Has anyone had experience with the HS50EXR?

Yeats

All-Pro
Jul 31, 2012
New Jersey, USA
Chris
Yup, I've had 2. Sadly, both fell victim to poor QC and I had to return them.

In short, image quality was OK, IMHO the best superzoom image quality comes from the Canon SX50. But the Fuji handles much nicer, feels more solid and the EVF is worlds better.
 

Luke

Super Moderator
Nov 11, 2011
Milwaukee, WI USA
Luke
I had one, but only for a couple of days. It felt awesome in hand. I like the controls and the output was about as good as I've seen from a small sensor. The direction of my 2 camera kit changed and I decided to go with a DSLR instead of a superzoom to cover all my focal lengths. I can't go quite as long and it's a LOT heavier, but that was my choice.

I don't have enough experience with it to recommend it or say stay away. Although hearing Chris' experience would definitely make me rule out a used one.
 

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Jan 3, 2012
Troy, NY
Yup, I've had 2. Sadly, both fell victim to poor QC and I had to return them.

In short, image quality was OK, IMHO the best superzoom image quality comes from the Canon SX50. But the Fuji handles much nicer, feels more solid and the EVF is worlds better.
How's the autofocus on the SX50? The reviews are consistent in their findings. I love my FZ150, but a bit more reach would be welcome.

Cheers, Jock
 

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Jan 3, 2012
Troy, NY
I had one, but only for a couple of days. It felt awesome in hand. I like the controls and the output was about as good as I've seen from a small sensor. The direction of my 2 camera kit changed and I decided to go with a DSLR instead of a superzoom to cover all my focal lengths. I can't go quite as long and it's a LOT heavier, but that was my choice.

I don't have enough experience with it to recommend it or say stay away. Although hearing Chris' experience would definitely make me rule out a used one.
Luke,

As you might recall, I have used the FZ150 professionally, and it has served well. Lately, however, I've gotten interested in wildlife photography (for fun, not for pay), and I've been trying to get a bit more reach without breaking the bank. I have threatened myself with a DSLR -- and they do almost everything better than a superzoom -- except "be inexpensive and be highly portable." I could afford and DSLR and potentially even write it off as a business expense, but . . . My fear is that if I fork out the bucks the high performance, after a while I'll stop carrying it because of the bulk and the weight.

The reality is that I tend to be an opportunistic photographer.

Thanks for your input.

Cheers, Jock
 

Yeats

All-Pro
Jul 31, 2012
New Jersey, USA
Chris
In my experience, I found the Canon's AF to be slightly more accurate then the Fuji's. The Fuji's was faster, but there was a greater tendency to focus behind the subject if there was something behind it with strong contrast.
 

Luke

Super Moderator
Nov 11, 2011
Milwaukee, WI USA
Luke
Jock, I think you are making the right choice for you. I thought the AF was amazing. And the reach is kind of mind-boggling. I had looked at a LOT of samples of the Panasonic and the Fuji. I was driving myself a bit crazy, but if there is a difference, it is minimal. Another discovery I made though in my brief ownership was that I didn't have any software to read the Fuji RAW files which was another strike against it. I don't know if it's of any use to you, but the super-slow motion video feature was pretty amazing.
 

Yeats

All-Pro
Jul 31, 2012
New Jersey, USA
Chris
Jock, have you considered a m4/3 camera + VF3 + Panny 100-300 lens? That would be 600mm equivalent, and even cropped by 50% it might give a 1000mm/1200mm superzoom a run for it's money. More expensive, but could still be done for under $1000. That's the route I'm going to take, as finances allow.

 

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Jan 3, 2012
Troy, NY
Pardon my epic ignorance . . .

Jock, have you considered a m4/3 camera + VF3 + Panny 100-300 lens? That would be 600mm equivalent, and even cropped by 50% it might give a 1000mm/1200mm superzoom a run for it's money. More expensive, but could still be done for under $1000. That's the route I'm going to take, as finances allow.

Yeats,

Wow, nice photo!

Now to the epic ignorance part -- my knowledge of system cameras basically ended in the 1960s, when if you had a screw-mount camera, you could essentially any screw mount lens on it. Are Panasonic lenses usable on other systems or are they only usable on Panasonic cameras?

Cheers, Jock
 

Luke

Super Moderator
Nov 11, 2011
Milwaukee, WI USA
Luke
Panasonic and Olympus cameras are part of a system called micro four thirds (they were both part of an earlier standard called four thirds, so be aware that there are some {mainly} Olympus lenses that are not strictly compatible with m43 without the use of an adapter).

