I have lusted for a small camera that has an incredible focal length range. Why? Well, there are times when I want to take a camera along with me when I ride my recumbent tricycle. I see stuff, all the time. But, unfortunately, taking along my D800e and a 300mm lens with a 1.4 extender is problematic. The assembly just doesn't go with a tricycle.

Enter the Canon Powershot SX50HS. With a 24-1200mm lens! WOW.

Problem is the reviews are terrible. Image quality sure does not seem great. Although I have processed some sample with pretty good results.

Of course, what I want and what is possible are two different things. What I want does not exist. Or does it?

Any thoughts about my desire?

Nothing special, just a small camera that I can take with me when size and weight matter.

Small. With an extended focal length. Solid build. Reliable. Produces outstanding RAW images.

Is it out there? Or, am I just having a wishful thinking day?

Bill I assume you've read Michael Reichmann's review of the SX50 if not here's a link:
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/canon_sx_50_review.shtml
Would you support or disagree with his conclusions?
When reviewing this camera I'd forget about 100% monitor viewing - I'd look at small prints 8x10 or 11x14 in size.
If the prints pass muster than the camera passes muster.
IMO it is as simple as that, as this camera is not a high megapixel full frame D-SLR so it shouldn't be held to the same standard.

Thanks for the link. Interesting conclusions. Who can disagree with Michael Reichmann'?

For less than $400 it looks like something I could acquire and play with. It might just meet my needs, that is, something I can carry with me on my tricycle (Terratrike Recumbent) when something happens before me that needs to be captured and preserved. There have been hundreds of times, literally, when I saw something, the light was exceptional, and alas no camera.

I may just order one and try it out. If it fails in image quality, well, there is always Craig's List.

Bill

Would you consider a m4/3? If not, why not?

I can see why you like the idea, it does sound appealing at first read, but there's a reason why we keep spending the big money on exotic telephotos.
With a lens that goes out to 1200 you'd want a tripod ? Then the travel light thing goes out the window slightly.

I think that DChans on the right lines here, micro 4/3 and a 300, then crop if you need. Probably a better lightweight solution.

Sure.

Which camera? Which lens?

Best regards,

Bill

Oh goodie a "Lets help Bill spend all his money" thread.

You have now Nikon stuff Bill, have you not considered a V1 with its slightly bigger than compact sensor and a lightweight zoom or prime? A 200mm lens will get you an equiv of over 500mm... V1, mount adaptor and 55-200 lens would get you pretty far (for Florida). Wide end covered with a 10mm-30mm lens. Or an 18-200 super zoom.

If you want REALLY compact then you will have to make do with compact quality, focus speed and RAW writing speeds.

Hi Neil,

Interesting idea. I have been just now reading about the V1, but it looks like lenses are limited.

B&H offers the V1 with 10-30mm and 30-110mm Lenses for $399. The 30-110 would give me 81-297mm in 35mm format. The 10-30mm would be fine for landscapes, 27mm at the wide end.

All in all not a bad suggestion. I hope Tony pops in, he has a V1, I think.

Of course, now there is the V2. More money. Grumble.

One good thing is that there is a Photography Show this weekend near where I live. Lots of junk there, but also some dealers who are unloading demo cameras. One never knows what will be there. I have bought some good stuff in the past. Maybe I will get the chance to do some shooting with the v1.

Best regards,

Bill

Bill - I have the V1 (V2 isn't much different.. just added a flash and made it ugly as sin) and the adapter which allows me to use my DLSR lenses. The 18-200mm works great with this camera and you keep your f-stop... I would go this route if I were you instead of investing in a P&S camera.

Olympus E-M5 or E-PL5 for example. Lens-wise you can have lenses of up to 300mm (600 full-frame equivalence) in focal length. Some good prime lenses include Olympus's own 12 f2, 45 f1.8, 75 f1.8, or, panasonic/leica 25f1.4, 45f2.8 macro, etc., and several other zoom lenses from both Olympus and Panasonic to choose from to begin with.

Bill, if you are looking for something similar to the SX50, but with better image quality you should look into the Fuji X-S1.  It has a relatively big 2/3" inch sensor, as compared to other point and shoots.  Its zoom is about half the SX50, but still a not too shabby 26x (or something like 600mm equivalent).   Its price is its downside.  Around $700.

For a bridge camera I can carry around when I don't want to lug the 1DX, I chose Panasonic's FZ200.  The primary reason is Panasonic's return to a fixed f2.8 lens.  Zoom range is not bad at 25-600mm.  Noise beyond 400 can be seen, but that big f-stop advantage compared to other bridge cameras allows for lower ISO. 

So far, it has been a really fun, relatively little, camera to use.  No lens changing and no sensor cleaning.

Liz

Thanks to all for the laundry list of options!

A lot to chew on.

I sorta like Neil's suggestion, the Nikon V1. This is because I have Nikon lens I can use with it when an adapter is added. Although I can see all kinds of issues with such an arrangement. I gather that one needs to use the adapter if one considers the 18-200mm. That would be the perfect range for me. Somewhere around 48-540 mm. A really good working range with good optics. I wonder about the weight of the 18-200mm, the adapter, mounted on the V1? LeOrmand says it works well. That would be an excellent choice. Of course, means buying the V1, the adapter, and the 18-200. So there went a grand or more. Grumble.

