I've had a Canon 450D previously and now I have a Canon 60D. With my 450D, I had Canon 100-400mm lens. Unfortunately, both camera and lens were stolen during a burglary. I was able to replace the 450D with a 60D but due to other losses I wasn't able to replace the 400mm lens with anything other than the 18-135mm kit lens that came with the 60D.
I'm currently struggling financially to get a proper lens for my 60D.
I reviewed an article on the new Canon SX50 this morning. In short, it has 50x optical zoom, Digic 5 processer, goes up to ISO 6400, has a 4.5 stop IS and a few other nifty features.
My question is, with all the power in this SX50, is it really necessary to spend the extra money on the 60D (which I already did) and proper lens or two? It seems to me that SX50 can do pretty much 90% of what the DSLR can do. The mega pixels is a bit lower and I imagine the image sensor is a bit smaller. But does that really matter? How much of a different would I see?
I guess you will ask me what I intend to do with my camera. Look, I'm a beginner and even though I would like it, I will probably not ever make to a professional wildlife photographer. I do take thousands of personal pictures in Kurger Park etc. I would also like to start sending in my pictures to Weg, WegRy, Getaway etc.
So, can I compete with the big guns using only a SX50? Waat would the difference really be?http://www.canon-europe.com/For_Home...erShot_SX50HS/