On 1 Jun 2005 10:17:11 -0700, wrote:

I should be a ragboater instead of a stinkpotter. I will study this
digital camera thing to death before I make a decision. Ratz. Olympus
had the inside edge until checked out the wide angle lens on the stock
kit and discovered the following "focal length multiplier" chart for
35mm SLR digitals. The 14 mm lens on the Olympus didn't seem "short
enough", and here's why:

To compare the view through a digital SLR lens vs. a standard camera
lens, one has to apply a "focal length multiplier".
The smaller the sensor area (plane where the light is gathered and
digitized) the greater the multiplier has to be.

For the benefit of anybody else considering a new SLR before the summer
cruising season is in full swing, here are the focal length multipliers
for popular brands:

Canon: 20D and below are all 1.6. The 1DMkII ($4k camera) is 1.3, and
the 1DSMkII ($8k camera) is 1.0.

Pentax: Both models are 1.5

Minolta: 1.5

Olympus: 2.0

Kodak: both cameras in the DCS-SLR series are 1.0, (and sell for
$3700)

Nikon: All cameras are 1.5

And?

How small an area are you talking about and how close?

Later,

Tom

And?

How small an area are you talking about and how close?


Later,


Tom


**********
I'm spoiled with my 19mm lens. :-)

I can photograph a day head (and wind up with something other than a
close-up of a Grohe faucet or VacuFlush marine toilet) standing in an
adjoining companionway. Shoot from the door of the forward cabin in a
32-footer and get a view of both the port and starboard sides back to
within a foot or so of the aft bulkhead. Crawl into an engine room and
get a good view of both the port and starboard engines. Stuff like
that. The 28 just doesn't *quite* do it.

I often need a wide-angle exposure, and seldom a "zoom".
I'm going to have to get down to a 10mm digital lens with any of the
cameras in the "doesn't matter (as much) if you klutz it into the
sound" price range. :-)

On 1 Jun 2005 15:41:01 -0700, wrote:

And?

How small an area are you talking about and how close?


Later,


Tom


**********
I'm spoiled with my 19mm lens. :-)

I can photograph a day head (and wind up with something other than a
close-up of a Grohe faucet or VacuFlush marine toilet) standing in an
adjoining companionway. Shoot from the door of the forward cabin in a
32-footer and get a view of both the port and starboard sides back to
within a foot or so of the aft bulkhead. Crawl into an engine room and
get a good view of both the port and starboard engines. Stuff like
that. The 28 just doesn't *quite* do it.

I often need a wide-angle exposure, and seldom a "zoom".
I'm going to have to get down to a 10mm digital lens with any of the
cameras in the "doesn't matter (as much) if you klutz it into the
sound" price range. :-)

Ah - understand now I do.

Test shots I will take - information for you it will be - decide if
standard lens works it will.

Later,

Tom

wrote:
I should be a ragboater instead of a stinkpotter. I will study this
digital camera thing to death before I make a decision. Ratz. Olympus
had the inside edge until checked out the wide angle lens on the stock
kit and discovered the following "focal length multiplier" chart for
35mm SLR digitals. The 14 mm lens on the Olympus didn't seem "short
enough", and here's why:

To compare the view through a digital SLR lens vs. a standard camera
lens, one has to apply a "focal length multiplier".
The smaller the sensor area (plane where the light is gathered and
digitized) the greater the multiplier has to be.

For the benefit of anybody else considering a new SLR before the summer
cruising season is in full swing, here are the focal length multipliers
for popular brands:

Canon: 20D and below are all 1.6. The 1DMkII ($4k camera) is 1.3, and
the 1DSMkII ($8k camera) is 1.0.

Pentax: Both models are 1.5

Minolta: 1.5

Olympus: 2.0

Kodak: both cameras in the DCS-SLR series are 1.0, (and sell for
$3700)

Nikon: All cameras are 1.5

I've heard that the Canon is real nice. One problem I personally have
with digitals is the lag time. Being a 35mm SLR user for most of my
life, I'm used to pushing the shutter button and having the shutter
trip. The only "lag" was if there was little light. With digital
cameras, when you trip the *shutter* as it were, there is a latent time
between that moment and the moment the image is burned. From what I
understand, the Canon is superior in that regard.