Canon s110, Canon sx50 hd (and/or gopro)? Would like to buy tomorrow

[bny]

Hi,

I'm into wildlife and wildlife photography (as well of taking pics of my much beloved 14 yo puppy <3 )

I'm trying to choose a camera (or 2, if need be.) The Canon refurbished center recommended either their S110 or SX50 (both are supposed to do well in low light--even w/o flash (I walk in the evenings), have decent audio and have nice clarity w/ good zoom capabilities and are capable of video.) I'd really love the input of people who really understand cameras well.

Another part of me is considering carrying a gopro or action/sports camera alternative as well, just b/c it'd give me the benefit of filming from the moment I get out among nature until I leave

Either (or both) ways I'd love *really* clear, zoom-able images (audio to accompany them would be great.)

I'd love to buy a camera tomorrow and your help would be so very appreciated!

Thanks so much!

 

[Valjean24601]

Well, lets get you started on the right foot... What do you think a camera does? Most people are going to answer something along the lines that a camera takes pictures. Unfortunately, this is an inaccurate view of what a camera, any camera, does. A picture is the final result of a process that includes the camera, and the camera has a very limited role. Now if I were to ask you what a tape recorder does, you would say it record sound (voices, etc). Correct! And the tape recorder isn't responsible for the sound being recorded, it just records it. In other words, the tape recorder isn't going to make Barbra Streisand sound like Neil Diamond or turn me into a top 10 recording artist. The tool isn't responsible for the sound, it just records it.

A camera, any camera, is simply a tool you used to record an exposure. A camera records light. Period. You want a camera that does well in low light. Great. What does that mean? Typically, this means you want a camera that has a "clean(er)" high ISO. ISO is ONE factor in your exposure (the others being the shutter and aperture). Say you are in a dimly lit room. Exposure will be based on the LIGHT, not the camera. So we might need something like ISO 1600, f/2.8, and 1/30th of a second to record that light. You could spend thousands on a camera, but that won't change the light. In other words, no matter what camera you have, it will need those values in order to record that light (assuming that is the correct exposure). A camera that "does well" in low light should have a usable, higher, ISO. ISO 1600 is somewhat high, but there are cameras that will go much higher. The problem is that ISO is somewhat like an audio gain: we aren't increasing the amount of light, we are simply amplifying the light we do have (by increasing the ISO). Any time you amplify a signal, you amplify the noise. As your ISO increases, so does your noise, or digital "grain". So you typically want to use the lowest ISO you can, but in low light, you are simply forced to use higher and higher ISO's.

All of that said, any camera you buy is going to be a compromise to achieve a certain result. Common compromises: image quality, price, & weight. Personally, I don't think either of those cameras will do well in low light (no flash, which is simply a fast & easy light source). Why? They have slow lenses and small sensors: the bane of low light shooting. I might say something like this would be "better": Panasonic Lumix DMC-FZ200 Digital Camera DMC-FZ200K B H Photo. One of the compromises: price. And keep in mind that better is relative. A DSLR with the right lens will be better still... and more money and more weight. Everything is a compromise.

As far as video goes, well that's another ball of wax. Video is the continuous recording of still images. In other words, a video recorder is still simply a light recorder! Only now you have audio. Audio is another discipline on it's own. And here you are making even more & more compromises. With audio typically being the most often compromised. Assuming you have a smart phone, take it out and record some video. Then define what it is you don't like about the sound. Hopefully there isn't too much! Because to change how you record your audio and make it "better" is going to require more time and money that most people are willing to commit!

 

[soufiej]

Hi,

I'm into wildlife and wildlife photography (as well of taking pics of my much beloved 14 yo puppy <3 )

I'm trying to choose a camera (or 2, if need be.) The Canon refurbished center recommended either their S110 or SX50 (both are supposed to do well in low light--even w/o flash (I walk in the evenings), have decent audio and have nice clarity w/ good zoom capabilities and are capable of video.) I'd really love the input of people who really understand cameras well.

Another part of me is considering carrying a gopro or action/sports camera alternative as well, just b/c it'd give me the benefit of filming from the moment I get out among nature until I leave

Either (or both) ways I'd love *really* clear, zoom-able images (audio to accompany them would be great.)

I'd love to buy a camera tomorrow and your help would be so very appreciated!

Thanks so much!

IMO you would be better off heading to a forum where such cameras are the topic of discussion. This particular forum isn't heavily populated by users of mid-priced compact cameras. The folks here can give good responses to generic camera questions but most have never held a SX50 or its kin. Simply inserting "Canon SX50 reviews" into a search engine should call up several decent forums where the SX50 is specifically discussed. I do happen to have and use a SX50 so I'll give some answers as best I can.

