Magnification confusion

[Cavalcanti]

As I have only recently bought a second hand Canon DSLR having been used to Bridge type cameras I am having difficulty understanding the magnification of the lenses.
My Fuji bridge states 14x and it has a huge fixed zoom lens attached.
I have been offered a Canon 75-300 mkIII F/4-5.6 lens for £70 but when I look at the spec of this it states x4, how can this be? Could some enlighten me as I really want to take great close-ups of wildlife with the Canon.

ta, Brian.

[dakwegmo]

Point and shoot cameras use 14x to describe the zoom range of the camera. It's basically a comparison of the shortest focal length by the longest. Think of it this way, the x in 14x means to multiple the number by the lowest focal length to get the longest. This is a reasonable way for P&S cameras to compare features, but isn't very useful for DSLRs.

As an example a 12-24mm lens and a 200-400mm lens both have 2x magnification. (400/200 = 2 and 24/12=2). You'll get dramatically different results with both of those lenses though, so the actual range of focal lengths is more useful.

[Sterling]

As was said above, the "X" factor is pretty much meaningless except for marketing point and shoot cameras.

To compare the lenses on cameras with different sensor sizes, the industry convention is to compare the 35mm equivalent.

On a 35mm camera, your Fuji 14x lens would have a range of 30-436mm. (Fujifilm FinePix S200EXR Review)
On a 35mm camera, your Canon lens would have a range of 120-480mm.

Therefore, your Canon will provide higher zooming power but will have much less wide angle capability.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by Cavalcanti

I have been offered a Canon 75-300 mkIII F/4-5.6 lens for £70 but when I look at the spec of this it states x4, how can this be?

"#x" zoom ranges are simple: High number / low number = #x.

300/70 = 4.28X zoom.

When dealing with an SLR, you have to stop thinking in "#x" zoom and in focal lengths (mm) instead.

FOr example, my kit is as follows:
10-24
18-70
70-300
50

Which means my kit consists of:
2.4x
3.9x
4.3x
0x

See something wrong? My 50mm lens doesn't zoom (called a "prime" lens), so it has no "#X" zoom factor.

The key, here, is that while each lens covers a small range, combined they do cover a vast range of 30x (300/10 = 30x). Compare this to, say, a Canon SX30is, and it's comparable in terms of #x (30x versus 35x) zoom, but not in actual focal length. The Canon, for instance, covers 24-840mm, while my gear covers an equivalent of 15-450. So my kit goes considerably wider, but not nearly as long.

[Cavalcanti]

Thanks for the replies! What everyone seems to be saying is that the 75-300mm lens will get me better closups than my Fuji but not so good wide-angle?
Can I ask another question - if I add a x2 macro lens to the end of my 80-200 IS will it give me 160-400 or what? (I understand that these cheap multipliers let in less light etc).

ta, Brian.

[vandergus]

Originally Posted by Cavalcanti

Thanks for the replies! What everyone seems to be saying is that the 75-300mm lens will get me better closups than my Fuji but not so good wide-angle?
Can I ask another question - if I add a x2 macro lens to the end of my 80-200 IS will it give me 160-400 or what? (I understand that these cheap multipliers let in less light etc).

ta, Brian.

In photography, there are two ways to achieve greater magnification of an image. One way, which is what the thread has focused on so far, is to increase the focal length of the lens. The other way is to reduce the distance to your subject. All lenses have a minimum distance at which they can focus (e.g. a particular lens may not be able to focus on objects closer than 12 inches from the camera), which in turn limits the amount of magnification that they are capable of. The x2 macro lens that you would attach to your 80-200mm would not increase the focal length but instead allow you to focus on objects at shorter distances, therefore increasing the magnification.

[Cavalcanti]

Thanks, Well the x2 multiplier has arrived and it really works - but does not fit the 200mm as it has a smaller diameter than the 2 shorter lenses, no matter it was only £25. It was marketed as "attach to a 200mm lens converts to 400mm" but I can see that was a misleading statement from what you have said.
It is hard to resist collecting lenses such as the offered 75-300mm but it is probably best waiting till the right ones become available. Still waiting to find out if this one is the USM though

[vandergus]

Originally Posted by Cavalcanti

Thanks, Well the x2 multiplier has arrived and it really works - but does not fit the 200mm as it has a smaller diameter than the 2 shorter lenses, no matter it was only £25. It was marketed as "attach to a 200mm lens converts to 400mm" but I can see that was a misleading statement from what you have said.
It is hard to resist collecting lenses such as the offered 75-300mm but it is probably best waiting till the right ones become available. Still waiting to find out if this one is the USM though

Hmm, based on your initial description I was thinking that the lens attachment was a diopter or close-up lens, but maybe it's something different. It vary well may change the effective focal length of the lens. Do you have a link to the item you purchased?

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by vandergus

Hmm, based on your initial description I was thinking that the lens attachment was a diopter or close-up lens, but maybe it's something different. It vary well may change the effective focal length of the lens. Do you have a link to the item you purchased?

Sounds like one of those cheap "filter" teleconverters.