The system is much more compact than a DSLR and the step up in IQ from a the small sensor superzoom is quite considerable. So you could get any of the m43 bodies and the Panasonic 100-300 or the Olympus 75-300 and have a high IQ dedicated telezoom machine. Obviously you could add another lens or two to cover closer focal lengths, too. When researching these cameras, keep in mind that they have a crop factor of x2 which just means when comparing focal lengths against euqivalents in your superzooms. So those 300mm at the long end of m43 cameras will be the same as your FZ150 being a 600mm equivalent.

But you'll have more quality and latitude for cropping. You can view a pretty big selection of samples from our sister site in this gallery for the 100-300...... http://www.mu-43.com/showthread.php?t=7871 (keep in mind different skill levels and sample variation).
 

demiro

Serious Compacts For Life
Dec 15, 2011
I'm in the middle of this decision-making process as well. Thinking about the Canon SX50 and also the Nikon P510. The Nikon is cheap and gets good reviews. Biggest nit is it doesn't do raw, which I really don't care about so much. Has anyone here shot with the P510?

And I'm weighing that against an Olympus 75-300. I already have an E-M5, so the lens sort of make sense. But I like the convenience and versatility of a superzoom and I'm not sure about cropping to make the 75-300 "equivalent" to the Canon or Nikon.

A used 75-300 is about $100 more than a refurbed P510.

Decisions, decisions...
 

Jock Elliott

Hall of Famer
Jan 3, 2012
Troy, NY
I'm in the middle of this decision-making process as well. Thinking about the Canon SX50 and also the Nikon P510. The Nikon is cheap and gets good reviews. Biggest nit is it doesn't do raw, which I really don't care about so much. Has anyone here shot with the P510?

And I'm weighing that against an Olympus 75-300. I already have an E-M5, so the lens sort of make sense. But I like the convenience and versatility of a superzoom and I'm not sure about cropping to make the 75-300 "equivalent" to the Canon or Nikon.

A used 75-300 is about $100 more than a refurbed P510.

Decisions, decisions...
Demiro,

Just to screw up your decision making process even more, I just heard from Panasonic product support: "the DMW-LT55 55mm Tele Conversion Lens work with all the Panasonic cameras in the FZ series." It's telephoto conversion lens for Panasonic ultra-zoom camera. 1.7x magnification level.

If I have the math right, it would turn the FZ150 or FZ200 into a 1000mm . . .

I really like the FZ150 (if you search on my posts, you'll see some results), and it has a lever on the side of the lens that can be used for manual focus (or zoom, but you already have a zoom lever next to the shutter button), so you have separate easy to use controls for zoom and manual focus (which is handy when you want to focus on something behind the foliage).

Cheers, Jock
 
Jan 31, 2011
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
I dont know if this helps, but I had a P500 and it was *awful*. The viewfinder was woeful, the jpgs were woeful and i ended up selling it. I've steered well clear of Nikon Superzooms ever since. DO consider the NIkon 1 System, which is excellent. The reach isnt as great as the superzooms, but its eminently croppable. You can see plenty of examples in the Nikon 1 forum :)
 
Jan 31, 2011
Newcastle, Australia
Sue
Demiro,

Just to screw up your decision making process even more, I just heard from Panasonic product support: "the DMW-LT55 55mm Tele Conversion Lens work with all the Panasonic cameras in the FZ series." It's telephoto conversion lens for Panasonic ultra-zoom camera. 1.7x magnification level.

If I have the math right, it would turn the FZ150 or FZ200 into a 1000mm . . .

I really like the FZ150 (if you search on my posts, you'll see some results), and it has a lever on the side of the lens that can be used for manual focus (or zoom, but you already have a zoom lever next to the shutter button), so you have separate easy to use controls for zoom and manual focus (which is handy when you want to focus on something behind the foliage).

Cheers, Jock
Thats good to know. I'm seriously considering upgrading to an FZ200 in time. The nikon1 purchase stalled it, as it also stalled a GR purchase (chalk and cheese I know but I like cameras, what can I say)
 

Yeats

All-Pro
Jul 31, 2012
New Jersey, USA
Chris
I had the Nikon P510, and the jpegs were OK, but no RAW. EVF is small, low-res (like the Canon) and very slow to update (unlike the Canon).