SX50 beats all my DSLRs Backyard Birding with Kenn Temple

"Don't get me wrong. The Canon SX 50 HS does not produce the same quality images that DSLR cameras do and you should consider purchasing these if you want high quality images. I really like my Canon 1D Mark IV (shown here) and I have gotten incredible photos with it, ... I now use use the Canon 1D X or my new Canon 7D Mark II with a Canon 300mm IS lens and 1.4 teleconverter, or my Canon 500mm IS lens with 1.4 teleconverter, Gitzo 1325 Carbon Fiber Tripod and Whimberley head. The Canon SX 50 is not in the same league with the big, professional, or near professional DSLR equipment. Then again, it costs around $430 vs. the Canon 1D Mark IV originally cost around $5,000. "; STOKES BIRDING BLOG Canon SX 50 HS for Bird Photography I love this camera

Favorite Canon SX50 HS Photographs - tonybritton


Those are some fairly complimentary comments regarding the SX50's capabilities. However, if your requirements for a camera include low light shooting and video, then I'd say the person at Canon who recommended the SX50 is someone far more familiar with Canon printers than Canon cameras. Of course, quality is in the eye of the person doing the viewing when it comes to photography and there is the chance you will find the SX50 to be perfectly satisfactory for your use. You must understand though the compact camera market is dominated by those units being designed around the smallest sensor available for use. The sensor in this camera - and most compact cameras, super zooms and the like - has the major disadvantage of being the least sensitive to light. The sensor included in most smart phones is the same size as the sensor built into most compact cameras. The SX50 has several significant benefits over a smart phone's camera but it is still a matter of sensor size and the ability of the lens to gather that light before sending it on to the sensor for recording.

All cameras, and the SX50 in particular, use the lens and the sensor as a system. And while the lens of the SX50 contributes to many of the camera's advantages, it is not the best combination, IMO, for "low light" settings. You know what you mean by "low light" and I do not. You may be saying you want a camera that can operate well in virtually no light, which virtually no camera can do - without either the addition of flash or specific equipment geared to such conditions. Given a sensor which is less sensitive to incoming light, the SX50 adds a lens which is considered "slow". In more standard English terms, that means the lens has a limited aperture*, which does not allow light to quickly reach the sensor. A "fast" lens has a low "f-stop" value of, say, f 1.8 or lower. The difference in the f 1.8 lens (generally on option with larger and more expensive DSLR's or "enthusiast" focused bridge cameras) and the f 3.4 lens of the SX50 is a significant difference in the simple ability to place more light, more quickly at the plane of the sensor. Combined, the slow lens and the less sensitive sensor of the SX50 - and most compact cameras/smart phones - isn't ideal for what I would consider "low light" situations. In fact, this is their most significant disadvantage in comparison to DSLR's. In bright light and fairly undemanding circumstances a camera such as the SX50 can be very competitive with far more expensive cameras.

Aperture (as specified by f-stop value) is one leg of what it called "the exposure triangle".** When using a "stopped down" aperture (a higher f-stop value), the photographer has the option to alter both shutter speed and ISO***. For now, you need to know raising the ISO value will ultimately introduce digital "noise" to the image making it less clear and less sharp. Some of this noise can be removed in the "post production" stage of getting a photographic print by using computer programs such as PhotoShop. "Some" is not all and there are trade offs when doing these corrections. Alternately, you could use a longer shutter speed, which brings its own issues of camera or subject movement both causing poor image quality. A support system can minimize camera movement but, do you want to be carrying a camera support system on your walks?

IMO the SX50 can be a very nice camera under the right conditions. And "the right conditions" are qualifying values which apply to most any camera. Creating the highest quality photos will typically be achieved by those users who understand the benefits and disadvantages of their equipment and learn how to work both with and around those issues. You can see some of the images the SX50 is capable of producing and engage in discussion at a site such as; PowerShot - Canon Community and; Canon PowerShot Talk Forum Digital Photography Review

The video capabilities of the SX50 are good, IMO, and similar to most compact cameras. The SX50 includes several features which aid the video user but video is not the camera's strong point. Low light is again not the best condition for video when using the SX50.

I use my SX50 regularly and I am impressed by the capabilities of this little camera in the right situations. Certainly, for the cost paid from Canon refurbished it stands out as a value leader. Many SX50 owners rave about the camera. That does not make it the right camera for everyone. What you seem to be looking for is not going to be found in a lower priced camera. Those are the trade offs you must make when selecting any electronic device.

IMO, a camera with a larger sensor and a "faster" lens will be much more successful in low light. This is a condition which affects most lower cost cameras. Canon's own GX1 mkII has a faster lens and a larger sensor making it the better choice for low light photos. It is, though, more expensive than the SX50 and lacks the 50's zoom range. However, simply put, the smallest size in a sensor will always limit the light gathering capacity of any camera. The faster the lens, the more light will be available to the sensor. I would suggest you do a bit of study and then make yourself a new set of priorities or, at the least, better understand the limitations of your present priority list.

Best Superzoom 2014 Eight competitors 2.5 clear winners

canon SX50 youtube - Google Search

canon SX50 youtube - Google Search

* What Is Aperture Understanding Camera Aperture from Nikon from Nikon

**Learning about Exposure - The Exposure Triangle - Digital Photography School

*** Understand ISO in 4 Simple Steps Expert Photography

 

[astroNikon]

I thought I posted here before but my post disappeared.
but in regards to the GoPro, I opted to a Polaroid XS100 sports video camera. It's much cheaper and comes with all of the attachments and can record 4hrs.

I was using an older P&S but I don't like the square bulk of those even though they are small. The polaroid is a cylinder shape.