Canon PowerShot SX40 HS

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Pierre Jelenc, Apr 10, 2012.

  1. I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.) I wonder if anyone
    here has real-life experience with this camera? The specs and reviews
    I've seen on the web look promising, but I haven't seen it mentioned
    in r.f.d except for one announcement of its release last fall.

    Pierre
    --
    Pierre Jelenc
    The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
    The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org
    Pierre Jelenc, Apr 10, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Pierre Jelenc

    Bruce Guest

    (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    >I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    >low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.) I wonder if anyone
    >here has real-life experience with this camera? The specs and reviews
    >I've seen on the web look promising, but I haven't seen it mentioned
    >in r.f.d except for one announcement of its release last fall.



    Low light shooting of bands on stage is perhaps asking too much of a
    camera with a very small sensor and a slow lens (f/5.8 for much of the
    zoom range). Noisy images will be the inevitable result.
    Bruce, Apr 10, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Pierre Jelenc

    RichA Guest

    On Apr 10, 2:28 pm, (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    > I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    > low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.)


    Why?
    Be smart, buy a used DSLR and lens. Even if you have to crop more,
    the detail retained in low light will be better than what that Canon
    will render.
    RichA, Apr 10, 2012
    #3
  4. Pierre Jelenc

    DanP Guest

    On Tuesday, April 10, 2012 7:28:03 PM UTC+1, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
    > I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    > low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.) I wonder if anyone
    > here has real-life experience with this camera? The specs and reviews
    > I've seen on the web look promising, but I haven't seen it mentioned
    > in r.f.d except for one announcement of its release last fall.
    >
    > Pierre
    > --
    > Pierre Jelenc
    > The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
    > The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org


    For low light you need a big sensor and wide aperture.
    If your budget is tight buy a second hand DSLR body and a 50mm f/1.8 lens.

    If you want a long zoom in low light you definitely need a tripod. 50mm is good enough.

    SX40 is close the size of a DSLR, so get a DSLR instead.


    DanP
    DanP, Apr 10, 2012
    #4
  5. In article <>,
    RichA <> wrote:
    >On Apr 10, 2:28?pm, (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    >> I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    >> low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.)

    >
    >Why?
    >Be smart, buy a used DSLR and lens. Even if you have to crop more,
    >the detail retained in low light will be better than what that Canon
    >will render.


    Weight and size. I want a camera I can carry with me all the time in a
    regular bag, together with my umbrella, my book, my sweater on occasion,
    etc.

    Pierre
    --
    Pierre Jelenc
    The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
    The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org
    Pierre Jelenc, Apr 11, 2012
    #5
  6. Pierre Jelenc

    Bruce Guest

    (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:

    >In article <>,
    >RichA <> wrote:
    >>On Apr 10, 2:28?pm, (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    >>> I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    >>> low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.)

    >>
    >>Why?
    >>Be smart, buy a used DSLR and lens. Even if you have to crop more,
    >>the detail retained in low light will be better than what that Canon
    >>will render.

    >
    >Weight and size. I want a camera I can carry with me all the time in a
    >regular bag, together with my umbrella, my book, my sweater on occasion,
    >etc.



    I use, and would recommend, a Panasonic G3 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7
    and Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lenses. It is a light, compact system (Micro
    Four Thirds) and has excellent image quality with 16 MP and low noise
    up to ISO 1600. The results blow away anything you could obtain from
    the Canon SX40 HS because of the much larger Four Thirds sensor.
    Bruce, Apr 12, 2012
    #6
  7. Pierre Jelenc

    DanP Guest

    On Wednesday, 11 April 2012 22:06:00 UTC+1, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
    > In article <>,
    > RichA <> wrote:
    > >On Apr 10, 2:28?pm, (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    > >> I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    > >> low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.)

    > >
    > >Why?
    > >Be smart, buy a used DSLR and lens. Even if you have to crop more,
    > >the detail retained in low light will be better than what that Canon
    > >will render.

    >
    > Weight and size. I want a camera I can carry with me all the time in a
    > regular bag, together with my umbrella, my book, my sweater on occasion,
    > etc.
    >
    > Pierre
    > --
    > Pierre Jelenc
    > The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
    > The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org


    You seem put off by a DSLR or micro four thirds size yet you are looking at SX40. Sizewise they are pretty close yet the sensor performance in low light is noticeable.

