says "90 to 400 mm (35 mm equivalent)" and "Maximum magnification: Approx. 0.19x / 0.38x (35mm film camera equivalent) ". Can anyone tell me what this equates to? I'd preferably prefer to buy a camera package with a separate zoom lens, any recommendations for decent UK-based sites or shops? I'm currently looking at the Pixmania site.
> I'm looking to buy a mid-range SLR digital camera, are there any > pitfalls I should be aware of?
Many, I'm afraid. It's not easy to know where to start.
> Also, I'm looking at zoom lenses to go with it, how do I work out what > magnification they are, eg 5x, 10x etc? For instance, this lens: > http://shop.panasonic.co.uk/invt/hfs045200e
> says "90 to 400 mm (35 mm equivalent)" and "Maximum magnification: > Approx. 0.19x / 0.38x (35mm film camera equivalent)".
SLR users don't tend to talk about 5x, etc, especially those of us who have been taking photos since the 1950s. What's interesting are the two numbers of the zoom, e.g. 35 to 135, 90 to 400, etc.
50/55mm is 1:1 real-life size. So your lens above is a zoom, from medium long to very long, a little more than 4x zoom range. To confuse matters, many mid-range digital SLR cameras have sensors smaller than an original 35mm film frame, so the magnification of any lens is different from when you use it on a "full frame sensor" camera. If you need to know why, you should read up on focal length, e.g.: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length.
Why did you choose this lens? Would you never want to use a wide-angle lens, as if you only have one like this, you wouldn't be able to.
> Can anyone tell me what this equates to? I'd preferably prefer to buy > a camera package with a separate zoom lens, any recommendations for > decent UK-based sites or shops? I'm currently looking at the Pixmania site.
Pixmania will deliver at a good price, but I have heard that they are not as friendly as some if anything happens to go wrong. I tend to use Amazon if they have what I want. Here's your lens:
Jessops is well established, but the shops have gone right downhill since the 80s, unless you happen to live near one of their large stores such as the one in Manchester.
>> I'm looking to buy a mid-range SLR digital camera, are there any pitfalls >> I should be aware of?
> Many, I'm afraid. It's not easy to know where to start.
>> Also, I'm looking at zoom lenses to go with it, how do I work out what >> magnification they are, eg 5x, 10x etc? For instance, this lens: >> http://shop.panasonic.co.uk/invt/hfs045200e
>> says "90 to 400 mm (35 mm equivalent)" and "Maximum magnification: >> Approx. 0.19x / 0.38x (35mm film camera equivalent)".
> SLR users don't tend to talk about 5x, etc, especially those of us who > have been taking photos since the 1950s. What's interesting are the two > numbers of the zoom, e.g. 35 to 135, 90 to 400, etc.
> 50/55mm is 1:1 real-life size. So your lens above is a zoom, from medium > long to very long, a little more than 4x zoom range. To confuse matters, > many mid-range digital SLR cameras have sensors smaller than an original > 35mm film frame, so the magnification of any lens is different from when > you use it on a "full frame sensor" camera. If you need to know why, you > should read up on focal length, e.g.: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length.
> Why did you choose this lens? Would you never want to use a wide-angle > lens, as if you only have one like this, you wouldn't be able to.
It was really just an example, as one of the cameras I was looking at came as a package with this lens as a 2nd lens here:
>> Can anyone tell me what this equates to? I'd preferably prefer to buy a >> camera package with a separate zoom lens, any recommendations for decent >> UK-based sites or shops? I'm currently looking at the Pixmania site.
> Pixmania will deliver at a good price, but I have heard that they are not > as friendly as some if anything happens to go wrong. I tend to use Amazon > if they have what I want. Here's your lens:
Thanks for the advice, I'm just browsing at the moment, I usually do a Google on a particular model to see if I can get it cheaper elsewhere. I've decided to take photography more seriously as a hobby, I already have a digi camera with a 10x zoom, I'd be using a new one for scenery, wildlife etc., so I was interested to see how the SLR zoom factors compared to what I already have. If I wanted, say, better than 10x zoom, is there a rough way to find out which lens would offer this?