The Canon SX50 does have an interesting feature for wildlife photogs: when setting your Auto-ISO, you can specify how aggressively the camera ramps up the ISO. It's been a few months so I don't remember the precise terminology, but there's something like a low/standard/high setting. As an example, if you are shooting in bright light, the camera might choose to keep the shutter at at least 1/250s in the "standard" setting. That's fine for Canon's excellent OIS, but may not be fast enough to freeze motion. If you switch the auto-ISO "aggressiveness" setting (sorry, I don't remember the term Canon uses) to "high", the minimum shutter speed might be 1/500s. Pretty cool, IMO.
 

Yeats

All-Pro
Jul 31, 2012
New Jersey, USA
Chris
I'm in the middle of this decision-making process as well. Thinking about the Canon SX50 and also the Nikon P510. The Nikon is cheap and gets good reviews. Biggest nit is it doesn't do raw, which I really don't care about so much. Has anyone here shot with the P510?

And I'm weighing that against an Olympus 75-300. I already have an E-M5, so the lens sort of make sense. But I like the convenience and versatility of a superzoom and I'm not sure about cropping to make the 75-300 "equivalent" to the Canon or Nikon.

A used 75-300 is about $100 more than a refurbed P510.

Decisions, decisions...
The Panny 100-300 is faster and gets better reviews than the Oly 75-300. Remember, due to the m4/3 "crop factor", that 300mm lens offers a 600mm field of view, even if you cropped to match the Canon SX50's 1200mm, you'd still have (possibly higher quality) 8MP to work with.

Sometimes the biggest challenge when shooting distant wildlife is atmospheric distortion.
 

demiro

Serious Compacts For Life
Dec 15, 2011
Demiro,

Just to screw up your decision making process even more, I just heard from Panasonic product support: "the DMW-LT55 55mm Tele Conversion Lens work with all the Panasonic cameras in the FZ series." It's telephoto conversion lens for Panasonic ultra-zoom camera. 1.7x magnification level.

If I have the math right, it would turn the FZ150 or FZ200 into a 1000mm . . .

I really like the FZ150 (if you search on my posts, you'll see some results), and it has a lever on the side of the lens that can be used for manual focus (or zoom, but you already have a zoom lever next to the shutter button), so you have separate easy to use controls for zoom and manual focus (which is handy when you want to focus on something behind the foliage).

Cheers, Jock
Jock, that does screw me up a little, but maybe in a good way. I've always been interested in the FZ200, but if I'm going super-zoom I want some serious reach. If that tele-con lens does the job without giving too much IQ away it makes things a bit more interesting. Cheap goes out the window at that point, but that always seems to be the first place I compromise anyway.

Thanks for the heads up.
 

demiro

Serious Compacts For Life
Dec 15, 2011
I dont know if this helps, but I had a P500 and it was *awful*. The viewfinder was woeful, the jpgs were woeful and i ended up selling it. I've steered well clear of Nikon Superzooms ever since. DO consider the NIkon 1 System, which is excellent. The reach isnt as great as the superzooms, but its eminently croppable. You can see plenty of examples in the Nikon 1 forum :)
Thanks for the P500 feedback. I think the 510 was somwwhat upgraded, at least, but not sure how much.

I've considered the Nikon 1, and you can get some nice reach with legacy lenses, but I really want to keep this simple with either a lens for my m4/3s kit or a superzoom.
 

Luckypenguin

Hall of Famer
Dec 24, 2010
Brisbane, Australia
Nic
The Panny 100-300 is faster and gets better reviews than the Oly 75-300. Remember, due to the m4/3 "crop factor", that 300mm lens offers a 600mm field of view, even if you cropped to match the Canon SX50's 1200mm, you'd still have (possibly higher quality) 8MP to work with.

Sometimes the biggest challenge when shooting distant wildlife is atmospheric distortion.
Remember that to simulate doubling the focal length of a lens by cropping you need to crop by 50% in height and width which gives a 4MP file from a 16MP original
 

Luckypenguin

Hall of Famer
Dec 24, 2010
Brisbane, Australia
Nic
The Canon SX50 does have an interesting feature for wildlife photogs: when setting your Auto-ISO, you can specify how aggressively the camera ramps up the ISO. It's been a few months so I don't remember the precise terminology, but there's something like a low/standard/high setting. As an example, if you are shooting in bright light, the camera might choose to keep the shutter at at least 1/250s in the "standard" setting. That's fine for Canon's excellent OIS, but may not be fast enough to freeze motion. If you switch the auto-ISO "aggressiveness" setting (sorry, I don't remember the term Canon uses) to "high", the minimum shutter speed might be 1/500s. Pretty cool, IMO.
On my G1X under the "ISO Auto Settings" I have a feature called "Rate of Change" which does what you describe with standard, fast, and slow settings. A neat feature, I think.
 

Latest threads

Top Bottom