Making a superzoom for a compact is easy, but for a DSLR, it's hard?

Started Oct 7, 2013 | Discussions thread
EinsteinsGhost Forum Pro • Posts: 11,977
Re: Making a superzoom for a compact is easy, but for a DSLR, it's hard?

brianj wrote:

EinsteinsGhost wrote:

A vast majority of images were taken between 24-130mm (16mm - 90mm, APS-c), only a few at 320-380mm and very few in between.

But the number taken was rising towards 380mm, imagine if you could have gone to 1000mm, what would the graph look like then. My findings after owning a superzoom is that the mid range drops but it rises again towards the tele end.


It would have looked flat, worse than 140-180mm range. For seven years, I used Sony F828 as my main camera and its 28-200mm, f/2-2.8, lens was sufficient (equates to 18-135mm lens) and in fact, that very fact is also reflected above.

As it is, even 18-250 travel zoom (many images above were taken with it, including the few you see at 380mm eq), is heavily compromised optical design. I don't use that lens often for that reason (my go to lens is Sony 16-50mm f/2.8 SSM). I will often carry 8mm/2.8, 135mm/2.8 and 200mm/2.8 as a set of lenses for most coverage. The only advantage the travel zoom has is... one lens solution. It gets slow fast.

 EinsteinsGhost's gear list:EinsteinsGhost's gear list
Sony Cyber-shot DSC-F828 Sony SLT-A55 Sony Alpha NEX-6 Sigma 18-250mm F3.5-6.3 DC OS HSM Sony 135mm F2.8 (T4.5) STF +12 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow