Dave
Basically, Iâm looking to get a new camera, and will probably get an SLR. Itâs the first time Iâve bought an SLR, so donât really understand a lot of the terminology!
With my compact, I get a x4 zoom on it. With some of the high end SLR look-alike cameras Iâve seen, I can get x18 zoom â I understand all of that (sort of). But, when I look at a âproperâ SLR, it doesnât seem to use the xZoom rating, rather mm, and was just wondering how these translate into xZoom equivalent! For example, 1 camera I looked at comes with an 18-55mm lens & a 55-200mm lens and wondered how that compared with a x18 zoom camera.
thanks
Answer
All camera lenses will have a focal length measured in mm, even point and shoot lenses. If you check the specs for a camera with a built-in lens, you'll find the lens equivalent in 35mm film cameras posted, because 35mm cameras were a standard for so long. To find the specs in mm for any camera, visit the camera database at http://www.dpreview.com
Measuring the equivalent in 35mm terms is the most accurate way to do a comparison, because it equalizes everything, which the xZoom measurement doesn't do. Here's why:
To get an xZoom measurement, you take the big # and divide it by the smaller one. So 55mm/18mm = 3.05x, which means it's a 3x lens. However, 200mm/55mm = 3.64x. If you just compared the xzoom powers, the lenses would appear to be nearly identical (between 3x and 4x), yet they are very different lenses, with the first lens being wide angle to mild telephoto and the second lens being a telephoto zoom. They have very different looks through the viewfinder.
So, like I said, convert everything to a 35mm equivalent. For a digital SLR, multiply the lens by 1.5, so an 18-55mm has a 35mm equivalent view of 27-82.5mm
Now, for comparsion: the Canon A570 IS, which has a 4x zoom. Look at the lens specs here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona570is/
35mm to 140mm equivalent lens per the specs.
So, the 18-55mm spec again: 27-82.5mm This means the 18-55mm lens will be wider (27mm is wider than 35mm), but have less telephoto power (82.5mm isn't as powerful as 140mm). Adding in the 55-200mm, which is 82.5-300mm equivalent--the two lenses cover more telephoto now too from 27.5mm to 300mm (vs. 35mm to 140mm).
Now, let's look at an 18x zoom, the Panasonic FZ18:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz18/
Lens specs: 28-504mm
The 18-55mm covers 27-82.5mm.
The 55-200mm covers 82.5-300mm
Bottom line: the two lenses won't be as powerful, but it will still cover a very wide range (200mm / 18mm = 11.1x)
Finally, while LEM is mostly correct (and a thumbs up to him), he is somewhat mistaken about Sigma/Tamron/Tokina third party lenses. The fact is that those companies make some unique and very good lenses. For example, while Nikon makes an 80-400mm VR lens, Sigma makes an 80-400 optical stabilized lens with a built-in motor. Optically, the Sigma is the equal or superior of the Nikon. Yet it's far less expensive! Another example: Only Tamron makes an 18-250mm lens (an equivalent 13.8x zoom) for SLRs. Yet another example: the Sigma 10-20mm is relatively inexpensive, yet performs fantastically for wide angle and I've seen this lens used by pros for interior photos because it doesn't distort.
So, I disagree with LEM on third party lenses. If you know what you are doing, it's possible to get superb third party lenses, including lenses you can't find or get from the big camera companies, for a lot less money.
All camera lenses will have a focal length measured in mm, even point and shoot lenses. If you check the specs for a camera with a built-in lens, you'll find the lens equivalent in 35mm film cameras posted, because 35mm cameras were a standard for so long. To find the specs in mm for any camera, visit the camera database at http://www.dpreview.com
Measuring the equivalent in 35mm terms is the most accurate way to do a comparison, because it equalizes everything, which the xZoom measurement doesn't do. Here's why:
To get an xZoom measurement, you take the big # and divide it by the smaller one. So 55mm/18mm = 3.05x, which means it's a 3x lens. However, 200mm/55mm = 3.64x. If you just compared the xzoom powers, the lenses would appear to be nearly identical (between 3x and 4x), yet they are very different lenses, with the first lens being wide angle to mild telephoto and the second lens being a telephoto zoom. They have very different looks through the viewfinder.
So, like I said, convert everything to a 35mm equivalent. For a digital SLR, multiply the lens by 1.5, so an 18-55mm has a 35mm equivalent view of 27-82.5mm
Now, for comparsion: the Canon A570 IS, which has a 4x zoom. Look at the lens specs here:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canona570is/
35mm to 140mm equivalent lens per the specs.
So, the 18-55mm spec again: 27-82.5mm This means the 18-55mm lens will be wider (27mm is wider than 35mm), but have less telephoto power (82.5mm isn't as powerful as 140mm). Adding in the 55-200mm, which is 82.5-300mm equivalent--the two lenses cover more telephoto now too from 27.5mm to 300mm (vs. 35mm to 140mm).