One last question, can I use a remote shutter release with all SLR's or is it model-specific?
>>> I'm looking to buy a mid-range SLR digital camera, are there any >>> pitfalls I should be aware of?
>> Many, I'm afraid. It's not easy to know where to start.
>>> Also, I'm looking at zoom lenses to go with it, how do I work out >>> what magnification they are, eg 5x, 10x etc? For instance, this lens: >>> http://shop.panasonic.co.uk/invt/hfs045200e
>>> says "90 to 400 mm (35 mm equivalent)" and "Maximum magnification: >>> Approx. 0.19x / 0.38x (35mm film camera equivalent)".
>> SLR users don't tend to talk about 5x, etc, especially those of us who >> have been taking photos since the 1950s. What's interesting are the >> two numbers of the zoom, e.g. 35 to 135, 90 to 400, etc.
>> 50/55mm is 1:1 real-life size. So your lens above is a zoom, from >> medium long to very long, a little more than 4x zoom range. To >> confuse matters, many mid-range digital SLR cameras have sensors >> smaller than an original 35mm film frame, so the magnification of any >> lens is different from when you use it on a "full frame sensor" >> camera. If you need to know why, you should read up on focal length, >> e.g.: >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Focal_length.
>> Why did you choose this lens? Would you never want to use a >> wide-angle lens, as if you only have one like this, you wouldn't be >> able to.
> It was really just an example, as one of the cameras I was looking at > came as a package with this lens as a 2nd lens here:
That's surprising for a "standard" lens - 14mm is very wide angle and the whole zoom range is wide angle, compared with the standard 50mm, although it would be different on a small sensor SLR.
>>> Can anyone tell me what this equates to? I'd preferably prefer to buy >>> a camera package with a separate zoom lens, any recommendations for >>> decent UK-based sites or shops? I'm currently looking at the Pixmania >>> site.
>> Pixmania will deliver at a good price, but I have heard that they are >> not as friendly as some if anything happens to go wrong. I tend to >> use Amazon if they have what I want. Here's your lens:
> Thanks for the advice, I'm just browsing at the moment, I usually do a > Google on a particular model to see if I can get it cheaper elsewhere. > I've decided to take photography more seriously as a hobby, I already > have a digi camera with a 10x zoom, I'd be using a new one for scenery, > wildlife etc., so I was interested to see how the SLR zoom factors > compared to what I already have. If I wanted, say, better than 10x zoom, > is there a rough way to find out which lens would offer this?
Large range zoom SLR lenses are large and heavy. Few amateurs will have a lens with a 10x zoom range - I'm not sure I've ever held one.
The bigger and more complex the lens, the more compromises have to be made, so the cost goes up dramatically for a good lens as the compromises have to be ironed out with more expensive engineering. The one above costs about £2000. It would not be sensible to put it on a cheap SLR.
But the whole point of an SLR is that you can change the lens. So you can buy two or three decent lenses and change them around. I have a cheap 55 - 80 which came with the camera (it's not very good, but it has the benefit of being light weight), a very good 35 - 135 which I bought 15 or more years ago for my first Canon EOS film SLR, and a 100 - 300 which I bought from a friend and which isn't much cop, to be honest.
> One last question, can I use a remote shutter release with all SLR's or > is it model-specific?
My Canon has an optional remote shutter release (infra-red, like a tiny TV remote) which I believe will work with any Canon SLR - I think it cost me £10. It seems likely that other major SRL makes will have a similar option, but any decent camera shop will tell you.
In article <VD74m.52049$OO7.19...@text.news.virginmedia.com>, the Omrud
<usenet.om...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote: > > It was really just an example, as one of the cameras I was looking at > > came as a package with this lens as a 2nd lens here:
> That's surprising for a "standard" lens - 14mm is very wide angle and > the whole zoom range is wide angle, compared with the standard 50mm, > although it would be different on a small sensor SLR.
the lumix has a 2x equivalence, so the 14-45 is effectively a 28-90mm in 35mm terms, which is very standard.
