# Canon SX50 lens for DSLR



## rifz (Mar 16, 2013)

For $400 the Canon SX50 has an amazing zoom range, and now with RAW! It's too bad they won't make a lens like this for DSLRs, I don't care if I'm not using the full sensor, I would still get the speed and high iso etc...

Canon SX50 Extreme Zoom 200x FULL HD

I'd love to see a shoot out with this and one of those $300 samyang 800 -1200 f8 manual focus lens or Sigma 150-500, Tamron 18-270.


----------



## CTJohn (Mar 16, 2013)

Interesting that you mention this. I started getting into digital photography with an Olympus SP-560UZ which is another superzoom camera. Now that I'm using a 7D and multiple L lenses, I still wish at times I could find a simple DSLR lens that would give me that type of range.


----------



## rifz (Mar 16, 2013)

Ya I started with the UZ too,  I just sold my 7D for the 6D, I had the Tamron 18-270 PZD it was good a walk around lens. I think the full frame Tamron 28-300 is older and not as good.. I have the canon 24-105L but it would great to have more range and less weight.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Mar 16, 2013)

Full frame super zooms are a rare beast - it's odd that the only L option is the silly sized 28-300mm which isn't really a walk around lens - only alternatives are older stuff like the 28-135 mm which isn't really a wide a range as what's offered on the EF-S range, where you get the 18-135 and 18-200 (which is like having 29-216 & 29-320mm in your hands)

I'd say that there is a market now with the entry level 6D for a range of L superzooms, giving for example a 20-135mm, 24-200mm (black) and continue the 28-300mm product, probably all retaining a variable f stop, with prices at say £600-800 range for the two newer models, maybe with last gen IS ?


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 16, 2013)

Haydn1971 said:


> Full frame super zooms are a rare beast - it's odd that the only L option is the silly sized 28-300mm which isn't really a walk around lens - only alternatives are older stuff like the 28-135 mm which isn't really a wide a range as what's offered on the EF-S range, where you get the 18-135 and 18-200 (which is like having 29-216 & 29-320mm in your hands)
> 
> I'd say that there is a market now with the entry level 6D for a range of L superzooms, giving for example a 20-135mm, 24-200mm (black) and continue the 28-300mm product, probably all retaining a variable f stop, with prices at say £600-800 range for the two newer models, maybe with last gen IS ?



The reason FF super zooms are quite rare is the same as why P&S super zooms are quite common. A lens filling a larger sensor that also zooms quite a bit becomes uncontrollably big and unwieldy, and introduces more lens inaccuracies than acceptable. A P&S user wouldn't mind that, and the tiny sensor would be the limiting factor for IQ, rather than the lens. Not so for a FF sensor of today. Even the 28-135, which was quite popular in the film days, is falling out of favor as the high-res sensors expose its weaknesses. The APS-C sensor is midway between FF and P&S, of course, and the APS-C super zooms lie midway in terms of quality as well.
Finally, it is not fair to use the crop factor to compare zoom ranges. Even though 18-135APS-C can be used as a 29-216FF equivalent, the makers still only have to cover a range of 117, not 187.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Mar 16, 2013)

To be fair, it's not always about getting the best possible photo - sometimes you need the flexibility of superzooms and are happy to put up with their short comings.


----------



## Don Haines (Mar 16, 2013)

Haydn1971 said:


> To be fair, it's not always about getting the best possible photo - sometimes you need the flexibility of superzooms and are happy to put up with their short comings.



I have the canon 18-200 lens..... It has to be one of the worst lenses that canon makes, but if you are hiking and can only carry one lens with you, it suddenly becomes a very attractive lens.


----------



## Haydn1971 (Mar 16, 2013)

Exactly my point - the flip side is that I could just buy another crop camera and add a 18-200


----------



## sagittariansrock (Mar 16, 2013)

Haydn1971 said:


> To be fair, it's not always about getting the best possible photo - sometimes you need the flexibility of superzooms and are happy to put up with their short comings.



+1 
Of course, IQ is not always the most important thing. But (200-18) 182mm focal range for a 35mm sensor will likely be prohibitive in price and weight.


----------



## rifz (Mar 17, 2013)

I don't really want to carry two cameras, with extra batteries and learn a new set of controls etc. but with a superzoom lens on a DSLR you could only use live view, because the view would be much too small in the viewfinder. I heard the nikon has a digital zoom so the full frame cameras can use crop lenses.

You can fit a Sigma DC lens on a Canon full frame but you have to crop afterward and it looks funny in the viewfinder.

Sigma 10-20 f4-56 DC @ 10mm


----------

