# Zoom Comparison (Between Point & Shoot and SLR Lens)



## Alan Ellis (Jun 23, 2008)

Point and shoot zoom ability is measured in optical ranges such as 3x, 10x, 12x, etc, but SLR lens are measured in mm. 

So what is the same size SLR lens (in mm) as a 3x, 10x, or 12x zoom on a point and shoot? In other words, if my point & shoot has a 12x optical zoom, what SLR lens do I need to achieve the same zoom level as the 12x point & shoot.

Thanks...

AE


----------



## reg (Jun 23, 2008)

You can't compare it like that.


----------



## Rogan (Jun 23, 2008)

it all depends what the lens on ur point and shoot is

on my Fuji Finepix with 10x theres an equivalent to 36mm-365mm (this is all going by what someone else told me)

so to get this on a crop sensor ur looking at 250-300mm lens on the long end


----------



## Buszaj (Jun 23, 2008)

reg said:


> You can't compare it like that.



Very helpful. What Rogan said is correct, usually on the camera around or on the lens it says "35mm equivalent" and then a range of numbers in mm. That is the focal length needed on a 35mm camera (full frame) to get the same reach as your P&S.


----------



## reg (Jun 23, 2008)

Buszaj said:


> Very helpful.




I thought it was, but I forgot to run it by you first.

The fact is: You CAN'T compare it like that.


----------



## Miaow (Jun 23, 2008)

I asked a similar thing in a post a while ago , Some answers on there sorta explains a way of working out a comparisson http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=111410


----------



## Alan Ellis (Jun 23, 2008)

Miaow said:


> I asked a similar thing in a post a while ago that sorta explains a way of working out a comparisson http://thephotoforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=111410


 
Good info...thanks. 

Much better than, "You can't compare it like that." :roll:


----------



## amba (Jun 24, 2008)

Don't take it personally, but I was always amused by how many people are impressed by the "x20 zoom" stickers and the like. IMO, this is the ultimate triumph of marketeers over the average consumer.
Manufacturing an x20 zoom costs no more than manufacturing a fixed focal length lens if you ignore parameters like optical quality, maximum aperture etc. true, it has some value to some people, but this is how marketeers divert buyers attention from parameters that increase manufacturing costs, to parameters that cost them nothing to make.

Sorry again, got carried away, I just could not resist it :er:

To your question, x8 for example, refers to the ratio between the zoom lens narrow (a.k.a. tele) focal length to its wide focal length. So, for example, Nikon's pretty good and extremely popular DSLR 18-200mm DX zoom lens would be an "x11" zoom in the p&s world, while their excellent and slightly less popular 12-24mm DX zoom lens is an "x2" zoom only. The fact that for these specific two lenses, the "x2" zoom selling price is 50% higher than that of the "x11" zoom (and the "x2" zoom does not even have vibration reduction :thumbdown, should tell you that there is more to define a lens, or a lens "goodness" than just zoom ratio.

Always look for the "35mm equivalent" focal length to understand what viewing angles lenses actually give. DSLRs have "focal length multiplier" numbers, typically 1.5 for Nikon and 1.6 for Canon, so, Nikon's DSLR 18mm is equivalient to 27mm focal length in the 35mm (film SLR) world, which is moderately wide, and their DSLR 200mm is equivalent to 300mm in the film world.
In the point and shoot world there are no standard focal length multipliers, the multipliers are generally higher than those of DSLRs, but vary significantly from camera to camera, even for same manufacturer, effectively, focal length multiplier numbers are only used in the DSLR world, not in the digital P&S world.

Cheers!


----------



## darkpbstar (Jun 24, 2008)

large zoom on P&S cameras just turns out noisy.  It never looks good when you zoom all the way on a P&S, but, with a dSLR the photos always look amazing, no matter what zoom you use!


----------



## Alan Ellis (Jun 24, 2008)

amba said:


> Don't take it personally, .....


 
No worries....life is too short to take forum comments personally.

Your explanation is complicated but makes sense. For the average consumer, "12x, etc" is much easier to understand than values in mm. For me.....just entering the SLR world....trying to make sense of all the info and numbers is somewhat overwhelming, so a comparison to something that I am familiar with (i.e, 12x) is necessary for my beer- damaged brain to understand.