> > Thanks for the advice, I'm just browsing at the moment, I usually do a > > Google on a particular model to see if I can get it cheaper elsewhere. > > I've decided to take photography more seriously as a hobby, I already > > have a digi camera with a 10x zoom, I'd be using a new one for scenery, > > wildlife etc., so I was interested to see how the SLR zoom factors > > compared to what I already have. If I wanted, say, better than 10x zoom, > > is there a rough way to find out which lens would offer this?
> Large range zoom SLR lenses are large and heavy. Few amateurs will have > a lens with a 10x zoom range - I'm not sure I've ever held one.
actually most amateurs buy super-zooms. it's the pros that want higher quality shorter range lenses.
> The bigger and more complex the lens, the more compromises have to be > made, so the cost goes up dramatically for a good lens as the > compromises have to be ironed out with more expensive engineering. The > one above costs about £2000. It would not be sensible to put it on a > cheap SLR.
actually it would, as the success of nikon's 18-200mm shows (11x). it retailed for $699 new but was backordered for as much as 6 months and even sold for as much as twice that price on ebay. sigma wanted a piece of the action and came out with their 18-200mm, followed by canon and now there is even an tamron 18-270mm zoom, a 15x range.
Mentalguy2k8 wrote: > Also, I'm looking at zoom lenses to go with it, how do I work out what > magnification they are, eg 5x, 10x etc? For instance, this lens:
> says "90 to 400 mm (35 mm equivalent)" and "Maximum magnification: > Approx. 0.19x / 0.38x (35mm film camera equivalent) > ". Can anyone tell me what this equates to?
When dealing with 35mm equivalences, divide the new lens focal length by 50mm (normal 35mm lens); eg, 400/50 = 8X...90/50 = 1.8X
The "0.19x / 0.38x (35mm film camera equivalent)" makes no sense to me. It seems to be saying that the 90>400mm lens is covering from 0.19% to 0.38% of the area when compared to a normal lens for a 35mm camera; if so, it is incorrect. In the first place, 90>400mm will give you something more like 0.55% to 0.125%; in the second place, going from 90 to 400 mm will change the coverage by a factor of 4.4. not 2 as indicated in 0.19 vs 0.38.
--
dadiOH ____________________________
dadiOH's dandies v3.06... ...a help file of info about MP3s, recording from LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that. Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
That's not an SLR, it has no optical viewfinder, just the LCD on the back.
The advantage of interchangeable lenses is that you can get better quality lenses with a smaller zoom range or no zoom at all, or more light gathering ability, so for better results you don't want a big 10x specification.
The advantage of larger sensor models is low light performance, that one is half size of full frame DSLRs, most DSLRs are 3/4 size which is the best value, the half size models are a little smaller but it's less common, one step up and you get a price break due to mass marketing.
If you don't need low light performance, don't want to bother changing lenses and want 10x zoom, get a P&S.
> One last question, can I use a remote shutter release with all SLR's or > is it model-specific?
> says "90 to 400 mm (35 mm equivalent)" and "Maximum magnification: > Approx. 0.19x / 0.38x (35mm film camera equivalent) > ". Can anyone tell me what this equates to? I'd preferably prefer to buy > a camera package with a separate zoom lens, any recommendations for > decent UK-based sites or shops? I'm currently looking at the Pixmania site.
AFAIK "Magnification" is really for close-up photography. It says how big the image on the sensor is compared to the size of the subject. It depends on how close the object can be before the lens can't focus on it. A true "macro" lens has a 1:1 ratio. -- Bertrand
Mentalguy2k8 wrote: > Thanks for the advice, I'm just browsing at the moment, I usually do a > Google on a particular model to see if I can get it cheaper elsewhere. > I've decided to take photography more seriously as a hobby, I already > have a digi camera with a 10x zoom, I'd be using a new one for scenery, > wildlife etc., so I was interested to see how the SLR zoom factors > compared to what I already have. If I wanted, say, better than 10x zoom, > is there a rough way to find out which lens would offer this?
