Why no real wide angle P&S cameras?

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> writes:
> Was just browsing for wide-angle (<28mm) P&S cameras and there seem to
> be none!! Why is that? No demand or high-cost of developing one to fit
> a P&S cost profile or both?

Not much demand, difficulty of making wide-angle lenses for such small
sensors. You can use a video-type wideangle adapter on some digicams
if you don't mind a ton of distortion.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 18 May 2005 05:48:47 -0700, "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Was just browsing for wide-angle (<28mm) P&S cameras and there seem to
>be none!! Why is that? No demand or high-cost of developing one to fit
>a P&S cost profile or both?

Nikon makes an add on FC-E9 Fisheye Converter Len for it's Coolpix
line. 183 degree of field.
******************************************************************

"The past is foreign country: they do things differently there."

_The Go-Between_
L.P. Hartley
1895 - 1972

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"dylan" <no@nospam.com> wrote in message
news6fihl$7o3$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
>
> "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1116420527.407420.147460@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Was just browsing for wide-angle (<28mm) P&S cameras and there
seem to
> > be none!! Why is that? No demand or high-cost of developing one to
fit
> > a P&S cost profile or both?
> >
>
> Ricoh caplio GX at 28mm
> Olympus C-5060 at 27mm-
>
Canon S60 at 28mm.

But I think <28 actually meant *less* than 28mm.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Wed, 18 May 2005 22:00:25 GMT, Roy wrote:

> You can't really call 28mm on a P & S Size sensor much of a Wide Angle.
> Even at a 1.5 crop they are only equivalent to 42mm on 35 film format.
>
> The OP was asking if there were any under 28mm, and if not, why not.

You've got it backwards. The 28mm the OP was talking about was
the 35mm equivalent focal length, which is indeed below the typical
low end of a P&S zoom lens. The actual length of probably ALL P&S
zoom lenses is well below 28mm. For instance, my Fuji lens at its
widest only goes down to 37mm (equiv.), but has a true focal length
of 5.7mm. None of the camera's wide angle focal lengths mentioned
by previous posters (24mm, 27mm, 28mm) were referring to their
actual focal lengths, which were actually much lower than these
numbers.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Thu, 19 May 2005 00:11:56 GMT, Confused wrote:

> The OP clearly implied the question in terms of 35mm equivalence...

Yes. Exactly what I said.


> You've been to "L" and back, huh. ;^)

You noticed!

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> writes:
> > Nikon 8400
> > 24mm - 85mm zoom, 8MP, excellent image and optical quality.
>
> 24mm is nice but when I said less than 28mm (35mm equivalent) I meant
> more like 12-18mm.

You know, a big obstacle to SLR zooms of that range is distortion.
But on a P&S, they could use a lens with as much distortion as they
want (i.e. semi-fisheye at the wide end) and simply correct for it
in the digital processing before writing out the JPEG file. I wonder
whether any cameras do that already. They might not admit it.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Siddhartha Jain wrote:
> David J Taylor wrote:
>> Nikon 8400
>> 24mm - 85mm zoom, 8MP, excellent image and optical quality.
>
> 24mm is nice but when I said less than 28mm (35mm equivalent) I meant
> more like 12-18mm.
>
> Something thats 12-45mm is just what I need but the SLR lenses in that
> range are so damn expensive!!
>
> - Siddhartha

You can add a wide-angle adapter that takes you to 18mm rectilinear or 7mm
fisheye.

David

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David J Taylor wrote:
> You can add a wide-angle adapter that takes you to 18mm rectilinear
or 7mm
> fisheye.

I thought most wide angle adapters for P&S cameras were fisheye.

- Siddhartha

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy@gmail.com> writes:

> David J Taylor wrote:
>> You can add a wide-angle adapter that takes you to 18mm rectilinear
> or 7mm
>> fisheye.
>
> I thought most wide angle adapters for P&S cameras were fisheye.

Well, there's the subtle distinction between "fisheye" and "severe barrel
distortion" to consider :-). But seriously, the vast majority I've
seen listed appear to be claiming to be rectilinear.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailtod-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/> <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/>
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/> <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Siddhartha Jain wrote:
[]
> Do rectilinear wide-angle adapters work for SLRs as well? Or is there
> is a substantial difference in the quality wrt to a wide angle lens?
>
> - Siddhartha

I believe the same principle would work (these adapters generally work in
afocal space like a telescope or binoculars), but if you have the chance
of interchangeable lenses I suspect the manuafacturers would find that a
complete new wide-angle lens would not cost a great deal more to produce
than just an adapter, so the new lens is preferable as the size and weight
would be less than the combination and the performance would be better as
well.

Cheers,
David