cahale Loc: San Angelo, TX

Get off the bridge?

photoman022 Loc: Manchester CT USA

When I first started digital photography I purchased a teleconverter "lens". It screwed on to the front of the lens. It was extremely heavy and I feared that it would burn out the motor on my 55-200 zoom, so I manually focused. To answer your question, yes it does "work", but you lose between one and three stops of light and the image quality (at least with mine) was horrible. I put the converter on my shelf and haven't used it in about 10 years. I wish I would have saved my money and bought my 70-300 zoom sooner.

Marilynbb Loc: NY

Thank you

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

The zoom on the Sony HX400V is a 50X that's equivalent to 24 to 1200mm on a full frame/35mm film camera!

That's a HUGE amount of zoom! It's more "reach" than most professional wildlife photographers ever have.

The way cameras like that Sony achieve such a huge range of zoom with a fairly compact zoome lens is by using a really tiny little sensor. It's smaller than your little fingernail. And it's crammed with 20 million ultra small individual pixel sites.

FYI, below is an actual 1200mm lens for a full frame/35mm film camera. It weighs about 35 lb....

JBRIII

Would this also be true for the Canon SX60 and 70?

Marilynbb Loc: NY

I think I need to find good tutorials to learn how to really use this camera. I will look around. I did do some of Carl readers videos but will look at orhers

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Yes, it is. The Powershot SX60 and SX70 both also use a very small sensor (1/2.3") to achieve an extreme zoom range without having to be too large. The SX70, for example, has "full frame/35mm equivalent" 21mm to 1365mm zoom lens (the actual focal length range is 3.8-247mm). This is even more "reach" than the Sony the original poster is using. There are other cameras using the same size sensor with even ore extreme zooms (Nikon P1000 is the most extreme I'm aware of, with a 24mm to 3000mm equivalent zoom).

The so-called 1/2.3" sensor in both the Sony and these Canon measures approx 4.7mm by 6.3mm (varies slightly by manufacturer), for total image area approx. 28.5 to 29.7 square millimeters. This means a 20MP camera will have roughly 675,000 or more pixel sites per square mm.

The Canon Powershot "G" series cameras use larger sensors, but have more limited zoom range.

For example, the G1X Mark III uses a 24MP APS-C sensor, same size as in the 80D and a number of other Canon DSLRs. This sensor measures approx. 13.9mm by 22.3mm, for total area of 332 square mm. As a result, this camera will have larger pixel sites and a much less crowded sensor with a little over 72,000 pixel sites per square mm. That's almost 1/10th as "crowded" as the above SX70 example. However, the "price you pay" is that the zoom has nowhere near as wide range.... it's equiv. to 24mm to 72mm on full frame (actual focal length is 15-45mm).

I think most or all the other current Powershot G series use so-called 1" sensors (also called "CX") that aren't quite as large as APS-C, but are still a lot larger than the 1/2.3" sensors used in SX60/70 and that Sony. A 1" sensor measures approx. 8.8mm by 13.2mm, for total area round 116mm sq. This means there are approx. 172,000 pixel sites per sq mm on a 20MP 1" sensor. The Canon G3X has the widest zoom range among the Powershot G models, a 25X zoom that's equiv. to 24mm to 600mm (actual is 8.8-220mm). In other words, the G3X is sort of a compromise... it offers a lot of telephoto "reach", though it's not nearly as much as the cameras using a smaller sensor. However, the G3X has potential for better image quality and higher usable ISO (and, therefore, better low light shooting capabilities) than a camera that uses a much smaller sensor.

There are a whole lot of other sizes of sensors used in "point n shoot" digital cameras, camera phones, etc. Some use Micro 4/3, which is in between APS-C and 1" in size. A few actually use "full frame" sensors (24x36mm, same size as typical image on 35mm film, back in the days of film), quite a bit larger than APS-C. On the other hand, some others use sensors a little to a whole lot smaller than even the 1/2.3" mentioned above.

You'll notice I reference "full frame/35mm film equivalent" lens focal lengths above. This is commonly done as a means of comparing how a lens will behave on all the different sizes of sensors. You'll see the "equivalent" referenced in most ads and by retailers. It's important to look beyond that for sensor size, though. The size of the sensor, as well as the density and size of the individual pixel sites on it have a large impact on image quality.

While amazing things have been done with very small digital sensors, there are still natural limits. The smaller and more densely packed a sensor, the more you will need to limit using higher ISOs due to digital "noise". It's also more difficult to blur down backgrounds behind subjects, with the shorter actual focal lengths (these cameras also typically don't have particularly large aperture lenses, either... another limit on background blur effects). Ultra long effective focal lengths are also more difficult to hold steady, even with cameras providing image stabilization assistance. And, while it seems counter-intuitive, very small individual pixels also can be less capable capturing fine detail.

Finally, these sensor size differences aren't unique to Canon or Sony. Both of them and pretty much all manufacturers of non-interchangeable lens digital cameras offer models with different sensor formats... and, as a result... more or less zoom range.

JBRIII

Thanks for all the info, it explains a lot. I have the SX 60 and 70. Purchased for shooting plants and sometimes animals in the real outdoors, back roads (at least for 4 wheel drive). Sometimes we climb to get close, but not always possible, so the camera range is great. But neither is good in the dark or anything off the planet other than the moon or Sun (with special filters) or solar eclipses. Also, 70 with more pixels is somewhat less able than the 60 in my experience.I

Thanks again;

westitzer Loc: Central California coastal area

Have you looked at the Nikon P950 or P1000?

Marilynbb Loc: NY

I will, thank you.