Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums >

LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jan 8, 2006, 2:01 PM   #1
Junior Member
true's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2

Hi all.

I'm researching new digital cameras and trying to determine how important the lower end of the focal length should be to me. I do enjoy landscape and travel photography, and I think it might be nice to get more in view than my current camera (35mm). One of the cameras I'm looking at has 32.5 and the other has 38.

Does anyone know of any examples showing graphically the differences between 28mm / 32mm / 35mm / 38mm (or any subset of those)? Any rule-of-thumb calculations about how much more would be in-view at a given distance would be appreciated as well.

Thanks so much!
true is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Jan 8, 2006, 3:57 PM   #2
Senior Member
E.T's Avatar
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 921

You don't want to even think compact standard 35mm or ultrazoom standard 38mm (un)wide angles when there's much better ones available.

This one was taken with 28mm and 0.8 converter which means about ~22.5mm. (I bought converter because stormchasing/thunderstorms require very wide FOV)

For getting 38mm field of view take away slightly over 1/3rd of height and width meaning much over half of images's area... and like it should be easy to guess 35mm is only little wider.
Now 28mm is just 1/6th narrower.

KonicaMinolta A1,A2 and A200 have 28-200mm which I consider as quite perfect range for general photography. Wide angle is very good and even tele is quite enough for anything else than wild animals/birds.
And image stabilization works well for landscapes/nature/architecture shots. (enables two-three stops longer shake free shutter time)

But are you looking for camera with more features (and zoom) or very compact camera to carry in pocket?
E.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2006, 4:44 PM   #3
Junior Member
true's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 2

Thanks for the feedback - it is very helpful. To answer your question, I'm looking for the more compact size rather than an SLR type form factor. I'm not looking for ultra compact however, rather cameras with manual features 1 - 2 inches thick (fuji e550 / e900, canon A series, casio ex-z120 as examples).
true is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jan 8, 2006, 8:30 PM   #4
Senior Member
BillDrew's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512

If you are reasonably adept with a computer and photo editor, you shouldn't have any problem stitching landscape photos into a wider view than any real lens can deal with. As an example see a photo of our front yard (about 270 degrees: it is wide enough to blow the formating of the text here). Even if you are not adept, it can be done with enough persistence.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 7:13 AM.