Equivalent DSLR lens for zoom of 26x

[buddhika_jm]

Currently I am using a compact digital camera (olympus – sp590uz) with a fixed lens. According to the specification that lens has the zoom power of 26x.And I am planning to buy a DSLR and If I buy canon 55-250mm lens, will I be able to get the same zoom power with 55-250mm lens?. I know image quality of 55-250mm lens will be better. But what I want to know is the zoom power of that lens like mentioned in my compact digital camera. Or frankly what is the Canon DSLR lens that has the zoom power of 26x?

[bigben6]

the 26x is not what you need to be looking at really, all that means is that the max zoom is 26x the min zoom, so for instance a 50-100 is a 2x but so is a 100-200 or a 10-20.... and those cover VERY different focal lengths and ranges, look on your current camera and look for something like a 18-300mm rating, thats the total focal range of your current camera, if this is your camera: Olympus announces SP-590UZ with 26X zoom: Digital Photography Review

It is a 26-676mm equivalent zoom range. that will be very tough to match cheaply in a DSLR but i still think the SLR's pros will heavily outweight the loss in zoom range. the 55-250 will NOT match the zoom power, and it will probably give up alot on the wide end as well. But zoom power is not REALLY why most people make the switch.... i would go to a store with your camera, have a sales person go outside with you and shoot the same thing with a DSLR and your current cam then compare on a decent screen, bring your own laptop if need be, and remember, the increased picture quality will allow alot of "zoom" through cropping, just cause your gonna have a much better base image.

[buddhika_jm]

ok friend, I got what you meant. So why do digital compact camera makers measure lens with zoom power instead of using millimeters like in DSLR world? Is it for a marketing trick?

[PhotoRebel4]

Originally Posted by buddhika_jm

ok friend, I got what you meant. So why do digital compact camera makers measure lens with zoom power instead of using millimeters like in DSLR world? Is it for a marketing trick?

They do it because it's easier to understand. Most everyone has had a point and shoot (or at least used one), and the vast majority of those wouldn't know what to do with a number like 55-250mm. And that's not even taking into consideration the crop factor of the tiny little sensor in P&S cameras.

[buddhika_jm]

ok.. understood.. thanks.

[bigben6]

the only think 2x or 4 x or 24 x is give a general "feel" for versatility, maybe.... but again a 10-40 is a 4x but that does not make it better than say a 20-60 which is a 3x, in the end the 20-60 give you a total zoom range of 40mm and the 4x only gives 30mm.... which is better? Depends what your shooting to be honest.


As i said your camera should clearly state that is a 26-676mm equivalent somewhere on the lens or body.

and while what photorebel stated is to be considered on a DSLR, in the case of your camera that 26-676 is a 35mm equivalent zoom so you do not have to factor in crop factor for your current camera.

[mbrobich]

About the best and cheapest you can come close to this would be the Sigma 50-500mm(about $2100) or 150-500mm(about $1100) lens. Not including the price of the body.

You will never come close in a DSLR unless you spend about $10000.

But....always a BUT......with a DSLR and good sensor, you can come close or better in terms of image quality in a good 70-300mm lens for a few hundred bucks. Then just load the image in PS or whatever other software you have and crop the image to the equivalent size in your bridge camera zoom. (I have a couple of Fuji 30x Zooms also)

Good luck !

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by mbrobich

About the best and cheapest you can come close to this would be the Sigma 50-500mm(about $2100) or 150-500mm(about $1100) lens. Not including the price of the body.

You will never come close in a DSLR unless you spend about $10000.

Not necessarily: 26-676 isn't that unreal. That's only about 17-450 on an APS-C (x1.5) sensor. Hell, the difference between 600 and 676 isn't that big either, so you could get away with 400 on Nikon and Sony, and be even closer on Canon's x1.6 sensor.

Getting there won't cost you nearly that much: 16-85 and 80-400 on Nikon would do the trick. That's about $2500 total.

[drr0b]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Not necessarily: 26-676 isn't that unreal. That's only about 17-450 on an APS-C (x1.5) sensor. Hell, the difference between 600 and 676 isn't that big either, so you could get away with 400 on Nikon and Sony, and be even closer on Canon's x1.6 sensor.

Getting there won't cost you nearly that much: 16-85 and 80-400 on Nikon would do the trick. That's about $2500 total.

My two main lenses are the 15-85 IS USM and 70-300 IS USM, giving a total zoom factor of 20 (35 mm equivalent 24-480 mm) ! I love the image quality of these lenses, and you can get both for $1200! I used these on a 500D (T1i) before moving up to a 7 D a couple of weeks ago; you could get the whole lot for $1700.