Free Shipping on ALL Products
camera reviewsbest cameraslens reviewsphotography tipscamera forumvideo toursphotography bookssupport me
It is currently Tue Dec 23, 2014 4:28 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: "Equilavent" mm?
PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:06 pm 
What is meant when I'm reading reviews that the lens for the E-620 have equilavent ranges?
The kit lens of 14-42 is really 28-44? The zoom of 42-150 is really 84-300?

I'm looking at buying our 1st DSLR and the E-620 is one we are looking at, but I can't find a real model locally. I looked at the Nikon D5000 and comparing their 55-200 & 70-300 lens was night and day to me. Therefore am I going to be disappointed in the E-620 42-150 lens or does it compare with the Nikon 70-300?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:57 pm
Posts: 93
I must admit I was confused with this at first. Let me see if I can explain it...

When a Zuiko lens says it's 14-42, it means it covers the focal range of 14 to 42mm on a 35mm camera in the old film days or an equivalent full frame DSLR nowadays (the very expensive, bulky, pro cameras Nikon and Canon make).

But the thing is, Olympus doesn't make full frame cameras and even if it did, the 14-42 lens wouldn't work on it. But the 35mm way of measuring focal range is there to be... consistent with known photographic standards, I guess.

What Olympus uses in its DSLR's are cropped sensors compared to full frame DSLR's and the end result is that it multiplies in practice the focal range by a factor of 2 so you are right to say that same 14-42 is really more like 28-84mm. The Nikon D5000 you mentionned also has a cropped sensor and the crop factor is 1,5, I believe, so the 70-300mm lens you mentionned is equivalent to 105-450mm in practice.

As for the availability of Olympus, you are right about that (with DLSR's anyway, their compact cameras are easy to find though). It was an initial turnoff for me as many retailers in my part of the world didn't carry Olympus DSLR stuff much... or at all. If shopping online for you is an issue, I would still recommend going with the internet, but scout for local retailers with an online presence. Once you do, note the ones who do carry Olympus DSLR's (and lenses) and then go visit them personally. It's a matter of tracking them down.

Chicago is an enormous city. There's no way there aren't a dozen retailers with Olympus stuff at the very least.

As for lenses from Nikon and Olympus being night and day, you'll have to elaborate on that point, 'cause I am not sure what you mean.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 10:54 pm 
Masked Avenger wrote:
As for lenses from Nikon and Olympus being night and day, you'll have to elaborate on that point, 'cause I am not sure what you mean.


I was saying the difference in the Nikon lens of 50-200 vs 70-300 was a night and day difference. At first I was wondering how much of a difference there would be between a 200 & 300 lens, especially when there's almost a $400 price difference.

I'm sure there are lots of retailers in Chicago, I just don't know where, but I did start another thread for that issue.

Thanks for the quick response and help!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 28, 2009 11:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:57 pm
Posts: 93
Ah well, there are multiple factors that contribute to lens prices. However, the difference between 200mm and 300mm usually doesn't affect prices all that much, particularly with relatively low-cost, consumer lenses.

Perhaps if you told us what you are planning to shoot and maybe we can take this discussion further! :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:14 am 
Well we mostly shoot travel pictures (buildings, landmarks, landscapes, etc) and sports (2 boys playing basketball, football and baseball). Of course we have the social gatherings also for birthdays, holidays and such. Right now we have a Panasonic DMZ-? point and shoot. While we are happy with the social gatherings and most travel pictures, the sports photos are really lacking. Either we can't capture the speed of the play or the lighting in the buildings are a problem.

We are actually looking at the E-620 and some other cameras. As you have posted in my other thread, we don't have really good stores around us, so when looking the only lens I see are the kit lenses and the first intro zoom lense. For the Olympus E-620 I haven't seen any since I can not find a real model close to me yet.

I have no problem buying on the internet, but I'm just having a problem deciding if the E-620 is good for us without touching one.

Thanks again for your replies!


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 12:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:57 pm
Posts: 93
These cameras aren't cheap. You should be able to try them out for yourself. I think it is wise. I am not sure why you are so deadset on Olympus, but if your local retailers don't carry it, maybe you should consider more popular brands.

