canon sx50 or panasonic fz200...can't decide on which camera?

[kingmed]

Next month is my birthday, I would love to get a DSLR Nikon DSLR D7000 but haven't the money at present time for this or even the 5100, however I have talked my wife in to allowing me to get either a canon or panasonic. I am looking for a point and shoot which I can take decent to good video and photo's, I know the quality due to sensor size isn't going to be as good as a DSLR. My children are 9 and 13, haven't had any good video's for years...thought that one of these cameras would produce this type of quality. Just wondered if for the money if the Canon sx50 would be worth buying even though it doesn't have the 2.8 lens, since I work at Walmart and have a 10% discount I thought it might be a better try first, for at least a few weeks. I really like the Panasonic's rating just want to make the right decision. Any advise would be appreciated.

 

[Derrel]

Did you read Michael Recihmann's Luminous Landscape review of the Canon SX 50 last week???? MAN, he loves that thing!!! It sounds like a bang-up good compact, and the price is good, and the lens is a 50x with a 24mm to 1200mm "35mm equivalent" zoom. He mentions the Panny, and links to a review of it...the Panny has the f/2.8 lens, but only half the focal length at maximum zoom...which seems to me like a reasonable trade-off...

The Canon SX50 is the FIRST compact that Reichmann has really,really,really been "all-in-for" in a long,long time. He says he is confident in its lens at up to 13x19 inches printed!!!! He's been using one of his own for some time now, and really is VERY positive on it. I tell yah...a 1200mm equivalent zoom...take a look at the shot he made of tghe restaurant chef smoking outside in the alley on his cigarette break--made from TWO BLOCKS AWAY!!!!!!!!

 

[kingmed]

Did you read Michael Recihmann's Luminous Landscape review of the Canon SX 50 last week???? MAN, he loves that thing!!! It sounds like a bang-up good compact, and the price is good, and the lens is a 50x with a 24mm to 1200mm "35mm equivalent" zoom. He mentions the Panny, and links to a review of it...the Panny has the f/2.8 lens, but only half the focal length at maximum zoom...which seems to me like a reasonable trade-off...

The Canon SX50 is the FIRST compact that Reichmann has really,really,really been "all-in-for" in a long,long time. He says he is confident in its lens at up to 13x19 inches printed!!!! He's been using one of his own for some time now, and really is VERY positive on it. I tell yah...a 1200mm equivalent zoom...take a look at the shot he made of tghe restaurant chef smoking outside in the alley on his cigarette break--made from TWO BLOCKS AWAY!!!!!!!!

Hey Derrel thanks for the referral, I'm not so worried about the zoom range, I'm more into quality for the price and I know both cameras are that way, one sacrifices the 2.8 lens and the other sacrifices the zoom. I'll take a look at the review of the SX50, I may just take the 30 day challenge and see how I like the camera, if I don't I'm sure I can take it back and then try the Panasonic. Thanks again.

 

[brunerww]

Hi kingmed, sounds like a good strategy. Since you plan to use the camera for video, here is one more thought as you try out the SX50. The $520 FZ200 not only has a constant f2.8 zoom, it also has an external mic input, while the SX50 does not. If you ever need to use a mic to get sound from closer to your kids, you might find this feature useful. Here is a pic of my FZ150 (the FZ200's older brother) with an Azden external mic and a $5 adapter.

Hope this is helpful,

Bill

 

[kingmed]

Hi kingmed, sounds like a good strategy. Since you plan to use the camera for video, here is one more thought as you try out the SX50. The $520 FZ200 not only has a constant f2.8 zoom, it also has an external mic input, while the SX50 does not. If you ever need to use a mic to get sound from closer to your kids, you might find this feature useful. Here is a pic of my FZ150 (the FZ200's older brother) with an Azden external mic and a $5 adapter.

Hope this is helpful,

Bill

Ya, I have been reading up on both the 150 and the 200, not counting the 2.8 lens on the Panasonic FZ200 do you think that the Panasonic FZ150 would be a good choice for all around photo and video? Thought since you have had some experience with it that you might be a good source to ask. Like I said the long zoom is not that important, the 600mm out reach of the Panasonic is far greater than I could even expect. Thanks.

 

[brunerww]

I love the FZ150, it is a great camera for both stills and video, but indoors I do sometimes wish the lens was a little faster.

With the FZ200's constant f2.8 lens, you will be able to use higher shutter speeds indoors at long focal lengths at sporting events and school plays. This can make the difference between a blurry or a sharp picture. If budget allows, I recommend the FZ200.

Cheers,

Bill

 

[goodguy]

I just dont get this, I really dont!!!
You want a DSLR but rather going for a P&S why ?

Get a Nikon D3100 with the 18-55mm lens is roughly same price as the Canon and can be had for even less then that.

http://www.henrys.com/61709-NIKON-D3100-W-18-55VR.aspx

http://www.downtowncamera.com/index...rd=nikon+D3100&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=2

http://www.adencamera.com/product-overviewer.asp?ProdID=3428&Category=6

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Nikon-D31...-with-18-55mm-VR-Lens-3-LCD-HD-Video/15222286


At Walmart you can get the Canon T3 for roughly same value


http://www.walmart.com/ip/Canon-Bla...al-Bonus-16GB-Memory-Card-and-Tripod/21997675

 

[brunerww]

goodguy - I agree, these are much better still cameras, but he also wants a video-capable camera to record his kids.

The T3 has a maximum video resolution of 720/30p and shuts down video recording after only 12 minutes; while the D3100 has a maximum video resolution of 1080/24p and shuts down after 20 minutes - which would probably happen right in the middle of the school play.

You can always restart recording, but I would not buy either of these as my primary video camera.

The FZ200 may have a smaller sensor, but it shoots super-smooth, high resolution 1080/60p video & has no video recording time limit - and then there's that 24x constant f2.8 zoom

This combination of features is probably why it was named the "Best Point and Shoot for Video: on the 2012 Digital Camera Info Best of the Year Awards List.

Cheers,

Bill

 

[goodguy]

goodguy - I agree, these are much better still cameras, but he also wants a video-capable camera to record his kids.

The T3 has a maximum video resolution of 720/30p and shuts down video recording after only 12 minutes; while the D3100 has a maximum video resolution of 1080/24p and shuts down after 20 minutes - which would probably happen right in the middle of the school play.

You can always restart recording, but I would not buy either of these as my primary video camera.

The FZ200 may have a smaller sensor, but it shoots super-smooth, high resolution 1080/60p video & has no video recording time limit - and then there's that 24x constant f2.8 zoom

This combination of features is probably why it was named the "Best Point and Shoot for Video: on the 2012 Digital Camera Info Best of the Year Awards List.

Cheers,

Bill

You are a wiser man then me Bill.
I will be honest with you for me a DSLR is not a video camera, somehow it just doesnt work together for me.
I treat my D7000 as it should be, its for picture taking only.
For video we use my wifes Canon G15 which is an excellent P&S

So I guess it makes sense to get the FZ200 but to be honest me personally if I had to choose one camera I would still go with a T3 or Nikon D3100-but thats me.