If it's for wildlife, don't bother with a G1, the viewfinder won't cut it. You need an optical VF. And the G1 has very few zoom lenses available (actually: one), don't count on adapting an Olympus lens on it, in most cases the AF won't work.
The advantage in going with the big names (Nikon, Canon, and to some extent Pentax and Sony is that you will find a big range of lenses (and other complements: flash, remotes, etc...) from the body brand or from OEM brands (Tamron, Sigma, Tokina...) and this competition keeps the prices at reasonable levels. Olympus is also an option since it has a good choice of lenses (not so cheap but usually good) but there are very few OEM ones.
Don't focus too much on zoom "power", your current zoom is at best a 500mm equivalent, this is like a 300mm "real" on DSLRs with APS-C sensors. Using a longer lens efficiently requires a lot of training.
I went though the same questions as you about a 9 months ago, looked hard at the G1 (had a Lumix FZ8) and went for a Canon 450D. Turned out to be a very good decision :-)
> One last question, can I use a remote shutter release with all SLR's or > is it model-specific?
It's usually model- or brand- specific, due to different plugs. The plug on the G1's official remote is a 4-contact jack. A plain remote (half-press for focus, full press for shutter) is normally not expensive (15 UKP).
>> That's surprising for a "standard" lens - 14mm is very wide angle and >> the whole zoom range is wide angle, compared with the standard 50mm, >> although it would be different on a small sensor SLR.
> the lumix has a 2x equivalence, so the 14-45 is effectively a 28-90mm > in 35mm terms, which is very standard.
>> > Thanks for the advice, I'm just browsing at the moment, I usually do a >> > Google on a particular model to see if I can get it cheaper elsewhere. >> > I've decided to take photography more seriously as a hobby, I already >> > have a digi camera with a 10x zoom, I'd be using a new one for scenery, >> > wildlife etc., so I was interested to see how the SLR zoom factors >> > compared to what I already have. If I wanted, say, better than 10x >> > zoom, >> > is there a rough way to find out which lens would offer this?
>> Large range zoom SLR lenses are large and heavy. Few amateurs will have >> a lens with a 10x zoom range - I'm not sure I've ever held one.
> actually most amateurs buy super-zooms. it's the pros that want higher > quality shorter range lenses.
>> The bigger and more complex the lens, the more compromises have to be >> made, so the cost goes up dramatically for a good lens as the >> compromises have to be ironed out with more expensive engineering. The >> one above costs about £2000. It would not be sensible to put it on a >> cheap SLR.
> actually it would, as the success of nikon's 18-200mm shows (11x). it > retailed for $699 new but was backordered for as much as 6 months and > even sold for as much as twice that price on ebay. sigma wanted a > piece of the action and came out with their 18-200mm, followed by canon > and now there is even an tamron 18-270mm zoom, a 15x range.
I don't think a 200mm or a 270mm lens is a big lens. I have a 100-400 mm zoom and it isn't really a big lens. The big lens have to be fastened to a tripod, you can't hold them. The 'x' rating used for P&S is rather useless when talking about DSLRs. The 15x example above is 130 mm short of my '4x' (100-400), by mine has a lot more reach.
nospam <nos...@nospam.invalid> wrote: > the Omrud <usenet.om...@gEXPUNGEmail.com> wrote: >> > Thanks for the advice, I'm just browsing at the moment, I usually do a >> > Google on a particular model to see if I can get it cheaper elsewhere.
Beware of too cheap a price, there seem to be many shops around that either take your money but won't send you a camera, or where items included by the camera maker (like, say, the battery) turns out to be an expensive extra, and of course bait and switch offers and so on.
