SX50..vs. SX60..vs...Part 2

These are all amazingly good, right up through ISO 1300 (not saying 3200 is as good as lower ISOs), where no other camera I know of can produce a useful image.

Just as long as we don't think that, if we had your exact camera in our hands, we could replicate you results....    8-)

sueanne wrote:

nice and thanks for sharing

Your welcome.

Thanks for commenting Sue anne.

ANAYV

ANAYV wrote:

This is the second part of comparing SX50 (Classic) with other superzooms.

SX50 is known to be one of the better Superzooms ever made , for it's sensor size and zoom range.

ISO 80

I.Q. was really good, and newer SX models have been com[pared to it.

O.I.S. was also really good

ISO 640 1200mm 1/80th shutter

ISO 1000

Here's three shots at ISO 800, 1600 and 3200:

ISO 800 1/13

ISO 1600 1/25th

ISO 3200 1/50th

Notice the background and absence of speckled noise pattern.

Here's one from the SX60...at 1/80th shutter , ISO 100. Notice the background in darker areas.

1/80th ISO 100

All handheld

More to come

ANAYV

GeraldW wrote:

Those three lizard shots are absolutely telling. Canon did a great job in the internal processing on the SX50HS. I compared my first SX50 to the FZ200 I had at the time. It was an indoor shot and light levels were low. ISO 1600 on the SX50 was cleaner looking than the FZ200 at ISO 800. I had to drop to ISO 400 to show an improvement over the SX50, and that ate up most of the F# advantage of the FZ200.

My second SX50HS was a factory refurb and not as good; and a later FZ200 was better than the first one, so they tied. But I kept the FZ200 and got rid of that SX50. My first SX50 went to my daughter.

Back in 2014, when Imaging Resource did a shoot out of superzooms, the SX50 was included and soundly defeated the SX60 they had. Later, DPReview compared several superzooms and the SX60 looked pretty good, so there does seem to be some sample to sample variation in the SX60. Several of us who frequented the Panasonic Compact Forum noted quite a lot of sample variation in the FZ200 over the first year of production.

Really well captured ANAYV!

I second what you say Gerald about some variations in the SX50. Such a great lens and while my FZ200 could really nail a great pic, the SX50 always got the job done. The SX60 and SX70 are both capable of excellent IQ..but I still give a slight edge to the 50.

Doobie Brothers  ISO 1600..no man's land for these small sensors, but it worked.

Sactojim wrote:

Really well captured ANAYV!

Thanks Jim!

I second what you say Gerald about some variations in the SX50. Such a great lens and while my FZ200 could really nail a great pic, the SX50 always got the job done. The SX60 and SX70 are both capable of excellent IQ..but I still give a slight edge to the 50.

Doobie Brothers ISO 1600..no man's land for these small sensors, but it worked.

Excellent shots, Jim!

From the super slow 1/10th shutter of the rabbit (at full telephoto no less) to the higher ISO shots of the Doobie Brothers...you really show off the capabilities of the classic SX50.

Well done!!

ANAYV

GeraldW wrote:

Those three lizard shots are absolutely telling. Canon did a great job in the internal processing on the SX50HS.

Indeed, they did Jerry. I think the sensor played a bigger part in the I.Q. vs. SX60/70 models more advanced software processing (DIGIC) doing more for I.Q.

I compared my first SX50 to the FZ200 I had at the time. It was an indoor shot and light levels were low. ISO 1600 on the SX50 was cleaner looking than the FZ200 at ISO 800. I had to drop to ISO 400 to show an improvement over the SX50, and that ate up most of the F# advantage of the FZ200.

Didn't like to  go past ISO 800 on my SX50 I had.

The FZ200 didn't like anything past ISO 400..for me.

My second SX50HS was a factory refurb and not as good; and a later FZ200 was better than the first one, so they tied. But I kept the FZ200 and got rid of that SX50. My first SX50 went to my daughter.

Back in 2014, when Imaging Resource did a shoot out of superzooms, the SX50 was included and soundly defeated the SX60 they had.

I recall that review.

Later, DPReview compared several superzooms and the SX60 looked pretty good, so there does seem to be some sample to sample variation in the SX60. Several of us who frequented the Panasonic Compact Forum noted quite a lot of sample variation in the FZ200 over the first year of production.

I also recall talk about the later production runs were made in China .

Read good things about them.

ANAYV