A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

"Super Zoom" Cameras



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 16th 14, 01:01 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

On 2014-11-15 23:01:40 +0000, John McWilliams said:

On 11/13/14 PDT, 2:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-11-13 20:57:14 +0000, John Turco said:

With these devices now having reached 65x optical zoom (35mm
equivalent), where will it end? What's the practical limit? Will 100x
ever be achieved?

Discuss, please!

John


The old resident expert on these things seems to have dropped off the
planet, and all of us are thankful for that.

Who, Steve Young??


Nope! I speak of the troll who went by any of many shifting identities
one of which was "Superzooms". Needless to say, he was a rabid advocate
of the super zoom cameras of the 2008-2010 era and attacked anybody
shooting with, or recommending any other type of camera.

Fortunately he hasn't been around for 3-4 years now. I think his
mother's basement, somewhere in Minnesota, must have got flooded.
Most of his rants went something like this, perhaps you recall him:

"I am here to be sure to correct all the blatant misinformation,
misconceptions, and lies that you resident-troll pretend-photographer
scum (or just really crappy snapshooters) incessantly spew to the
world. Why should someone who actually OWNS or wants to buy a REAL
camera get the wrong advice from all of you totally ignorant
role-playing boobs.

Tattoo that on your forehead in case you forget tomorrow. But flip it
right to left so you can read it."

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #12  
Old November 16th 14, 02:48 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
John McWilliams
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,945
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

On 11/15/14 PDT, 4:01 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-11-15 23:01:40 +0000, John McWilliams said:

On 11/13/14 PDT, 2:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-11-13 20:57:14 +0000, John Turco said:

With these devices now having reached 65x optical zoom (35mm
equivalent), where will it end? What's the practical limit? Will 100x
ever be achieved?

Discuss, please!

John

The old resident expert on these things seems to have dropped off the
planet, and all of us are thankful for that.

Who, Steve Young??


Nope! I speak of the troll who went by any of many shifting identities
one of which was "Superzooms". Needless to say, he was a rabid advocate
of the super zoom cameras of the 2008-2010 era and attacked anybody
shooting with, or recommending any other type of camera.

Fortunately he hasn't been around for 3-4 years now. I think his
mother's basement, somewhere in Minnesota, must have got flooded.
Most of his rants went something like this, perhaps you recall him:

"I am here to be sure to correct all the blatant misinformation,
misconceptions, and lies that you resident-troll pretend-photographer
scum (or just really crappy snapshooters) incessantly spew to the world.
Why should someone who actually OWNS or wants to buy a REAL camera get
the wrong advice from all of you totally ignorant role-playing boobs.

Tattoo that on your forehead in case you forget tomorrow. But flip it
right to left so you can read it."

Oh, yeah, now I recall. Was that the same boob that went on and on about
some dodgy software and how it was going to blow Adobe away?
  #13  
Old November 16th 14, 03:05 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

On 2014-11-16 01:48:46 +0000, John McWilliams said:

On 11/15/14 PDT, 4:01 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-11-15 23:01:40 +0000, John McWilliams said:

On 11/13/14 PDT, 2:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-11-13 20:57:14 +0000, John Turco said:

With these devices now having reached 65x optical zoom (35mm
equivalent), where will it end? What's the practical limit? Will 100x
ever be achieved?

Discuss, please!

John

The old resident expert on these things seems to have dropped off the
planet, and all of us are thankful for that.

Who, Steve Young??


Nope! I speak of the troll who went by any of many shifting identities
one of which was "Superzooms". Needless to say, he was a rabid advocate
of the super zoom cameras of the 2008-2010 era and attacked anybody
shooting with, or recommending any other type of camera.

Fortunately he hasn't been around for 3-4 years now. I think his
mother's basement, somewhere in Minnesota, must have got flooded.
Most of his rants went something like this, perhaps you recall him:

"I am here to be sure to correct all the blatant misinformation,
misconceptions, and lies that you resident-troll pretend-photographer
scum (or just really crappy snapshooters) incessantly spew to the world.
Why should someone who actually OWNS or wants to buy a REAL camera get
the wrong advice from all of you totally ignorant role-playing boobs.

Tattoo that on your forehead in case you forget tomorrow. But flip it
right to left so you can read it."

