hmmmm
MOST of what I said was wrong? I probably should not dignify that post with a response, but I'm going to. Then I'm leaving this discussion permanently.
I stated that:
* "there is a difference in lenses between film cameras and digital ones"
This is completely accurate
* "Do NOT buy a DSLR and think you're going to use your old lenses from your film camera's body"
I missed the word "directly". OK - on many cameras you can buy an adapter. I was simply trying to point out that it is not going to be a direct fit.
* "A digital SLR has to focus the image onto a much smaller digital sensor"
In most cases the sensor IS smaller than the size of a frame of 35mm film.
* "...get used to "sizing" lenses differently...."
This is completely accurate for every brand I'm aware of.
* "(I forget the exact ratio)."
I stated there was a ratio involved. I never said it was the same for every brand. I never stated it was a "multiplier" or "divisor". By the way -- even when you are dividing, it is still called a "multiplier". It's just that the "multiplier" is less than 1 (such as .75 or .89, etc.
I'm very sorry that you feel my input was incorrect. I do not see it that way.
The POINT of this post was to bring attention to the difference between the lenses built for film bodies as opposed to those built for digital bodies. There is NO dispute that there are differences.
Let's keep in mind that the OP was: "If you were going to buy a digital SLR type camera which one would you buy". I provided information pertinent to that decision-making process.
To the OP: Please enjoy your search for the perfect DSLR. It can be a fun process. I think I'm fairly accurate in saying that you'll probably be very happy with whichever brand and model you choose. They take very nice photos!
Teardrops n Tiny Travel Trailersor t n ttt for short (tnttt.com) |
by Ned B » Mon Jan 02, 2012 2:05 pm
myoung wrote:OuttaHand wrote:I did not realize it until I got looking at D-SLRs but there is a difference in lenses between film cameras and digital ones. Do NOT buy a DSLR and think you're going to use your old lenses from your film camera's body.
The focal length of the lenses (and bodies) are different.
* A film SLR has to focus the image onto a piece of film that is 24mm x 36mm in size.
* A digital SLR has to focus the image onto a much smaller digital sensor.
For this reason, you also need to get used to "sizing" lenses differently. The 80 - 200 mm zoom lens on the old film camera is going to provide a picture size and zoom level of a smaller digital SLR lens. It would be something like 50 - 135 or something (I forget the exact ratio).
Sorry if this is more than you wanted to know. Just trying to help out.
With all due respect, most of what you say is incorrect.
Depending upon the lens and manufacturer, you may use old lenses on new DSLRs. For example, I have used old 50 mm and 35 mm tilt-shift lenses on my Nikon D300. Both of those lenses are among the sharpest Nikon has ever produced but date back to the mid 1970s.
Also, getting the 35 mm equivalent focal length for DX (Nikon's designation) cameras as opposed to FX (full frame DSLRs) involves multiplying not dividing. It varies among manufacturers, but I believe the multiplier for Canon is 1.6 and I know the multiplier for Nikon is 1.5. Thus, a Nikon 18-200 mm zoom lens is the equivalent of a 27-300 mm zoom.
Lastly, sensor sizes differ quite a bit from point-and-shoot all the way up to full frame DSLRs.
exactly, I have the 18-200mm for my D300s, so I generally don't 'need' anything else for my daily work. My next piece of glass will likely be a true wide angle, but that's only because I want to do interior shots for real estate tours and the equivalent of 27mm isn't wide enough.
re: the older lenses, the only thing you give up is the camera control , they work the same as always, given the x 1.6 factor.
-
Ned B - 1000 Club
- Posts: 1036
- Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 10:25 am
- Location: Syracuse NY (ish)
