping to shoot in JPEGs rather than in RAW.

I didn't mean to imply that it was bad, but rather just that it pales in comparison to what I have come to expect from Canon. On bright sunny days, my JPEGs typically look great. On cloudier days, however, I tend to end up with this:

SOOC

Opening the RAW in DxO and simply saving it at the default settings without doing any manual processing produces this:

DxO - Default Processing

That's not really surprising. Have you tried Canon's own DPP? Besides several different contrast curves, you can just take outdoor photos and correct for colour temperature with a simple slider. V4 is very versatile and free to Canon owners.

Normal photoshop curves layer + blended overlay also seriously boosts colour intensity + curves+ screen layer.

I'm sitting between the G7x, G1x ii and G16 right now comparing everything to the very similar to s90 - the G12 (or ex G12 I no longer have).

Here's my breakdown:

G16 - huge lens improvement and some low light improvement. Hot shoe.

G7x - form factor and massive low light boost at the cost of a hot shoe - I can do without this if I carry my dSLR. 2nd battery I'm used to.

G1x-ii makes me want to buy a 100D instead because of the price and lower versatility.

G7x with a hot shoe would win this - even an IR Flash control.

cb

I think the first thing you need to decide is if you want a camera with that much zoom, especially since high zoom means smaller sensor and smaller apertures and lower high ISO quality.  Sure, you can get a decent low light shot from an FZ200, but you will lose the micro contrast that you would get from a less complex lens. There the mirrorless Oly or Panny would be a better choice.  BUT, then you would need more lenses which means more to switch around and more to carry around as a tradeoff.

Also what are you planning to do with these photos?  If you wish to publish them in print, then don't even consider a superzoom as the number of really great shots you would get, especially from the start, would be few and far between, due to the tiny sensor.

I would think about what kind of photos you most likely will be shooting and see which cameras would give you the best chance of getting great shots in those situations.  The last thing to consider then would be brand.

Wolfgang

djedi wrote:

I think the first thing you need to decide is if you want a camera with that much zoom, especially since high zoom means smaller sensor and smaller apertures and lower high ISO quality. Sure, you can get a decent low light shot from an FZ200, but you will lose the micro contrast that you would get from a less complex lens. There the mirrorless Oly or Panny would be a better choice. BUT, then you would need more lenses which means more to switch around and more to carry around as a tradeoff.

Also what are you planning to do with these photos? If you wish to publish them in print, then don't even consider a superzoom as the number of really great shots you would get, especially from the start, would be few and far between, due to the tiny sensor.

I would think about what kind of photos you most likely will be shooting and see which cameras would give you the best chance of getting great shots in those situations. The last thing to consider then would be brand.

Wolfgang

Thanks, Wolfgang. I appreciate your advice. I only very rarely print any photos (I make an annual photo book of photos for my wife); most are shared via Picasaweb.

I don't envision myself lugging around a lot of lenses, though if there was a good mirrorless with a decent zoom lens that outperformed the FZ200, I might want to go that way. The SX50's price point is still very attractive ($200+) vs. FZ200 ($365 on Ebay) and it would still be an improvement for my SX10 that I hardly ever use indoors anymore.

I also still want a G7X (thanks, cb, for your comments), though a part of me wonders how much better its successor might be and whether it is worth stretching out my S90 till then...

Decisions, decisions...