Thanks for the help and explanation.

AE


----------



## asfixiate (Jun 24, 2008)

Another big thing to notice is optical zoom vs digital zoom on a p&s.  As soon as you leave optical zoom you will notice the noise a lot more.  I have DSLR but also have kodak easyshare.  Images are fine if I stay within the optical zoom but as soon as i'm digitally zooming the images are horrid.


----------



## Battou (Jun 24, 2008)

asfixiate said:


> Another big thing to notice is optical zoom vs digital zoom on a p&s.  As soon as you leave optical zoom you will notice the noise a lot more.  I have DSLR but also have kodak easyshare.  Images are fine if I stay within the optical zoom but as soon as i'm digitally zooming the images are horrid.



You also can't keep the bastard still even with a tripod in the digizoom, That cuts your usable zoom leingth in half (on the easyshare atleast)


----------



## asfixiate (Jun 24, 2008)

Plus takes forever to digitally zoom. Wow with all these positive things said about p&s I wonder why the market is still so booming.

I feel like my shots on my 5mp easyshare that's 3 or 4 years old gets better results than some of the new Higher MP digicams.


I love my DSLR because of the control I have with it.  zoom slow means I'm slow, control noise, etc.


----------



## Battou (Jun 24, 2008)

asfixiate said:


> Plus takes forever to digitally zoom. Wow with all these positive things said about p&s I wonder why the market is still so booming.
> 
> I feel like my shots on my 5mp easyshare that's 3 or 4 years old gets better results than some of the new Higher MP digicams.
> 
> ...



well, as we've alredy learned more MGP is not always better but the market is booming because everyone and their brother want a camera, on top of that it would seem they all want wallet sized cameras instead of a bunch of wallet sized prints :lmao:. Also the price plays factor, not everyone can afford 500+ for a base setup of a dSLR nor do they wish to work with film for various reasons.


----------



## asfixiate (Jun 24, 2008)

I've heard the Canon S5IS is a decent camera.  

I'm pretty set with my camera (Rebel XT).  I'll keep buying lens and probably upgrade to 40d level camera or if 5d Level becomes more affordable.


----------



## mrodgers (Jun 24, 2008)

darkpbstar said:


> large zoom on P&S cameras just turns out noisy. It never looks good when you zoom all the way on a P&S, but, with a dSLR the photos always look amazing, no matter what zoom you use!


Comparing a dSLR to a P&S is like comparing a Ferarri to a Ford Explorer.  It's just a ridiculous comparison when talking about quality/performance.  Of course a dSLR is going to produce better photos than a P&S, just as a Ferarri is going to post better acceleration and handling than an Explorer.

But, I can put my P&S in my pocket and carry everywhere I want without lugging around a cumbersome camera bag.  Just as one can cross a creakbed to get to their fishing spot in the Explorer over the Ferarri.

The question presented in the OP wasn't asking about a dSLR/P&S quality debate, but rather how to decifer the numbers and the differences between camera types.


----------



## BoblyBill (Jun 24, 2008)

Basically what they mean for 3x a zoom for excample is that the longest mm on the lens is 3x that of the shortest mm of that lens. So to convert DSLR lens to this system would be to take the longest part of the lens and divide it by the shortest part. My 17-40 would then be a 2.35x zoom, and a 70-200mm would be a 2.85x. So they somewhat fool you into thinking that the higher that number the farther you can "zoom" which is mostly true except say the lens was a 10-120mm which would be a 12x zoom but not nessecarily a very long lens. Where as a 600mm prime is 1x zoom but would be able to see 5 times farther than the 10-120mm which is a 12x... That is why reg said they can't be compared because you are dividing the long by the short and it makes the value very relative. Make sense?


----------



## prodigy2k7 (Jun 24, 2008)

There is no actual mm for a lets say 3x zoom because 3x is just how much the zoom changed from in and out.
Such as a 100-300mm is a 3x lens.
Also a 10-30mm is a 3x lens.
Or a 50-150mm is a 3x lens.

Edit: Most cameras also tell their mm equiv in their specs, so you know the mm also.


----------



## reg (Jun 24, 2008)

prodigy2k7 said:


> There is no actual mm for a lets say 3x zoom because 3x is just how much the zoom changed from in and out.




*THANK YOU!!*


----------

