TS-IOR From Tunisia, joined Oct 2001, 3311 posts, RR: 6 Posted (8 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 3725 times:
It is something that i do not understand much in photography... is zooming with a superzoom compact (those bridges SLR likes) at let's say 1000mm gives the same as using a 1000mm lens/teleconverter ? My idea is that the result is of course better with a lens and the zoom (getting closer) is more significant than when using a fixed zoom ! When zooming is needed, does a 250mm or 300mm lens can replace a 12x optical zoom (400mm) fixed zoom ? Don't get lost :-P
megatop412 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 293 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (8 months 1 week 5 hours ago) and read 3678 times:
When you use the terms the 'same', or 'can replace', or 'more significant' do you mean in terms of just focal length, or image quality? IQ is usually a product of sensor size, and in those cases the SLR wins(even on a crop sensor)
ckw From UK - England, joined Aug 2010, 659 posts, RR: 17 Reply 3, posted (8 months 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 3631 times:
Typically a bridge or compact camera is using a tiny sensor which is roughly a 5 or 6x crop compared to full frame.
Regardless of focal length, a bridge camera is always going to struggle compared to a DSLR simply because their pixel sites are that much smaller - this leads to two things ... less ability to resolve fine detail and more noise. And of course the noise suppression technology normally used by small cameras further reduces the image detail.
Also the lenses aren't really comparable. Most compacts and bridge cameras are built in a very cost concious manner - you won't find the same exotic glass and coatings that you'll get in a decent DSLR lens.
The very concept of a 12x zoom causes problems - providing good image quality across such a range is next to impossible - compromises have to be made ... typically you'll see a lot more chromatic aberration and less sharpness than you'll get with a typical DSLR lens. (from memory, I think the most extreme range you'll find in a DSLR zoom is 10x, and these too have issues).
Of course the question you have to ask yourself is how good is good enough? You can spend a lot of money chasing perfection!
megatop412 From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 293 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (8 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3602 times:
Quoting TS-IOR (Reply 2): I meant focal length and image quality...
There is no way a superzoom fixed lens "casn replace", be the "same", or be "more significant" than an SLR lens with a teleconverter. As I said earlier, IQ is a product of sensor size, and the smaller sensor of a fixed-lens superzoom compact will always involve more noise and less light sensitivity. If you had to be able to stick a camera in a pocket, then that's one thing but if you are after quality images, you should really be using an SLR with the lenses.
And by the way, just about any image(of an aircraft) @ 1000mm focal length is going to look pretty bad, shooting through all that atmospheric distortion. Stick with 500mm or less. If you need more than that, you're not close enough.