Anything better than the Canon SX70? It's all about the zoom and pixels on target

Lyn2011 wrote in post #19464290
It would be interesting to follow your experience with the SX70. I still have the SX50 and the bright light here can be a problem with it. In the thread Australian birds are several photos taken with the SX50. I hope the SX70 is much better. I have the same problem as you, I like a small camera for walking. One thing I learned from somebody here on the forum is that ISO 200 gives mostly the best results.
Succes with your new camera.

I got out to the lake today and took a few test images. I need to come up with a better testing strategy but this one seemed realistic. Three images each with camera semi-optimised for best IQ. I say semi because I still don't know the SX70 all that well. The cameras were resting on a picnic table, turned ISO down on the SX to 200 but kept the 5DIV at 400. 5DIV was manually focused using LV and 10x. The SX70 I started to MF but the AF was working better. Same with the ZS80 so those two are AF focused. The target is a cormorant filled tree 718 feet out into the lake as measured by Google Earth. Shooting conditions weren't optimal as the sun had just risen and there were a few clouds softening the light a big. All were taken raw with minimal processing of each image. I didn't try to match the processing between images but choose what setting worked best for the image, basically I tried to make each image look its best irrespective of what settings were used for the other images. I then cropped out the same FOV from each image. The SX70 didn't need cropping so it's the full 20.1mp image. The 5DIV when selecting the same FOV was 6.1mp and the ZSW80 was 5.6mp. So zoom clearly does put pixels on target. To post, I resized all images to 1600x1200. I am quite happy with the SX70, I think it will do just fine. The body is a bit bigger than hoped, but it's clearly way better than the ZX80 and in some ways better than the 5DIV. Tomorrow i want to try the 5DIV with the 1.4 t-con. I think the 5D will do much better with more pix on target although I have the older Canon t-con and its not the greatest optically. Here are the images.

Something seems to be a bit wonky on the 5D4 image, can't quite put my finger on it. It gives me the same feeling I had when I did an entire shoot and nothing quite pleased me, and it turns out that a name-brand decent filter was to blame. Not using a filter on the 5D4 at all are you? Just seems a bit off...

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19464576
Something seems to be a bit wonky on the 5D4 image, can't quite put my finger on it. It gives me the same feeling I had when I did an entire shoot and nothing quite pleased me, and it turns out that a name-brand decent filter was to blame. Not using a filter on the 5D4 at all are you? Just seems a bit off...

No filters. Processed it a bit. Might have over-sharpened, but other than applying a tad of NR, remove CR,

Just re-processed the 5DIV image. No sharpening applied and i went lighter on other settings as well. Keep in mind that you are seeing a small portion of the 5DIV and ZS80 frame to match the FOV of the SX70. The SX70 is the full 20.1 mp image so there is a lot more to work with.In essence, I turned the 5DIV into a 6mp camera. Here is the full frame and the portion used.

gjl711 wrote in post #19464434
I got out to the lake today and took a few test images. I need to come up with a better testing strategy but this one seemed realistic. Three images each with camera semi-optimised for best IQ. I say semi because I still don't know the SX70 all that well. The cameras were resting on a picnic table, turned ISO down on the SX to 200 but kept the 5DIV at 400. 5DIV was manually focused using LV and 10x. The SX70 I started to MF but the AF was working better. Same with the ZS80 so those two are AF focused. The target is a cormorant filled tree 718 feet out into the lake as measured by Google Earth. Shooting conditions weren't optimal as the sun had just risen and there were a few clouds softening the light a big. All were taken raw with minimal processing of each image. I didn't try to match the processing between images but choose what setting worked best for the image, basically I tried to make each image look its best irrespective of what settings were used for the other images. I then cropped out the same FOV from each image. The SX70 didn't need cropping so it's the full 20.1mp image. The 5DIV when selecting the same FOV was 6.1mp and the ZSW80 was 5.6mp. So zoom clearly does put pixels on target. To post, I resized all images to 1600x1200. I am quite happy with the SX70, I think it will do just fine. The body is a bit bigger than hoped, but it's clearly way better than the ZX80 and in some ways better than the 5DIV. Tomorrow i want to try the 5DIV with the 1.4 t-con. I think the 5D will do much better with more pix on target although I have the older Canon t-con and its not the greatest optically. Here are the images.

