Lee Jay
•
Forum Pro
•
Posts: 56,673
Re: Looks like the G5X misses the mark for me
damian5000 wrote:
Lee Jay wrote:
damian5000 wrote:
Jim wrote:
damian5000 wrote:
R2D2 wrote:
I skipped on the Sony RX10 MkII (24-200) solely because it wouldn't work with the close up lenses I wanted to use on it (which the G3X does in spades). But that focal length range was soooo tempting.
Well, I skipped it because it's huge. I have that range in my 7DII + 18-135STM, and it's really not significantly larger, yet has a larger sensor and an optical viewfinder. In other words, if I'm going to go that big, I'm going to need something else, like range (FZ1000 or SX50) or interchangeable lenses.
Now, a 24-200 that would fit in my pocket would be interesting, and in fact it is as I mentioned. I'd give up sensor size and lens speed to get it.
There are plenty of cameras that fit in your pocket and go well beyond that zoom range. SX series from Canon, or TZ from Panasonic or HX from Sony.
Agreed. It's exactly why I purchased an SX280HS refurb from Canon for about $85.
I have an SX260HS. The sensor is too small, the lens is too slow, and the camera is too large. I'll give up the 200-500 equivalent range to get a 1/1.7" sensor instead of the 1/2.3" and to get a lens that starts at f/2 instead of f/3.5. I also want it to be about the size of the S120 or smaller - like the Panasonic LF1 but starting at 24mm instead of 28mm equivalent.
20x zoom, f2.0, 1/1.7", smaller than s120...
200/24 = 8.33x zoom. And, as I said, the LF1 is already 95% of the way there.
I just wonder if it's possible. The s120 is there, but only 5x zoom. How to more or less double this zoom and make the camera smaller... Sorry for my facetious comment earlier. Do you think its physically possibly given current tech?
As I keep saying, the LF1 is already almost all the way there. It's actually thinner than the S120, it's 28-200 and it's f/2 at the wide end with a 1/1.7" sensor. It would be all the way there if it started at 24mm equivalent. So, yes, I think it's possible.