Equivalent To???

[Nicks Pics]

What does equivalent to 450mm in 35mm mean?

I am going buy the 18-300mm lens and it says "Its massive zoom range goes from wide-angle (27mm equivalent in 35mm) all the way to super-telephoto (450mm equivalent in 35mm)"

Does it mean that it's zoom is more powerful than this lens?

No, it doesn't mean that you will get more magnification with that 18-300 mm lens than you would get if you bought that 400 mm lens for your D5100. You will get less. But if someone who had an FX camera bought the 400 mm, and you with a DX bought the 300 mm, and you compared shots, you would have more magnification! But that is because of the DX vs FX camera. A 400 mm lens will give any camera more magnification than a 300 mm lens.

You could try to re- explain your question if this is just not really giving you the answers you were looking for.

[Beauty Through a Lens]

Hi Adrian,

You are no doubt used to the "angle of view" of your kit lens on your D5100, which starts at 18mm - in other words, you have a rough idea, before you lift the camera and peer through the viewfinder, how much of a scene you will be able to 'fit in' to the photo. Don't worry about "Equivalent to" if you are just buying lenses for your camera, it just adds unnecessary confusion.

The whole concept of "Equivalent to" (focal length) is only of use to people comparing one format (sensor size) camera, to another. If you're not considering this, just forget it.

Since you're probably not familiar with what a 300mm lens looks like on a 35mm camera, the fact that on your D5100, it gives a more 'zoomed in' view (equivalent to 450mm on a 35mm camera) is completely irrelevant - so don't over think it.

It "is what it is" on any given format, so it becomes irrelevant.

PS - I remember this topic making my head hurt a few years back, so just move on.

To assuage those that might say I am over simplifying, here's an example when it is relevant ...
If someone is out shooting with two different sensor size cameras, e.g. a DX and FF (say the D5100 and a D810) and they have the Nikon 70-300mm lens fitted to the D5100, then move the lens to the D810, they will notice that fully zoomed in (300mm) on the D810 is a wider angle shot than when it was on the D5100. In fact 300mm on the D810 (FF) will look like 200mm using same lens on D5100 (DX).

If they zoom to 300mm on the D5100, they would need to fit a 450mm lens (which doesn't exist) on the D810 to match the angle of view - that is what 'equivalent to' means. But if you don't have two cameras, that's of no practical help, is it!

Cheers, Dave

THANK YOU! (x10)

[Donald]

This is the best explanation on the subject that you're going to find anywhere. Save it for future use.

Hi Adrian,

You are no doubt used to the "angle of view" of your kit lens on your D5100, which starts at 18mm - in other words, you have a rough idea, before you lift the camera and peer through the viewfinder, how much of a scene you will be able to 'fit in' to the photo. Don't worry about "Equivalent to" if you are just buying lenses for your camera, it just adds unnecessary confusion.

The whole concept of "Equivalent to" (focal length) is only of use to people comparing one format (sensor size) camera, to another. If you're not considering this, just forget it.

Since you're probably not familiar with what a 300mm lens looks like on a 35mm camera, the fact that on your D5100, it gives a more 'zoomed in' view (equivalent to 450mm on a 35mm camera) is completely irrelevant - so don't over think it.

It "is what it is" on any given format, so it becomes irrelevant.

PS - I remember this topic making my head hurt a few years back, so just move on.

To assuage those that might say I am over simplifying, here's an example when it is relevant ...
If someone is out shooting with two different sensor size cameras, e.g. a DX and FF (say the D5100 and a D810) and they have the Nikon 70-300mm lens fitted to the D5100, then move the lens to the D810, they will notice that fully zoomed in (300mm) on the D810 is a wider angle shot than when it was on the D5100. In fact 300mm on the D810 (FF) will look like 200mm using same lens on D5100 (DX).

If they zoom to 300mm on the D5100, they would need to fit a 450mm lens (which doesn't exist) on the D810 to match the angle of view - that is what 'equivalent to' means. But if you don't have two cameras, that's of no practical help, is it!

Cheers, Dave

[pnodrog]

Hi, take a look at this and see if it helps - open to suggestions regarding presentation.

[mrinmoyvk]

What does equivalent to 450mm in 35mm mean?

I am going buy the 18-300mm lens and it says "Its massive zoom range goes from wide-angle (27mm equivalent in 35mm) all the way to super-telephoto (450mm equivalent in 35mm)"

Does it mean that it's zoom is more powerful than this lens?

Forget everything and think of taking a picture at 18mm and 27mm standing at same place. 27mm picture will have small Field of View because you have zoomed further. Now take the 18mm picture on computer and crop it to match it with 27 mm picture. Open both images side by side. Is there any difference? Technically yes but from viewing terms nothing..
Same is with Full frame and APS-C sensors.