Great to see the results of 3 camera's. The SX70 does a good job in comparison, better than I expected.

I went out again this morning and am now seriously questioning my technique. Again, not ideal shooting conditions as it was early, just at sunrise but clear. I'm dropping the Panasonic as it's clearly the worst of the three. The 5DIV was set to ISO400, f/8, 1/180, 840mm as I used the Teleplus Pro 300 1.4 T-con. I focused in LV zooming in to 10x and used the tree trunk as the focus target. (I also used LV AF but the image is no different than the manually focused image) I shot in live view with the camera on a picnic table. I set the timer to 2 seconds to eliminate any movement from pressing the shutter. I believe this is about the best I can do to get the sharpest image possible. I suppose I can boost the ISO to maybe 1600 to up the shutter speed a but, but the camera is sitting firmly on a table so camera movement should be minimal.

For the SX70, it was ISO 100, f/6.5, 1/125 247mm (that's 1365 35mm equivalent) Also resting in a picnic table but I did not user a timer to take the image. (haven't figured out hot to use timer yet. ) Tried manually focusing and it worked, but AF does just fine as well.

I did much less processing today. Loaded the raw, adjusted for CA (both cameras needed very little.) No NR for the 5DIV and just a little for the SX70. Very minimal sharpening on both images, and that 's it. I then cropped out the portion from the 5DIV corresponding to the SX70 image, resized both images to 1600x1200 and posted. I really thought that the 5DIV would have done significantly better but the SX70 looks better to me.

What do y'all think? Am I missing something on the 5D?

I do find it interesting at how close the shore in the distance looks. The tree is 711 feet from where i was shooting and the other shore 3260 feet.

gjl711 wrote in post #19464882
I went out again this morning and am now seriously questioning my technique. Again, not ideal shooting conditions as it was early, just at sunrise but clear. I'm dropping the Panasonic as it's clearly the worst of the three. The 5DIV was set to ISO400, f/8, 1/180, 840mm as I used the Teleplus Pro 300 1.4 T-con. I focused in LV zooming in to 10x and used the tree trunk as the focus target. (I also used LV AF but the image is no different than the manually focused image) I shot in live view with the camera on a picnic table. I set the timer to 2 seconds to eliminate any movement from pressing the shutter. I believe this is about the best I can do to get the sharpest image possible. I suppose I can boost the ISO to maybe 1600 to up the shutter speed a but, but the camera is sitting firmly on a table so camera movement should be minimal.

For the SX70, it was ISO 100, f/6.5, 1/125 247mm (that's 1365 35mm equivalent) Also resting in a picnic table but I did not user a timer to take the image. (haven't figured out hot to use timer yet. ) Tried manually focusing and it worked, but AF does just fine as well.

I did much less processing today. Loaded the raw, adjusted for CA (both cameras needed very little.) No NR for the 5DIV and just a little for the SX70. Very minimal sharpening on both images, and that 's it. I then cropped out the portion from the 5DIV corresponding to the SX70 image, resized both images to 1600x1200 and posted. I really thought that the 5DIV would have done significantly better but the SX70 looks better to me.

What do y'all think? Am I missing something on the 5D?

Hosted photo: posted by gjl711 in
./showthread.php?p=194​64882&i=i129293316
forum: The Lounge

Hosted photo: posted by gjl711 in
./showthread.php?p=194​64882&i=i33943316
forum: The Lounge

You are right, the SX70 looks better. I guess that it is because of the cropping of the 5D photo?
And the SX70 does a bit sharpening in camera with JPG's, something a DSLR does not. (but that's my opinion not science, I use also the Canon 450D now and then together with the SX50)

Lyn2011 wrote in post #19465193
You are right, the SX70 looks better. I guess that it is because of the cropping of the 5D photo?
And the SX70 does a bit sharpening in camera with JPG's, something a DSLR does not. (but that's my opinion not science, I use also the Canon 450D now and then together with the SX50)

I only worked with the raw files so in camera jpeg processing was bypassed. This is a unique case though where the target is so far away and heavy cropping is needed. Today I think I want to try some tests where the full image from both cameras are used, no cropping. I'm hypothesizing that the 5DIV will excel. But for my specific use case, I'm quite satisfied with the quality the SX70 is delivering. It has exceeded my expectations by quite a bit.

gjl711 wrote in post #19465243
I only worked with the raw files so in camera jpeg processing was bypassed. This is a unique case though where the target is so far away and heavy cropping is needed. Today I think I want to try some tests where the full image from both cameras are used, no cropping. I'm hypothesizing that the 5DIV will excel. But for my specific use case, I'm quite satisfied with the quality the SX70 is delivering. It has exceeded my expectations by quite a bit.