Oh, yeah, now I recall. Was that the same boob that went on and on
about some dodgy software and how it was going to blow Adobe away?


That and discovering/finding unique species of moths, and how he was
capable of surviving for weeks in the wild and swamps while on his moth
hunts.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #14  
Old November 16th 14, 03:21 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

On 2014-11-16 02:11:34 +0000, Tony Cooper said:

On Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:05:48 -0800, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2014-11-16 01:48:46 +0000, John McWilliams said:

On 11/15/14 PDT, 4:01 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-11-15 23:01:40 +0000, John McWilliams said:

On 11/13/14 PDT, 2:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-11-13 20:57:14 +0000, John Turco said:

With these devices now having reached 65x optical zoom (35mm
equivalent), where will it end? What's the practical limit? Will 100x
ever be achieved?

Discuss, please!

John

The old resident expert on these things seems to have dropped off the
planet, and all of us are thankful for that.

Who, Steve Young??

Nope! I speak of the troll who went by any of many shifting identities
one of which was "Superzooms". Needless to say, he was a rabid advocate
of the super zoom cameras of the 2008-2010 era and attacked anybody
shooting with, or recommending any other type of camera.

Fortunately he hasn't been around for 3-4 years now. I think his
mother's basement, somewhere in Minnesota, must have got flooded.
Most of his rants went something like this, perhaps you recall him:

"I am here to be sure to correct all the blatant misinformation,
misconceptions, and lies that you resident-troll pretend-photographer
scum (or just really crappy snapshooters) incessantly spew to the world.
Why should someone who actually OWNS or wants to buy a REAL camera get
the wrong advice from all of you totally ignorant role-playing boobs.

Tattoo that on your forehead in case you forget tomorrow. But flip it
right to left so you can read it."

Oh, yeah, now I recall. Was that the same boob that went on and on
about some dodgy software and how it was going to blow Adobe away?


That and discovering/finding unique species of moths, and how he was
capable of surviving for weeks in the wild and swamps while on his moth
hunts.


Wasn't he the guy who photographed a Florida panther? He posted a
postage stamp sized image that was mostly black that could have been
anything from a feral cat to a discarded mop head.


Yup!

--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #15  
Old November 17th 14, 07:50 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Andrew Haley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 141
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

John Turco wrote:
With these devices now having reached 65x optical zoom (35mm
equivalent), where will it end? What's the practical limit? Will 100x
ever be achieved?


The problem is that if you want high quality and a large zoom range
it's going to be very large and costly to make.

It can be done: there is a Fujinon 8.9-900mm f/1.7-4.7 HDTV lens, the
XA101x8.9BESM . (The 35mm equivalent field of view is 35mm - 3537mm.)
It's designed for a 2/3" sensor, i.e. 3.93* crop factor. It is very
expensive: $182,980. Oh, and if 3537mm isn't enough there is a 2*
teleconverter. You've probably watched its images on TV: it's great
for tight zoomed pictures of faces from hundreds of yards away,
e.g. at stadiums and very large festivals.

So, you can have it today: the only questions are whether you really
want something that big and how much money you've got.

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/...xa101x89-besm/

Andrew.
  #16  
Old November 17th 14, 08:02 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

In article , Andrew
Haley wrote:

With these devices now having reached 65x optical zoom (35mm
equivalent), where will it end? What's the practical limit? Will 100x
ever be achieved?


The problem is that if you want high quality and a large zoom range
it's going to be very large and costly to make.


not necessarily.

the panasonic fz200 has a 25-600mm (equivalent) constant f/2.8, which
itself is rather impressive, but even more so when on a fairly decent
camera which is not at all large and not at all costly.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz200

It can be done: there is a Fujinon 8.9-900mm f/1.7-4.7 HDTV lens, the
XA101x8.9BESM . (The 35mm equivalent field of view is 35mm - 3537mm.)
It's designed for a 2/3" sensor, i.e. 3.93* crop factor. It is very
expensive: $182,980. Oh, and if 3537mm isn't enough there is a 2*
teleconverter. You've probably watched its images on TV: it's great
for tight zoomed pictures of faces from hundreds of yards away,
e.g. at stadiums and very large festivals.

