Not many "wide-angle" compacts but, heck, many are wide-angle anyway!

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by JeffOYB@hotmail.com, Jan 7, 2006.

  1. Guest

    Hardly any compacts are officially equivalent to a 28mm film camera
    lens.

    But when I went to the store today and looked at the field of view of
    several compacts they sure seemed wide to me! In fact when I compared
    them side to side with an DSLR with a wide-angle zoom the compacts came
    out at an equivalent of 25mm on the DSLR. But they're only listed as
    35-38mm. What's up? These things are wide-angle to me.

    I'm talking about these compacts: Canon A520 and A610 and Sony DSC-W5.
    They all seem to give a wide view like my old 28mm.

    Anyone know what's really going on here?

    Thanks.

    --JP
     
    , Jan 7, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Re: Not many "wide-angle" compacts but, heck, many are wide-angleanyway!

    writes:

    > Hardly any compacts are officially equivalent to a 28mm film camera
    > lens.
    >
    > But when I went to the store today and looked at the field of view of
    > several compacts they sure seemed wide to me! In fact when I compared
    > them side to side with an DSLR with a wide-angle zoom the compacts came
    > out at an equivalent of 25mm on the DSLR. But they're only listed as
    > 35-38mm. What's up? These things are wide-angle to me.


    25mm on most DSLRs (those with APS-C size sensor) gives the same field
    of view as 40mm on a 35mm film/sensor. This seems to be in line with
    your observations.

    --
    Måns Rullgård
     
    =?iso-8859-1?q?M=E5ns_Rullg=E5rd?=, Jan 7, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. ASAAR Guest

    On 6 Jan 2006 17:21:14 -0800, wrote:

    > In fact when I compared
    > them side to side with an DSLR with a wide-angle zoom the compacts came
    > out at an equivalent of 25mm on the DSLR. But they're only listed as
    > 35-38mm. What's up? These things are wide-angle to me.
    >
    > I'm talking about these compacts: Canon A520 and A610 and Sony DSC-W5.
    > They all seem to give a wide view like my old 28mm.


    Did that DSLR happen to have a FF sensor? If not, and you relied
    on the zoom lens setting to base your 25mm on, you may have misled
    yourself. If the DSLR has a sensor with a 1.5 "crop factor", a true
    25mm focal length lens would be equivalent to a 37.5 mm lens mounted
    on a 35mm film camera (or DSLR with a FF sensor). This would be
    very close to the wide setting of the lens on an A520, A610 or W5.
    Have you checked the field of view of a Canon S80 or Nikon 8400?
     
    ASAAR, Jan 7, 2006
    #3
  4. Mark² Guest

    wrote:
    > Hardly any compacts are officially equivalent to a 28mm film camera
    > lens.
    >
    > But when I went to the store today and looked at the field of view of
    > several compacts they sure seemed wide to me! In fact when I compared
    > them side to side with an DSLR with a wide-angle zoom the compacts
    > came out at an equivalent of 25mm on the DSLR. But they're only
    > listed as 35-38mm. What's up? These things are wide-angle to me.
    >
    > I'm talking about these compacts: Canon A520 and A610 and Sony DSC-W5.
    > They all seem to give a wide view like my old 28mm.
    >
    > Anyone know what's really going on here?
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > --JP


    Unless you picked up a professional, $3000-$8000 dollar Canon 1-Series DSLR
    that uses a FULL FRAME sensor...which I highly doubt...you were looking at
    only a portion of the frame that 25mm lens would normally project on a
    film-based SLR. This is called the "crop factor" or "field of view crop"
    etc., that happens with DSLRs that use a sensor which is smaller than the
    35mm film frame. The result is a cropping of the outer portion of the image
    teh 25mm lens was designed to project...to the tune of 1.5x or 1.6x,
    depending on the body.
     
    Mark², Jan 7, 2006
    #4
  5. Bruce Hoult Guest

    In article <>,
    wrote:

    > Hardly any compacts are officially equivalent to a 28mm film camera
    > lens.
    >
    > But when I went to the store today and looked at the field of view of
    > several compacts they sure seemed wide to me! In fact when I compared
    > them side to side with an DSLR with a wide-angle zoom the compacts came
    > out at an equivalent of 25mm on the DSLR. But they're only listed as
    > 35-38mm. What's up? These things are wide-angle to me.


    That's probably because 25mm on a typical DSLR with a 2/3 frame sensor
    *is* the same angle of view as a 38mm lens on a 35mm film camera.


    > I'm talking about these compacts: Canon A520 and A610 and Sony DSC-W5.
    > They all seem to give a wide view like my old 28mm.
    >
    > Anyone know what's really going on here?


    I suspect you've forgotten how wide 28mm is on a 35mm camera.