    If you buy the SX40 for the reasons you mentioned you will end up not using it.
    At least look for a smaller camera with the same sensor size.


    DanP
    DanP, Apr 12, 2012
    #7
  8. In article <>,
    Bruce <> wrote:
    > (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    >
    >>In article <>,
    >>RichA <> wrote:
    >>>On Apr 10, 2:28?pm, (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    >>>> I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    >>>> low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.)
    >>>
    >>>Why?
    >>>Be smart, buy a used DSLR and lens. Even if you have to crop more,
    >>>the detail retained in low light will be better than what that Canon
    >>>will render.

    >>
    >>Weight and size. I want a camera I can carry with me all the time in a
    >>regular bag, together with my umbrella, my book, my sweater on occasion,
    >>etc.

    >
    >
    >I use, and would recommend, a Panasonic G3 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7
    >and Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lenses. It is a light, compact system (Micro
    >Four Thirds) and has excellent image quality with 16 MP and low noise
    >up to ISO 1600. The results blow away anything you could obtain from
    >the Canon SX40 HS because of the much larger Four Thirds sensor.


    But it's a different kind of sensor as far as I can tell, so size is not
    enough to draw conclusions. I cannot find test pictures of both models
    from the same reviewer. Do you know of any?

    Pierre

    --
    Pierre Jelenc
    The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
    The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org
    Pierre Jelenc, Apr 13, 2012
    #8
  9. In article <28833182.3.1334217899456.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbvf19>,
    DanP <> wrote:
    >
    >You seem put off by a DSLR or micro four thirds size yet you are looking
    >at SX40. Sizewise they are pretty close yet the sensor performance in
    >low light is noticeable.


    I've been carrying a Lumix FZ 20 for years; they're about the same size.

    >If you buy the SX40 for the reasons you mentioned you will end up not using it.
    >At least look for a smaller camera with the same sensor size.


    According to dpreview.com, there aren't any with the new BSI-CMOS and
    image stabilization that also have the ISO range and the articulated LCD,
    both of which are what's missing from the FZ 20. On the other hand, the FZ
    20 has a faster lens, F2.8 through the entire range; still that's not
    enough to compensate for its miserable low-light performance.

    Pierre
    --
    Pierre Jelenc
    The Gigometer www.gigometer.com
    The NYC Beer Guide www.nycbeer.org
    Pierre Jelenc, Apr 13, 2012
    #9
  10. Pierre Jelenc

    Bruce Guest

    (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    >In article <>,
    >Bruce <> wrote:
    >> (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    >>
    >>>In article <>,
    >>>RichA <> wrote:
    >>>>On Apr 10, 2:28?pm, (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:
    >>>>> I am considering getting the Canon PowerShot SX40 HS for indoors,
    >>>>> low-light photography (bands on stage, mostly.)
    >>>>
    >>>>Why?
    >>>>Be smart, buy a used DSLR and lens. Even if you have to crop more,
    >>>>the detail retained in low light will be better than what that Canon
    >>>>will render.
    >>>
    >>>Weight and size. I want a camera I can carry with me all the time in a
    >>>regular bag, together with my umbrella, my book, my sweater on occasion,
    >>>etc.

    >>
    >>
    >>I use, and would recommend, a Panasonic G3 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7
    >>and Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lenses. It is a light, compact system (Micro
    >>Four Thirds) and has excellent image quality with 16 MP and low noise
    >>up to ISO 1600. The results blow away anything you could obtain from
    >>the Canon SX40 HS because of the much larger Four Thirds sensor.

    >
    >But it's a different kind of sensor as far as I can tell, so size is not
    >enough to draw conclusions.



    The difference in sensor size is substantial enough to render any
    discussion of sensor type effectively irrelevant.


    >I cannot find test pictures of both models from the same reviewer.
    >Do you know of any?



    No, because I would not want to waste my time comparing two cameras
    that are such very different performers in the same low light
    situations. I suppose you might find reviews of both cameras at
    DPReview.com. You will definitely find a review of the G3.
    Bruce, Apr 13, 2012
    #10
  11. Pierre Jelenc

    DanP Guest

    On Friday, 13 April 2012 21:57:17 UTC+1, Pierre Jelenc wrote:
    > In article <28833182.3.1334217899456.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@vbvf19>,
    > DanP <> wrote:
    > >
    > >You seem put off by a DSLR or micro four thirds size yet you are looking
    > >at SX40. Sizewise they are pretty close yet the sensor performance in
    > >low light is noticeable.

    >
    > I've been carrying a Lumix FZ 20 for years; they're about the same size.
    >
    > >If you buy the SX40 for the reasons you mentioned you will end up not using it.
    > >At least look for a smaller camera with the same sensor size.

    >
    > According to dpreview.com, there aren't any with the new BSI-CMOS and
    > image stabilization that also have the ISO range and the articulated LCD,
    > both of which are what's missing from the FZ 20. On the other hand, the FZ
    > 20 has a faster lens, F2.8 through the entire range; still that's not
    > enough to compensate for its miserable low-light performance.


    So you are happy with that size.

    So you are happy with that size. Get a bigger sensor camera and a fast lens.

    4 years ago I bought a Canon SX100, small and nice zoom. 2 years later I bought a Canon 500D and the SX100 is gathering dust. I have 3 lenses a 18-55mm IS, a 55-250mm IS and a 50mm f/1.8 which is my favourite and the smallest.

    DanP
    DanP, Apr 14, 2012
    #11
  12. Pierre Jelenc <> wrote:
    > Bruce <> wrote:
    >> (Pierre Jelenc) wrote:


    >>>Weight and size. I want a camera I can carry with me all the time in a
    >>>regular bag, together with my umbrella, my book, my sweater on occasion,
    >>>etc.


    >>I use, and would recommend, a Panasonic G3 with Panasonic 20mm f/1.7
    >>and Olympus 45mm f/1.8 lenses. It is a light, compact system (Micro
    >>Four Thirds) and has excellent image quality with 16 MP and low noise
    >>up to ISO 1600. The results blow away anything you could obtain from
    >>the Canon SX40 HS because of the much larger Four Thirds sensor.


    > But it's a different kind of sensor as far as I can tell, so size is not
    > enough to draw conclusions.


    If you are happy with the size, go for the larger sensor.

    > I cannot find test pictures of both models
    > from the same reviewer. Do you know of any?


    Go to dpreview,
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcg3/17
    and compare to the Canon PowerShot SX230 HS (same BSI-CMOS
    technology, same megapixels, same sensor size) and you'll see that
    the G3 JPEGs at 6400 ISO roughly equal the SX230 JPEGs at 800.
    That's 3 stops difference. If I wanted to shoot in low light
    without flash and had to choose between those 2 ... (and no,
    the SX40 HS will *not* be significantly better at high ISO,
    that's a fact of the sensor size.)

    Look at the feathers next to the clock at the lower right corner,
    at the thread spools in the black box (center bottom) and at the
    fur (straight above it under the KODAK Gray Scale).

    Abd, just for kicks, add the Canon 5D Mark III JPEGs at ISO 25600
    to the fray. Or the Nikon D800 at the same ISO. (Another 2
    stops ...) Or the Nikon D4, which might even have another stop
    up it's sleeves.

    And that's "just" the out of camera JPEGs. Using RAW you can
    get out even more with careful work and denoising.


    And then notice that the lenses (an (FF equivalent) 40mm and an
    FF 90mm) are over a stop faster than the wide angle of the SX40.
    And over 3 stops faster than the tele end! So at "90mm" you'll
    need to set your SX40 to ISO 800 --- and the G3 would need only
    ISO 200 ...

    The only thing you won't get as small and as easy with an
    interchangeable lens camera is the 35x all in one zoom (by
    physical, financial and weight constraints a huge compromise
    everywhere), and you might not find the long end as cheap.
    If that's important to your photograpy, well ...


    -Wolfgang
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Apr 17, 2012
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Sexy Susan

    Re: Canon Powershot A60 vs. Canon Powershot A70

    Sexy Susan, Sep 18, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    395
    Browntimdc
    Sep 22, 2003
  2. KOS
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    510
    Darius Alexander
    Sep 25, 2003
  3. Andrys Basten

    Re: Canon Powershot A60 vs. Canon Powershot A70

    Andrys Basten, Oct 15, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    466
    Timothy Lange
    Oct 15, 2003
  4. John F

    CANON POWERSHOT A80 or CANON POWERSHOT S1 IS ?

    John F, Oct 26, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    510
    Hans-Georg Michna
    Oct 29, 2004
  5. Bruce
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    512
    John Turco
    Oct 27, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page