So, you can have it today: the only questions are whether you really
want something that big and how much money you've got.

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/...xa101x89-besm/


how is that relevant for a normal everyday camera? oh yea, it isn't.
  #17  
Old November 17th 14, 10:09 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
Savageduck[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 16,487
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

On 2014-11-17 19:02:00 +0000, nospam said:


the panasonic fz200 has a 25-600mm (equivalent) constant f/2.8, which
itself is rather impressive, but even more so when on a fairly decent
camera which is not at all large and not at all costly.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz200


Actually for the shooter looking for a camera with long reach, and who
isn't concerned about sensor size (APS-C, or FF) the FZ200 is a
surprisingly good performer and pretty good value at less than $500.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

  #18  
Old November 17th 14, 10:14 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

In article 2014111713095140194-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom,
Savageduck wrote:

the panasonic fz200 has a 25-600mm (equivalent) constant f/2.8, which
itself is rather impressive, but even more so when on a fairly decent
camera which is not at all large and not at all costly.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz200


Actually for the shooter looking for a camera with long reach, and who
isn't concerned about sensor size (APS-C, or FF) the FZ200 is a
surprisingly good performer and pretty good value at less than $500.


it is indeed. there's another model with a longer zoom but not a
constant f/stop. either way, they're quite good.
  #19  
Old November 18th 14, 01:18 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
M-M[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 33
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

In article , Andrew
Haley wrote:

John Turco wrote:
With these devices now having reached 65x optical zoom (35mm
equivalent), where will it end? What's the practical limit? Will 100x
ever be achieved?


The problem is that if you want high quality and a large zoom range
it's going to be very large and costly to make.

It can be done: there is a Fujinon 8.9-900mm f/1.7-4.7 HDTV lens, the
XA101x8.9BESM . (The 35mm equivalent field of view is 35mm - 3537mm.)
It's designed for a 2/3" sensor, i.e. 3.93* crop factor. It is very
expensive: $182,980. Oh, and if 3537mm isn't enough there is a 2*
teleconverter. You've probably watched its images on TV: it's great
for tight zoomed pictures of faces from hundreds of yards away,
e.g. at stadiums and very large festivals.

So, you can have it today: the only questions are whether you really
want something that big and how much money you've got.

http://www.fujifilmusa.com/products/...xa101x89-besm/

Andrew.


For a whole lot less you can get a spotting scope with a camera
attachment. Of course you're talking about f/32.

--
m-m
http://www.mhmyers.com
  #20  
Old November 20th 14, 11:22 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Andrew Haley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 141
Default "Super Zoom" Cameras

nospam wrote:
In article , Andrew
Haley wrote:

With these devices now having reached 65x optical zoom (35mm
equivalent), where will it end? What's the practical limit? Will 100x
ever be achieved?


The problem is that if you want high quality and a large zoom range
it's going to be very large and costly to make.


not necessarily.

which itself is rather impressive, but even more so when on a fairly
decent camera which is not at all large and not at all costly.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonic-lumix-dmc-fz200


Unless I am very much mistaken, 600 / 25 = 24. Not 100.

The question is "What is the practical limit" for a zoom range, and
the OP already mentioned 65x, so 24x is irrelevant as an answer. The
right answer is that there isn't a limit, really: it depends on how
much quality you want and the cost and weight you're prepared to
tolerate.

At the long end of that Panasonic's range, f/2.8 is a 38mm aperture.
Impressive (if true) but nowhere near 100 x, which would require the
lens aperture to be 160mm.

The things which matter are physical limits, and the big Fujinon
exemplifies what you must do if you want a large zoom range, high
quality and fast aperture.

Andrew.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sony uses "pellicle" approach in new EVF "SLT"cameras (a33 and a55). Alan Browne Digital SLR Cameras 5 August 27th 10 09:32 PM
"Corset-Boi" Bob "Lionel Lauer" Larter has grown a "pair" and returned to AUK................ \The Great One\ Digital Photography 0 July 14th 09 12:04 AM
Are "D" and "Di" zoom lenses the same? Jeff Digital SLR Cameras 3 December 12th 06 11:16 AM
Q: "baby" Linhof Super Technika D. Medium Format Photography Equipment 0 April 2nd 06 08:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.