As for your sports pics, yes, I can see your problem. I think any DSLR would be a significant upgrade in terms of continuous shooting. But if you are in dim-lit conditions with subjects (your kids) far away, you need to have a camera that can shoot at high ISO (Olympus DSLR would be an upgrade from your Panosonic, but other brands perform better) and/or you might need better lenses than regular kit lenses.

Remember the past reply talking about different factors affecting lens prices? This is where it really kicks in. Fast auto-focus, aperture (the amount of light entering the lens) and those little details you don't normally care about as a novice.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 2:07 am 
Because a certain focal length alone tells us nothing about the relative "perception" of the picture it produces unless we factor into account the size of the medium it is projecting onto [Film or sensor]

On a 35mm film camera, about 50mm focal length gave us a "Normal" perspective of the world as we see it through our eyes. If the sensor/film were 1/2 the size, then we'd only see half as much on the image and thus its as if the focal length were doubled, so 100mm

This is why theres a conversion factor on cropped sensors. 4:3 sensors are approximately half the size of 35mm, and thus the conversion factor is 2x.

Likewise, on a medium format camera, the sensor is LARGER and lenses like 80mm are the equivalent to human vision.


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 5:04 am 
Masked Avenger wrote:
I am not sure why you are so deadset on Olympus, but if your local retailers don't carry it, maybe you should consider more popular brands.

you need to have a camera that can shoot at high ISO (Olympus DSLR would be an upgrade from your Panosonic, but other brands perform better) and/or you might need better lenses than regular kit lenses.

.


I'm not dead set on Olympus, but this is the Olympus forum :-) We are also looking at the Nikon D5000 and two Canons XSi or T1i. I just came to this forum to ask questions regarding our research on the Olympus.

I take it from your comments, you would point us to one of the other cameras?


Top
  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:46 am 
Offline
Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2006 4:30 pm
Posts: 9834
Location: UK
Hi TMJJS,

I agree, this is the Olympus forum. 8)

Back to your original question, the quoted focal length of any DSLR lens is exactly what it says on the tin: think of a magnifying glass focussing the Sun and the focal length is the distance you have to set that glass in front of a piece of paper to set fire to that paper. OK, DSLR lenses are more bulky but you get the idea. The crop factor is just how much smaller the camera sensor is than a frame of 35mm film. So if the crop factor is 2 then the sensor is half the size (lengths, not area) and as a result the field of view is halved. There's a slight complication with the 4/3rds sensor having a different aspect ratio but the principle stands.

So if you strap a 50mm lens in front of a sensor with a crop factor of two then to get the same field of view on a frame of 35mm film you'd need to use a lens with a focal length of 100mm (2 x 50).

It's still relevant to specify primarily a lens by it's actual focal length (rather than it's full-frame 35mm equivalent as is usually done on superzooms) as a single lens can be fitted in front of sensors of different sizes, either by design or by using an adaptor.

Bob.

_________________
Olympus OM-D E-M1 + M.Zuiko Digital ED 12-40mm f/2.8, Lumix 7-14mm f/4, Leica DG Summilux 15mm f/1.7 ASPH, M.Zuiko Digital 45mm 1:1.8, M.Zuiko Digital ED 75mm 1:1.8.
Leica D Vario-Elmar 14mm-150mm f/3.5 - f/5.6 ASPH.
OM-D E-M5, H-PS14042E, Gitzo GT1541T, Arca-Swiss Z1 DP ball-head.
Astrophotography: TEC 140 'scope, FLI ML16803 camera, ASA DDM60 Pro mount.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Oct 30, 2009 7:41 am 
I think the E-620 is the right camera for you.
It's a really light travel camera, especially combined with the two kit lenses, which are the best you can get from all manufacturers. The 40-150mm has decent autofocus speed, which would be suitable for outdoor sports - for indoor sports, you would need something like the really awesome 50-200mm lens.


Top
  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  

All words, images, videos and layout, copyright 2005-2012 Gordon Laing. May not be used without permission.
/ How we test / Best Cameras / Advertising / Camera reviews / Supporting Camera Labs

Webdesign by Alphabase IT
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group