So I suppose there is no other option than SX70, but that's not an issue as you are happy with it.
I'll keep following this thread, it's interesting. Thanks.

gjl711 wrote in post #19464882
What do y'all think? Am I missing something on the 5D?

I think what you're missing is the atmospheric distortion over that distance. Hard to get anything sharp unless the relative temps of water or land surface, and air, work out.

If it were me I'd use an R7 and RF 100-400 (actually that is what I use if I want a light carrying kit). 44 oz total, plenty of pixels on target, great AF tracking and image quality. Stick the RF-S 18-150 (11 oz) in your pocket for wider FOVs.

Lyn2011 wrote in post #19465621
So I suppose there is no other option than SX70, but that's not an issue as you are happy with it.
I'll keep following this thread, it's interesting. Thanks.

Still asking, if there is a better option, let me know. I'm always looking.

Pippan wrote in post #19465637
I think what you're missing is the atmospheric distortion over that distance. Hard to get anything sharp unless the relative temps of water or land surface, and air, work out.

If it were me I'd use an R7 and RF 100-400 (actually that is what I use if I want a light carrying kit). 44 oz total, plenty of pixels on target, great AF tracking and image quality. Stick the RF-S 18-150 (11 oz) in your pocket for wider FOVs.

R7 and 100-400 isn't going to fit in a pocket I suspect. If quality is what I'm after, then the 5DIV and 150-600 come with me though my recent testing seems to have made me re-think that. As said earlier in the thread, I'm looking for something I can carry around always, not specifically for a photo excursion, but like a phone, it's just with me. The SX70 isn't quite there but comes pretty close. The ZS80 was a true pocket camera and I do carry that pretty much all the time, but it's quality is lacking especially when going long. I know what I'm looking for is a bit of a special case, but hiking in the woods, you never know what you will bump into. Like last year, I bumped into an alligator and all I had was my phone camera. I took a picture and if you squint just right, you can see the gator in the water but if I didn't tell you what your looking at, you might think it something else.

gjl711 wrote in post #19463365
THanx TS but reach is only 1/2 of the equation. I don't have a problem lugging the 5D and 150-600 when I go out specifically for photography, but I'm looking for something I can have with me when I'm out for exercise. SO many times I run into a nice photo but all I have is my phone. The ZS80 sort of addresses that but the quality is much poorer than I though it would be especially on the long end. THat's what I'm thinking about the SX70. It looks to be a bit better than the Panasonic but still small enough to fit into a sweatshirt pocket of belly pack. Juist wondering if I missed anything. A 1" sensor camera with a 1200mm lens would have been awesome but I was not able to find such a beast. I did find a 1" sensor and 400mm, but that's a bit short I think.

I also use a Canon M50. I take it running on trail runs, when I go mountain biking, out walking, etc. My M50 easily fits in my trail running vest.

TeamSpeed wrote in post #19463418
I am trying to address the size issue though at the same time. I had both the 150-600 and 100-400 with my 5D4. The 100-400 is just lighter and a bit smaller. Throw on a small camera like the M6II or even the R7, and the overal package would be noticeably lighter and smaller.

However, another option is the M6II and the 55-250 STM. The M6II has 33Mpx on an APS-C sensor vs the 12Mpx of the 5D4 cropped to APS-C, almost 3x the pixels on target. So the 250mm on the M6 acts like a 400mm on a FF, and then throw in the pixel density differences, and you are likely quite close to your current combination.

The M50 and 55-250 is a very small setup (with great IQ), and the M6II would be no different, but with even more resolution. I have tried 2 or 3 of the Canon SX versions in the past, and after a month or so of use, ended up selling them off. They never quite met my expectations, either ISO noise was atrocious, or IQ was lacking at the extreme end.

I would rather go with ILC cameras any chance I can get vs some sort of superzoom.

This is what I use also. M50 and kit lens. It is small enough to carry on a 100 km trail run for me.