 | Slightly narrow aperture | f/3.4 |  | Slightly large | Professional size (123×87×106 mm) |  | Poor maximum light sensitivity | 6,400 ISO |  | Lower true resolution | 9.7 MP |  | Slightly smaller than average sensor | 1/2.3" 6.17x4.55mm |  | Thick | 4.2" | |  | Very low resolution screen | 461k dots |  | Slow continuous shooting | 2.2 fps |  | No touch screen | More buttons |  | Fewer focus points | 9 |  | Old | September 2012 |  | Heavy | 595 g | |
Showing 25 comments
I need camera for long term with high features and not in big size ! :)
Nikon coolpix 600 or canon sx 50 HS where canon has no wi fi and nikon picture quality in night mod is not satisfactory. ....what to do.
Low light issues: Very grainy in low light, color rendition in low light is poor. The best WB was AWB even in tungsten lighting. What you see in the screen and viewfinder are not what you get. Saturation, brightness and hues are very noticeable different. Saved images, even in raw are noticeable grainier than the screen.
Long exposures are only possible in ISO 80 which is good and bad. Bad because with a 30 sec limit means effectively high I so shooting is very limited and good because at 80 iso processing images are less noisy.
Daylight shooting: DOF focus issues fine detail missing, visible moire patterning.
These all point to the tiny CMOS....however a larger sensor would mean a bigger lenses, weight etc.Otherwise its probably the best bang for your buck in this category of bridge camera.
To every SX50 score you add 100 points just because it's popular and for a new camera you add almost nothing for popularity.
So snapsort's advice boils down to: Just buy whatever everyone else is buying.
Thanks for nothing....
The image quality is also very good, probably the best in its class in ideal conditions. It does have a weakness though, the low light performance is not great. But I don't expect a single camera to do it all so I will forgive one weakness.
Otherwise its a superb camera.
I'm glad I got it.