I think I remember you doing this once before Bill, back then it was a Panosonic G soemthing or other. In the end you will end up with a body, a couple of lenses and the adaptor, and then you will be back grumbling about carrying too much Put the 18-200 on the D800 in crop mode. Saves you 600$ just the body is a little bigger. Surely that trike has space for a bag of some sort. Or even better, get a Manfrotto superclamp and small ball head and attach it to the trike handle bars and you wont need that tripod either . I got one, they are solid, really solid.

Kinda like this. http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7194/6806227810_9dc1cfe50a_z.jpg

I have used mine with the 1D and 300 2.8 on it

There  you go, thinking again. And you are absolutely right. I don't need a small camera, I need a smaller lens. DUH.

I love the superclamp idea but unfortunately my recumbent is a trike and there are no handle bars. However, I can attach a small camera bag to a carrier over the rear tire, that should work fine with the D800 and a zoom.

Perhaps I will find a lens to my liking this coming weekend at the photography show. One never knows what will be available.

If not, guess I will contact Gary at Hunt's Photo Video.

Best regards,

Bill

Recumbent, forgot about that, darn you young sports guys. OK, I am out, buy the darn 1200mm compact :p

Bill - no worries about the weight. I have spent plenty of time with the V1 + adapter + 18-200 attatched around my neck... way lighter than a full blown DSLR. The included camera strap is fine for carrying this rig around (not so much when I attach my 300 f4) so you don't have to worry about breaking anything off. Yes, it isn't cheap (especially if you need to buy the 18-200!) but it's a great lens to have in general... you can probably find an older used one (VR 1) which will save some money, that's what I did. Like I siad, go with the V1 instead of V2, it's a lot nicer looking and cheaper. You give up flash (who cares) and a bump in megapixels, but that's about it. I have shots with this settup if you are interested in seeing them, send me a private message.

FWIW, here are a some quick shots made with the V1 + sigma 300/4 AF APO in 2011







Not very exotic subjects, but just to show that subject isolation can be acceptable despite the smaller V1 sensor, provided that the FL is long enough.
Probably a big difference with bridge cameras which have much smaller sensors (the SX50 impressive "1200mm" is in fact a real 215mm f/5.6).

As the sigma is screw-drive only, those were manual focus. The combo was really small for a 800mm equivalent, at about 1.5 kg. 
I also briefly tested an even more compact lens : the 200/4 Ais, as a baby 500/4, but with mixed results especially wide open.
I wish I had tested other medium lenses such as 70-300/5.6, 70-200/2.8, 200/4 micro, and now the new 70-200/4, but I ended selling the V1.
For me the biggest drawbacks were the EVF latency and even more the weak ergonomy (with every function burried in a menu) and crippled-down firmware especially with the FT1 adapter attached (read the manuals). If these caveats are acceptable on a "very small camera" is up to you.

Don't know if the V2 is better in those user-interface issues.

Manu.

Well, the saga continues.

Went to the photoshow. Bought a Nikon 55-200mm lens for $130. Next day went riding on my tricycle with D800 and lens mounted. Not easy to hold while riding. Took some shots of an Anhinga with fish. Got home. Looked at shots. Took 25, only five were in focus. All shots were pants. Logged in to Craigslist. Listed lens for $150. Two hours later I had a buyer. Next day met the buyer, pocket back$150. Then went to B&H and bought the Nikon 1 V1 with two lenses, the 10-30mm and the 30-110mm. Paid $399. This is less than half what the v1 cost with one lens when it was introduced. 

Luke wrote me about his experience with the V1. He sent me several photographs. I was totally impressed with what he was achieving with this little camera. He enhanced my interest.

Then did some reading. Found this guy:  http://www.naturalart.ca/artist/fieldtests/fieldtest_NikonV1.html and read his review. Then looked at this shot: http://www.naturalart.ca/images/test_shots/V1_DSC1389_BighornLamb_Juniper_70-200_1200pix.jpg

Of course Brad Hill is the consummate professional. But WOW.

I realized then that I had a 70-200mm f2.8 and a 300mm f/4 as well as a 1.4x. So, with the FT1 adapter, the V1 would be a game changer.

So, off to Amazon. Bought the FT1, cost me $189.

In sum, I am out $399 for the V1 and two lenses, and $189 for the FT1 adapter. That is less than $600 for a camera that will give me as much as 1134 mm focal length. 300mm X 1.4 Converter X 2.7 FT1 Converter = 1134. Unbelievable.

 After reading Brad Hill's review, a real nature photographer, and looking at his works done with the V1, what can one say except WOW, WOW, WOW!

I should sort out the entire assembly by this next weekend. If the weather is good in Florida, I will be along Clearwater Bay, hoping the tide is right at first light.

Test photos to come.

You're out at ~1200mm equivalent again Bill, gonna need a tripod to hold that much focal length steady.