Image captured with APS-C sensors seems to be zoomed because it does not capture the borders. What you did on computer with 18mm picture is done by the APS-C sensor in camera. Only difference is while cropping you reduced the mega pixels of image but APS-C sensor did not because it captured the image itself after neglecting the borders.

There are 2 types of sensors in DSLR cameras, 1. full frame and 2. APS-C
Full frame sensors are bigger in size typically compared to the size of film role used in olden days.
APS-C sensors are smaller in size as compared to full frame.

Full frame sensors being larger in size capture more area (field of view - FOV)
APS-C sensors being small capture smaller FOV so human mind thinks that we have zoomed further because we have not captured the borders

Cut 2 rectangles of different sizes in a cardboard and hold it one by one in front of your eye. You get more FOV while seeing through bigger rectangle and small FOV from smaller rectangle. It is as simple as that.

You have not zoomed further only think like that because you miss what was at the borders while seeing through smaller rectangle.


Technically speaking image captured with 10MP APS-C sensor and DX lens should be equal to image captured with 15MP FF sensor with FX lens and cropped down to 10MP equally from all four sides.


If it is still confusing, don't consider it while buying lens. As you have D5100 camera (which has APS-C 1.5 sensor), go for DX lens because FX lens is of no use. You will waste money on FX lens.

[xpatUSA]

As you have D5100 camera (which has APS-C 1.5 sensor), go for DX lens because FX lens is of no use. You will waste money on FX lens.

With regard to wasting money, Sigma true macro lenses, at least in 50, 70 and 105mm are just not available in DC size, only DG. So there is no choice and the money has to wasted if a Sigma 1:1 lens is absolutely necessary. (Their so-called "macro" zooms don't come any closer than 1:2.)

[Dave Humphries]

As you have D5100 camera (which has APS-C 1.5 sensor), go for DX lens because FX lens is of no use.

You will waste money on FX lens.

An FX lens will be perfectly usable on your DX camera - but what Mrinmoy means by these two statements is that;
Compared to a DX lens, an FX lens will be;

a bit bigger and heavier
consequently it will be more expensive

However, in use, there will be some advantages of an FX lens on a DX camera;

the image quality is very likely to be better
the AF (Auto-Focus) may well be quicker
if you ever decide to invest in a FF camera in later years, you won't need to replace this lens

One over-riding 'thing' concerning buying lenses for Nikon cameras such as yours* is to ensure the lens designation (if Nikon brand) has "AF-S" in the title. This designation tells you it has a focus motor inside the lens.
If shopping for alternate brands; Sigma, Tamron, etc. you will need to check (or ask us here) before you buy, that it also has a focus motor in.
Failure to get a lens with the focus motor in will limit your enjoyment of using the lens enormously, as you will need to manually focus it, which isn't that easy to do, before taking a shot - and make shooting some subjects all but impossible, particularly with telephoto lenses (e.g. ones with a minimum focal length of say, 40mm or more).

* Nikon D3000 series, D5000 series, plus the older D40 and D60 series.

Be especially careful if buying second-hand (off e-Bay or similar) as sellers don't always describe things as well as they should.

Good luck and I'm glad the post above helped.

[mrinmoyvk]

An FX lens will be perfectly usable on your DX camera - but what Mrinmoy means by these two statements is that;
Compared to a DX lens, an FX lens will be;

a bit bigger and heavier
consequently it will be more expensive

However, in use, there will be some advantages of an FX lens on a DX camera;

the image quality is very likely to be better
the AF (Auto-Focus) may well be quicker
if you ever decide to invest in a FF camera in later years, you won't need to replace this lens

One over-riding 'thing' concerning buying lenses for Nikon cameras such as yours* is to ensure the lens designation (if Nikon brand) has "AF-S" in the title. This designation tells you it has a focus motor inside the lens.
If shopping for alternate brands; Sigma, Tamron, etc. you will need to check (or ask us here) before you buy, that it also has a focus motor in.
Failure to get a lens with the focus motor in will limit your enjoyment of using the lens enormously, as you will need to manually focus it, which isn't that easy to do, before taking a shot - and make shooting some subjects all but impossible, particularly with telephoto lenses (e.g. ones with a minimum focal length of say, 40mm or more).

* Nikon D3000 series, D5000 series, plus the older D40 and D60 series.

Be especially careful if buying second-hand (off e-Bay or similar) as sellers don't always describe things as well as they should.

Good luck and I'm glad the post above helped.

You got it right Dave what I meant. And yes, if there is no DX version of a lens that one wants then FX is must. Wasting money is not literally wasting but spending.