Now, let's look at an 18x zoom, the Panasonic FZ18:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicfz18/
Lens specs: 28-504mm
The 18-55mm covers 27-82.5mm.
The 55-200mm covers 82.5-300mm
Bottom line: the two lenses won't be as powerful, but it will still cover a very wide range (200mm / 18mm = 11.1x)
Finally, while LEM is mostly correct (and a thumbs up to him), he is somewhat mistaken about Sigma/Tamron/Tokina third party lenses. The fact is that those companies make some unique and very good lenses. For example, while Nikon makes an 80-400mm VR lens, Sigma makes an 80-400 optical stabilized lens with a built-in motor. Optically, the Sigma is the equal or superior of the Nikon. Yet it's far less expensive! Another example: Only Tamron makes an 18-250mm lens (an equivalent 13.8x zoom) for SLRs. Yet another example: the Sigma 10-20mm is relatively inexpensive, yet performs fantastically for wide angle and I've seen this lens used by pros for interior photos because it doesn't distort.
So, I disagree with LEM on third party lenses. If you know what you are doing, it's possible to get superb third party lenses, including lenses you can't find or get from the big camera companies, for a lot less money.
Suggestions of DSLR cameras for a newbie?
Mandy H
Something on the less expensive side because I'm not buying it, it's going to be a gift. I am a beginner I don't need crazy top of the line stuff yet...
Answer
DSLR cameras have the larger sensor so you get a higher quality images. You can change lenses which can be valuable, by allowing to adjust to different needs.
There are a number of good brands so don't be sold on the idea one brand is better than another. I would keep your costs down. I would get a DSLR with a short zoom (like a 18-55mm) to start. No reason to spend more than $425 to $550. Either a 10MP or 12MP will do just fine.
Below, I listed some links, the first link listed below is to a web page that lists the 3 DSLR cameras I am recommending. This list will let you compare features and specs, also it has links to reviews of the cameras, the reviews include sample images from the cameras. Also I included some links to some dealers so that you can try and get the best price. Some dealers have some nice extras, free shipping is very common, and sometimes they are offering a free memory card and/or camera bag. Sometimes you have to click in the âadd to cartâ button to see the actual price.
Here are some models that I think are well worth researching including estimated price range:
Nikon D3000 10MP DSLR Digital Camera with 18-55mm VR Lens - $460 to $480
EOS Rebel XS (1000D) 10MP DSLR Digital Camera Kit w/18-55mm IS Lens - $499 to $525
Pentax K-x 12MP DSLR with 18-55mm Zoom (has HD Video also) - $485 to $525
Pick a price range, some features you know you want, and even consider which camera feels good in your hand as a factor. Plenty of great cameras, get one you like and start learning the principles of photography and you will be on your way to making some great images.
Most people go with Nikon or Canon but, I think the Pentax could be of special interest, since it can do HD video and has excellent quality at higher ISO settings which can be useful in low light places and helping get the picture. These features, especially the HD video, on a Nikon or Canon will cost you $100 to $200 more.
If you have any questions and if you think I can be of help then please do contact me.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
Mark
marksablow.com
DSLR cameras have the larger sensor so you get a higher quality images. You can change lenses which can be valuable, by allowing to adjust to different needs.
There are a number of good brands so don't be sold on the idea one brand is better than another. I would keep your costs down. I would get a DSLR with a short zoom (like a 18-55mm) to start. No reason to spend more than $425 to $550. Either a 10MP or 12MP will do just fine.
Below, I listed some links, the first link listed below is to a web page that lists the 3 DSLR cameras I am recommending. This list will let you compare features and specs, also it has links to reviews of the cameras, the reviews include sample images from the cameras. Also I included some links to some dealers so that you can try and get the best price. Some dealers have some nice extras, free shipping is very common, and sometimes they are offering a free memory card and/or camera bag. Sometimes you have to click in the âadd to cartâ button to see the actual price.
Here are some models that I think are well worth researching including estimated price range:
Nikon D3000 10MP DSLR Digital Camera with 18-55mm VR Lens - $460 to $480
EOS Rebel XS (1000D) 10MP DSLR Digital Camera Kit w/18-55mm IS Lens - $499 to $525
Pentax K-x 12MP DSLR with 18-55mm Zoom (has HD Video also) - $485 to $525
Pick a price range, some features you know you want, and even consider which camera feels good in your hand as a factor. Plenty of great cameras, get one you like and start learning the principles of photography and you will be on your way to making some great images.
Most people go with Nikon or Canon but, I think the Pentax could be of special interest, since it can do HD video and has excellent quality at higher ISO settings which can be useful in low light places and helping get the picture. These features, especially the HD video, on a Nikon or Canon will cost you $100 to $200 more.
If you have any questions and if you think I can be of help then please do contact me.
Hope this helps. Good luck.
Mark
marksablow.com
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar