On 9 Sep 2005 at 23:46, Tom Pfeiffer wrote:
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> > Willem-Jan Markerink
> > Sent: Friday, September 09, 2005 5:14 AM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: Wide-angle & DSLR (was: EOS Moving to Canon for Digital
> >
> > If even high-end digi-compacts fail miserably in providing
> > any wider angle than a 28mm-equivalent, then it will be a
> > cold day in hell before even a phone could do any better.
> >
> > Even an old DCS3 with 14mm Sigma can't be beat by anything
> > more compact, no matter how many more pixels it has....
> >
> >
>
> Both the new Kodak P880 and the older Nikon 8400 have 24mm equivalent lenses
> which would equal the coverage of a 14mm on the 1.7x DCS3. Plus, they are
> 8mp instead of 1.3, and the Nikon is barely a quarter the size and weight.
> Of course, it's not an SLR, but it is easy to carry and has a reasonably
> good reputation. And for only $500.......
I'd rather call those 'hybrid', not 'compact'....;))
Too close to SLR-format/shape to add much to the convenience/carry
factor....
Btw, the DCS3 has a 16.4x20.5mm chip, hence diagonally a factor
1.648, vertical 1.46x, horizontal 1.76x.
The sick thing: while you can check the math of this one in focal
length equivalents, you can't with neither Nikon nor Kodak, since
they either only vaguely mention '2/3rd inch chip' (Nikon, which in
no way can be translated to a 16.9mm diagonal (which would render
it's 6.1mm lens as a 16mm wide angle!)), or don't list the actual
focal length (Kodak), only the equivalent.
I guess I'll end up with a second hand 1Ds one day, and revive my
20mm....;))
(at that moment, I will probably ditch the 14mm, since even in analog
times I considered it too wide, or better: too small object details
on a 24x36mm frame....however, that Mamiya ZD 36x48mm chip (no micro-
lenses!) with their 26mm, now *that* is what I call wide-angle
appeal....both the angle *and* the format/object-detail....:))
Of course, I could be swung completely the other way, if a digital &
compact swing lens panorama camera was launched....:))
(I have witnessed (from close distance) the current analog panorama
manufacturers agonizing about the lack of such technology....
(their market is too small to invest the huge amounts needed for that
combination I guess (and in a way, it would be a 'hybrid' avant la
lettre, since the lens itself would still have to move mechanically,
hence more mechanics than any other digicam))
Should be IR-capable at the same time too, otherwise that era,
combining IR with panorama, would die slowly too.
--
Bye,
Willem-Jan Markerink
The desire to understand
is sometimes far less intelligent than
the inability to understand
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[note: 'a-one' & 'en-el'!]
*
****
*******
***********************************************************
* For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see:
* http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm
***********************************************************