If at all possible, take different cameras into your hands to see if they and their size feel right to your hands. It's no fun to handle a camera you don't like. (For me that means a battery grip isn't optional, I've got larger hands.)
>> Large range zoom SLR lenses are large and heavy. Few amateurs will have >> a lens with a 10x zoom range - I'm not sure I've ever held one. > actually most amateurs buy super-zooms. it's the pros that want higher > quality shorter range lenses.
Yep.
>> The bigger and more complex the lens, the more compromises have to be >> made, so the cost goes up dramatically for a good lens as the >> compromises have to be ironed out with more expensive engineering. The >> one above costs about £2000. It would not be sensible to put it on a >> cheap SLR. > actually it would, as the success of nikon's 18-200mm shows (11x). it > retailed for $699 new but was backordered for as much as 6 months and > even sold for as much as twice that price on ebay. sigma wanted a > piece of the action and came out with their 18-200mm, followed by canon > and now there is even an tamron 18-270mm zoom, a 15x range.
Canon had a super zoom lens since January 1993: the 35-350mm f/3.5-5.6L USL and an update for the 1.3x crop cameras, the 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM (June 2004). Of course, these are professional lenses, well build, with an at least acceptable image quality (compared to the usual lenses and high end zooms, not compared to the consumer super zooms). However, image quality costs money ...
The convenience of super zoom lenses is bought with slowness, distortion, vignetting, less sharpness, less resolution.
> I'm looking to buy a mid-range SLR digital camera, are there any pitfalls > I should be aware of?
> I'm currently looking at the Pixmania site.
> Thanks for any help.
Just be aware that Pixmania is not UK based, so you won't be able to rely on UK law if you have problems with the items after you've bought them. Buying on a Credit Card may give you some measure of protection, but check your CC T's &C's before doing it, and also check whether they will charge you a premium for an 'overseas' sale
If it comes with a charger there is a chance that it'll have a European rather than a UK plug and I have seen people complaining that the user manuals aren't in English.
In addition to allowing lenses to be changed, dSLRs have three maybe less obvious advantages over standard P&S cameras. - Larger sensors means that each pixel on the sensor will be bigger, meaning that more light will be captured, giving better performance at lower light levels. Don't forget that (for a given sensor size) adding more pixels will make the size of each pixel smaller, which will reduce the low light advantage. - SLR lenses tend to have bigger apertures, which means that you can more easily use depth of field as part of your photographic toolkit. - SLRs should have easier access to manual modes than most P&S cameras; so the more you put into your photography, the more you'll get out of it.
On Mon, 6 Jul 2009 15:17:46 +0100, "OG" <o...@gwynnefamily.org.uk> wrote:
>- Larger sensors means that each pixel on the sensor will be bigger, meaning >that more light will be captured, giving better performance at lower light >levels. Don't forget that (for a given sensor size) adding more pixels will >make the size of each pixel smaller, which will reduce the low light >advantage.
Does this mean that in low light it would be a better option to set my D80 to take 6mp shots instead of 10?
If so then this is the first time ive ever heard of it.
>> - Larger sensors means that each pixel on the sensor will be bigger, meaning >> that more light will be captured, giving better performance at lower light >> levels. Don't forget that (for a given sensor size) adding more pixels will >> make the size of each pixel smaller, which will reduce the low light >> advantage.
> Does this mean that in low light it would be a better option to set my > D80 to take 6mp shots instead of 10?
Only if you have variable sized pixel sensor sites or setting a lower pixel number "gangs" sensor sites together to form higher gain sensor sites.
>>- Larger sensors means that each pixel on the sensor will be bigger, >>meaning >>that more light will be captured, giving better performance at lower light >>levels. Don't forget that (for a given sensor size) adding more pixels >>will >>make the size of each pixel smaller, which will reduce the low light >>advantage.
> Does this mean that in low light it would be a better option to set my > D80 to take 6mp shots instead of 10?
Probably not, for the reason that Alan Browne has outlined; but you could try some experimentation of your own.
|
