Timeline for Why arent there supertele lenses for APS-C sensor sized cameras?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 22 at 14:34 | comment | added | Ross Millikan | @MichaelC: no, it is really a 357.5 mm lens. They advertise it as a 2000mm equivalent and I believe it looking at how close the moon comes to filling the frame. I now have the P1000 with its real 539 mm lens that gives 3000mm equivalent | |
| Jan 22 at 12:57 | comment | added | Michael C | @RossMillikan That's not really a 357.5mm lens, though. It's a roughly 64.3mm lens that gives a FF equivalent AoV of 357.5mm when the 1/2.33" crop factor of 5.56X is taken into account. | |
| Sep 27, 2020 at 21:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackPhotos/status/1310323340427628545 | ||
| Sep 27, 2020 at 3:43 | comment | added | Ross Millikan | This is a better question than the answers give credit for. I have a Nikon P900 camera that zooms out to 357.5 mm at f/6.5 but covers only a 1/2.33" sensor. The whole camera weighs 899g. The Canon 100-400 f/4-5.6 zoom which covers a full frame sensor weighs 1380g for the lens alone. This would make you think the first element has to be 30% larger (6.5*400/(5.6*357.5)) but in fact the filter is 77mm on the Canon and 67mm on the Nikon, only a 15% increase. Covering the small sensor clearly saves a lot of weight. | |
| Sep 27, 2020 at 2:56 | answer | added | Michael C | timeline score: 3 | |
| Sep 25, 2020 at 21:28 | answer | added | xenoid | timeline score: 6 | |
| Sep 25, 2020 at 21:07 | answer | added | WayneF | timeline score: 1 | |
| Sep 25, 2020 at 20:45 | history | asked | Arji | CC BY-SA 4.0 |