    --
    Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
    Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------
     
    Bruce Hoult, Jan 7, 2006
    #5
  6. wrote:
    > Hardly any compacts are officially equivalent to a 28mm film camera
    > lens.
    >
    > But when I went to the store today and looked at the field of view of
    > several compacts they sure seemed wide to me! In fact when I compared
    > them side to side with an DSLR with a wide-angle zoom the compacts
    > came out at an equivalent of 25mm on the DSLR. But they're only
    > listed as 35-38mm. What's up? These things are wide-angle to me.
    >
    > I'm talking about these compacts: Canon A520 and A610 and Sony DSC-W5.
    > They all seem to give a wide view like my old 28mm.
    >
    > Anyone know what's really going on here?
    >
    > Thanks.
    >
    > --JP


    It sounds as if you've forgotten what your old 28mm actually did!

    There are a few compact cameras with a 28mm (equivalent) wide angle, and
    the Nikon 8400 and Sony DCS-R1 have a 24mm wide-angle.

    As others have said, most DSLRs today crop to just the centre of the
    frame, those with a 1.6 crop turning the field of view of a 24mm lens into
    that of a 38mm one.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jan 7, 2006
    #6
  7. Guest

    I guess I should bring in my old camera to the store. Or just test one
    of their film cameras. It seems WAY NUTTY to me for makers to put
    things like "18-100mm zoom" marking on their zoom barrels when that's
    not what you're really getting. Unless it is a correct measurement but
    just not the same as the same numbers on a film camera. I suppose
    that's the case. I guess one just needs to be aware that when they get
    their digiDSLR (unless it's a fancy fullframe sensor) to "28mm" that
    they're not going to get the same view as their film cam set on 28mm.
    Whew! Thanks for the info, everyone. I get it now. --JP
     
    , Jan 8, 2006
    #7
  8. Guest

    Thanks everyone for the helpful info! Now I know. I should make my
    instore comparisons using a FILM cam.

    Say, with the view-cropping factor thing, I want to be sure I have this
    straight: Is what you see in the viewfinder or LCD what you're going to
    see on your print/file? I hope they aren't messing too much with that!
    I need some WYSIWYG. Thanks, JP
     
    , Jan 9, 2006
    #8
  9. Bruce Hoult Guest

    In article <>,
    wrote:

    > Say, with the view-cropping factor thing, I want to be sure I have this
    > straight: Is what you see in the viewfinder or LCD what you're going to
    > see on your print/file?


    Yes.

    Well, just as with a film camera, the actual picture usually shows 5% or
    so more than the viewfinder does, just to be on the safe side.

    --
    Bruce | 41.1670S | \ spoken | -+-
    Hoult | 174.8263E | /\ here. | ----------O----------
     
    Bruce Hoult, Jan 9, 2006
    #9
  10. m Ransley Guest

    Re: Not many "wide-angle" compacts but, heck, many are wide-angle a...

    The sony w5 is not wide angle at all, I wish it was I have one, but at
    least it has threads and takes converters. For wide wait for Kodaks new
    400$ 23mm, 180 degree panarama 3 shot auto stitch, dual lens, 23mm and
    3x zoom, 5 mp camera. Worth the wait I will bet. P&S out today have a
    very narrow range.
     
    m Ransley, Jan 9, 2006
    #10
  11. Paul Rubin Guest

    writes:
    > It seems WAY NUTTY to me for makers to put
    > things like "18-100mm zoom" marking on their zoom barrels when that's
    > not what you're really getting.


    I've never seen any manufacturers do that. I see "18-100mm" or
    whatever in advertising literature or spec sheets, to indicate the
    lens's field of view in 35mm terms, but the numbers I see on lens
    barrels are always the actual focal length of the actual lens.

    > I guess one just needs to be aware that when they get their digiDSLR
    > (unless it's a fancy fullframe sensor) to "28mm" that they're not
    > going to get the same view as their film cam set on 28mm.


    Yes, DSLR's until recently have not been newbie cameras, and users
    have been expected to know about this.
     
    Paul Rubin, Jan 9, 2006
    #11
    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. lostends
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    1,409
    lostends
    Aug 14, 2006
  2. John H
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    288
    John H
    Feb 24, 2006
  3. JohnR66

    10MP compacts. I am not impressed

    JohnR66, Sep 22, 2006, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    638
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)
    Oct 5, 2006
  4. Charles Packer

    Not wide-angle but still distorts

    Charles Packer, Apr 7, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    291
    Charles Packer
    Apr 9, 2008
  5. Dauphin de Viennois

    Re: DSLR lenses not good wide open at wide angle?

    Dauphin de Viennois, Jul 16, 2008, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    534
    Roy Smith
    Jul 16, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page