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

wrote in message
ups.com...

Olympus: 2.0

OK....so the 14mm Olympus lens produced results like a 28mm lens on a film
camera. What do you need a much shorter lens for? Are you photographing
inside tight spaces?

wrote:
...The 14 mm lens on the Olympus didn't seem "short
enough", and here's why...

Short enough for what? There is a macro mode,
if you are trying to shoot something very close to
the lens.

--
frosty

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

Chuck, I thought you knew this a year ago when we were discussing digital
cameras. I think you'll have to find a radical fisheye lens. Here's a Nikon lens
for you:

http://www.nikonians.org/html/resour...mm_f2.8_2.html

If 25mm is not wide angle enough, then check out this one:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/1224.htm

That get's you down to about 18mm. Good luck!

Go to a camera shop and look through a few camers and lenses. I bought mine at
Penn Camera. Don't know if those are out there, but the folks were very
cooperative.


--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

On Wed, 01 Jun 2005 17:23:17 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

wrote in message
oups.com...

Olympus: 2.0

OK....so the 14mm Olympus lens produced results like a 28mm lens on a film
camera. What do you need a much shorter lens for? Are you photographing
inside tight spaces?


He said (about a year ago) that he wanted to be able to photograph inside small
boat cabins.

--
John H
On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes (A true binary thinker!)

wrote:
I should be a ragboater instead of a stinkpotter.
snip....

I could recognize that quality in you. Glad to see it's struggling to
get out.

OK....so the 14mm Olympus lens produced results like a 28mm lens on a
film
camera. What do you need a much shorter lens for? Are you photographing

inside tight spaces?

*******
Yes. Interior compartments of boats.
The main lens I use for interior photos with the Contax is a 19-35mm.
At one time, I used a 28mm fixed lens and found that I really needed to
get down to the 19mm size fairly frequently.

It looks like it takes a about 12mm Nikon or a 10mm Olympus lens to get
that 19mm "view" I'm used to with silver film.

Bottom line is that I won't get by merely with the kit lens supplied
with any of the "affordable cameras".

Offshoot of this research seems to be that among the cameras with
three-figure price tags the Rebel XT has the potential for taking
photos of the highest resolution. The XT is rated at 8 megapixels, and
the 1.6 focal length multiplier indicates it also has a larger imaging
area.
Now if only the lenses for the Canon felt a bit more
"industrial".........

wrote:
I should be a ragboater instead of a stinkpotter.


snip....

I could recognize that quality in you. Glad to see it's struggling to
get out.


**********

There's a rumor going 'round, (unsubstantiated of course), that many
sailors actually starve to death each year while contemplating whether
to choose fish or fowl for dinner. I think I'm on the verge of being
just as anal over this camera deal, but on the other hand there is a
lot to "relearn" when switching to digital.

"frosty" wrote in message
...
wrote:
...The 14 mm lens on the Olympus didn't seem "short
enough", and here's why...

Short enough for what? There is a macro mode,
if you are trying to shoot something very close to
the lens.

--
frosty

Macro lenses are typically 50mm to perhaps 105mm on film cameras. Longer,
not shorter.

wrote in message
oups.com...
OK....so the 14mm Olympus lens produced results like a 28mm lens on a
film
camera. What do you need a much shorter lens for? Are you photographing

inside tight spaces?

*******
Yes. Interior compartments of boats.
The main lens I use for interior photos with the Contax is a 19-35mm.
At one time, I used a 28mm fixed lens and found that I really needed to
get down to the 19mm size fairly frequently.

It looks like it takes a about 12mm Nikon or a 10mm Olympus lens to get
that 19mm "view" I'm used to with silver film.

Bottom line is that I won't get by merely with the kit lens supplied
with any of the "affordable cameras".

Offshoot of this research seems to be that among the cameras with
three-figure price tags the Rebel XT has the potential for taking
photos of the highest resolution. The XT is rated at 8 megapixels, and
the 1.6 focal length multiplier indicates it also has a larger imaging
area.
Now if only the lenses for the Canon felt a bit more
"industrial".........


Be aware that sensor size plays a role. Not the number of pixels, although
that's important too. Simply the physical size of the sensor. There are two
reasons for this. Most important, larger sensors give higher quality
results. For the same number of pixels, a larger sensor allows each "well"
or pixel on the sensor to be larger. Larger means more sensitivity to light
and less noise.

Second, larger sensors give a wider view for the same focal length lens. If
the sensor was the same size as a 35mm negative then the lenses would give
the same view on the digital SLR as on the film SLR. If the sensor is 1/2
the size then the lens will give a view equal to twice the 35mm equivalent.

Size does matter!


--
Peter Aitken