The 4x, 10x, 20x etc is often confusing. And it remains confusing in terms of mm's thanks to the historical context. 300mm is a physical and mathematical description of the focal length. Magnification times is only relative to the individual lens performance so a real 300mm is 300mm no matter how many x they might say it is and each of your lenses will 'see' just as far. If it says "300mm" then it often means it magnifys like a 300mm lens would on a 35mm film camera..
Remember the 300mm (or whatever mm) is a hangover from the days of 35mm full frame film cameras. When you have a modern digital camera like an Olympus with a 4:3 sensor it is actually only a half frame in terms of the old 35mm cameras. This means that the sensor only sees the central area of the image and crops the rest. Effectively your real physical 300mm then works like a 600mm. Nikon, Canon, Sony, Pentax have sensors that are 1.5x crops so the 300 on one of those would be like a 450mm. On P&S cameras the sensor is very tiny so you'll get that 300mm equivalent view with a mere 67mm focal length..
Just check that you're dealing with "35mm equivalents" and look for the real physical focal length on the lens itself).
John.Please visit me at:http://www.pbase.com/johnfr/backtothebridgehttp://www.pbase.com/johnfr/digital_dartmoor..
30-300mm would be 10x zoom for a compact.70-300mm would be only 4.3x zoom..
However I wonder if focal length of 300mm of both lenses provides thesame view when used on the same camera body. I start to think so butI'm not sure..
On the same camera body, yes, these lenses would provide the same field of view at 300 mm. The 30-300 would go much wider at the wide angle end..
On the same camera body, yes, these lenses would provide the samefield of view at 300 mm. The 30-300 would go much wider at the wideangle end..
Indeed. When explained like that, it might even be a good idea to rephrase the original question: "Can you see a wider view with a 30-300mm than a 70-300mm?"..
Put like that, the answer is yes. Both lenses begin at 300mm, but one zooms out only to the moderate telephoto 70mm, while the second continues beyond that, into the "normal" range (around 50mm) and then out to the wideangle 30mm setting..
If these were interchangeable lenses for an SLR, the 30-300mm would allow tackling a variety of different subjects, whereas the 70-300mm is less versatile, and the lens would need to be swapped for another (such as a 28-80mm) to cope with different subjects.Regards,Peter..
Thanks everyone for taking your time answering my question! I will forget the "Xs". The snapshot days are over!!.
However it's a pity most of people are still living in the confusion. After I told my dad about my new camera, he asked me only three things, which brand? how many megapixels? and how much optical zoom? .....
Thanks everyone for taking your time answering my question! I willforget the "Xs". The snapshot days are over!!.
However it's a pity most of people are still living in the confusion.After I told my dad about my new camera, he asked me only threethings, which brand? how many megapixels? and how much optical zoom?.
Aha! That's what happens when you start to grow up. Not only do you start to get different answers to your parents......
.... you start to ask different questions, too. Regards,Baz..
Point them both at the sky at night. Both can see objects millions of light years away..
The question you probably want to ask is "Can you magnify a subject more with a 30-300mm than a 70-300mm?".
The answer is no...