Camera Zoom Properties

[Dutton]

In particular my question is on optical zooms.

I have myself sussed on the type of camera I am getting and such, but the one thing I am undecided on is RE optical zoom. I want a thoroughly decent zoom, since I plan on doing stuff like at racetracks where a good zoom will be very helpful.

There is one that has a 40x optical zoom, but the other aspects are not 100% ideal. There is another one that is essentially ideal in other respects but "only" has a 25x optical zoom.

Basically, I am after an idea of what the sort of "distance shrinking" entailed in the different zoom levels.

I get the impression that 25x would most probably be quite adequate, but there may be times when I need more? If I had the 40x, I can always not use the full extent...but if I have 25x but need more I am fudged.

Any help on this matter would be greatly appreciated (feel free to chime in on other matters RE camcorders while you are at it).

[Peter Mallett]

One for art and photography.

[Dutton]

I thought this might happen.

I do intend on using it for more than motorsport...it is a general question. However, ultimately, this is a logical spot indeed.

Well, people, since this is now in the realm of knowledgable people (which I ain't), feel free to give any thoughts regarding camcorders outwith the optical zoom question posed.

[Peter Mallett]

Well some of the guys in here are professionals so I reckon you'll get better info than anything from Falcemob or me.

[Dutton]

Oh, I know. I am just being awkward.

[Tim the Grey]

To be honest, expect blank looks in here.
25x or 40x WHAT?
These are meaningless numbers.
This tends to be more a stills than video forum, and lenses usually come separate, and marked with a focal length range...
i.e. I have 11-22, 14-54, and 50-200 zooms.

It may help if you can offer up model numbers of your choices, and the video knowledgable MAY be able to point you right?

[James North]

As far as I am aware with digital compacts, it depends on sensor/lens at it's widest. Then "x10 optical zoom" would mean 10 times that.

For example... may basic compact film cameras are 35m. Now assuming that a Digital Compact would be similar, one with an optical zoom of x10 would give you 350mm, and one with x20 would give you 700mm. And you would not be wanting much more than that.

Indeed x40 giving you 1400mm is far more zoom than you would need and more appropriate for capturing moving pictures, for example zooming form one end of a straight to the other, like looking at chapel at Silverstone from Stowe.

Like Tim says, talking about optical zoom here is likely to get get you some blank looks, Though some of us did start off with Digital compacts. Many of us have moved on Digital SLR, with interchangeable lenses etc.

For motor sport you'd have a wide range of lenses, from wide angles for close up shots in the pit lane and paddock, say 10-200mm, perhaps a medium zoom like a 70-200mm for pit lane/track side, a fixed prime perhaps 300mm, or maybe 500mm.

You can get teleconverters, and although some snappers do sometimes use 1000mm for a particular kind of shot, most of the time they wouldn't actually go over 500mm. And in most cases for track side, because most snappers will avoid shooting from behind large run off/gravel areas they be using something between 50-500mm depending on how near to the track edge they are, and of course the composition of the shot they are taking.

[James North]

Oh silly me... I missed the "camcorders" bit. Sorry.

[Peter Mallett]

Folks, let's drop the "ooh its not a real camera" attitude. Dutton has already said its for things other than motorsport as well as motorsport. And in case you lot didn't know, cameras have been around longer than cars!

[friendly advice] Now, I'm not a mod in this forum but I can issue certain very interesting sanctions and you really don't want that. [/friendly advice]

James. I think your point re digital cameras as opposed to DSLRs is valid. I'm sure that Dutton can find out what the initial focal length is. Perhaps someone knowledgeable can expand?

BTW. Without digicams we wouldn't have in car videos. Thus as far as I am concerned any form of pictorial record is a valid discussion point here.

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Well some of the guys in here are professionals so I reckon you'll get better info than anything from Falcemob or me.

Cheers.

Originally Posted by Tim the Grey

To be honest, expect blank looks in here.
25x or 40x WHAT?
These are meaningless numbers.
This tends to be more a stills than video forum, and lenses usually come separate, and marked with a focal length range...
i.e. I have 11-22, 14-54, and 50-200 zooms.

It may help if you can offer up model numbers of your choices, and the video knowledgable MAY be able to point you right?

The standard focal length for a camcorder (assuming around 8mm tape) is about 28mm.
Saying that I am not sure what the original question is asking.

[KC]

The camera manufacturers use the 5x, 10x or whatever x zoom multiplier at times to hide the fact that the camera is very wide angle on the short end. I have seen a lot of 10x optical zooms that are 8mm on the short end. That makes it 80mm on the long end. Not much of a zoom if you ask me. If you look at the lens end of most cameras, the optical zoom in millimeters is marked aorund the lens itself, otherwise look at the camera's specs on the box or online to determine what the actual focal length you are buying.

[Dutton]

Well, yes, this is the challenge. Working through the layers of, um, PR-friendly interpretations that companies use.

In the end I have decided to go with the get-one-and-mess-about-with-it-to-see-if-it-is-adequate approach. I can always just return it. One of the joys of North America.

The one I have first opted to give a shot with I played with whilst away at lakes and such for this past weekend. I think it should be perfectly adequate for what I will need. I'll be entirely capable of getting entirely in focus frames from quite disturbing distances. If particular positions entail a mixture of very close objects, medium objects, and long-distance objects it is entirely capable of dealing with this (can have them all in focus if I want, or not if not). The auto-focus is remarkably effective when panning and altering zoom at the same time, which will be as potentially useful as it was surprising.

Anyway, it is all good for my purposes (which is to say not remotely professional: just want to film stuff and edited it together for purely personal, recreational, purposes).

Thanks all for your time.

[Tim the Grey]

I sometimes think all the double speak around electronics is so baffling, the ONLY answer is the one you have. Buy one. Use it. Work out what's good, and what you don't like.

THEN buy one that does what you want.

I think we have similar sort of rules in Europe, if buying at a distance. Not quite as buyer friendly as over there, but then yours dates back to the Sears catalogue 100 years ago!

[Dutton]

On-topic:

There are certain limitations of said machine that are bit grating. I have the upcoming ALMS weekend at Mosport to fully explore the camera, but I suspect I may return it. It is a good bit of kit for the vast majortiy of situations, but there are certain picky things for which it is not quite there. I could certainly solve these issues with my editing software, but it is the kind of thing that would be a hell of a lot easier if I could deal with it at the time.

Time will tell, but I do not hold out overall hope.

*********************************

Off-topic:

You will have to explain the SEARS comment: I have only been here since Xmas '04.

North America is an interesting place (well, more accurately, I refer to Canada). Having lived in Scotland from birth (1981), it is interesting getting settled into things over here.

A lot of stuff fits your preconceptions, but it soon becomes clear there is a great deal of stuff you are simply unaware exists. Living here also helps you have a greater understanding of why certain things are the way they are.

There is not that much travelling abroad, but it is really expensive to do that. I will not get into the details unless prompted, but I have a much greater appreciation of things related to this since coming to live here.

Likewise, I will not get into details until promted RE geographical ignorance. If you have never been told something, then you cannot be expected to know it. As it happens, I do not think Brits (Europeans in general?) are nearly as clued up as they think they are. I won't deny that Canadians are more ignorant than Brits, but Brits, due to their Eurocentric focus, tend to not be aware of how little they know outside Europe.

I will stop here. This topic is entirely fascinating to me, albeit utterly off-topic.