Is it my imagination or is my lens zooming in (or out) all by itself. I take a picture lets say at 50 mm and then all of a sudden I look at my camera and my lens is at 200 mm. Is this normal? Has never happened before and i have had my camera for 2 years. Thanks
An expert who has achieved level 2 by getting 100 points
An expert that got 10 achievements.
An expert that got 5 achievements.
An expert who has written 7 tips or uploaded 3 video tips
Re: Lens is moving
It is not normal. Something may have loosened up internally. Set the lens to 50mm and then move the camera between pointing lens forward and lens down toward the floor as the camera might rest when you have it on a neck strap and bend over. I am guessing that gravity is pulling the lens out to the 200mm position. In any case, you should have a camera repair man look at it. I do not know what the repair could cost, but you have a superb lens and, if necessary, you may want to spend the money to fix it.
A 6ya expert can help you resolve that issue over the phone in a minute or two.
Best thing about this new service is that you are never placed on hold and get to talk to real repairmen in the US.
The service is completely free and covers almost anything you can think of (from cars to computers, handyman, and even drones). click here to download the app (for users in the US for now) and get all the help you need. Good luck!
- If you need clarification, ask it in the comment box above.
- Better answers use proper spelling and grammar.
- Provide details, support with references or personal experience.
Tell us some more! Your answer needs to include more details to help people.You can't post answers that contain an email address.Please enter a valid email address.The email address entered is already associated to an account.Login to postPlease use English characters only.
Tip: The max point reward for answering a question is 15.
Hi Pat, normally dust inside a lens will not affect the image quality. If it does , then really it needs to go to a service centre to be striped down and cleaned. I would imagine this is a zoom lens, as the moving parts in a zoom lens can cause dust to enter the lens.
A 35-80 mm lens is 2.3X zoom. Divide 80 by 35 and you'll get the result.
It is usually better to know what the focal length of a lens in "35 mm equivalent" is and judge by that, rather than relying on the "X" power of the lens. For instance, most point and shoot cameras start at about 35 mm and have either a 3X or 4X zoom. This would make it a 35-105 or a 35-140. I've seen some that start at 28 mm, though. A 3X starting at 28 mm is 28-84 and a 4X is 28-112. Neither one is a particularly strong telephoto lens and the 4X is just about the same as the 3X that starts out at 35 mm.
It's also important to realize that tradition dictates that lens focal lengths are usually expressed in terms of "35 mm equivalent," where "35 mm" refers to a 35 mm film camera. This is because of the relation between the sensor size and the actual focal length of the lens and the resultant angle of view of the lens.
I have one point & shoot that is actually a 5.8-24 mm zoom. This is a 4X zoom. The 35 mm equivalent is 28-116 mm. The sensor is 7.2x5.3 mm. (1/1.8") (And I wish I knew someone who could explain how the heck they came up with sensor size terminology!)
I have another point & shoot that is actually a 5.7-17.1 mm zoom. This is a 3X zoom. The 35 mm equivalent is 34-102 mm. "How could a shorter focal length give a longer 35 mm equivalent?" you might ask. It's because the sensor is only about 5x4 mm. (1/2.5")
I have a few Nikon DSLR's and - thankfully - they all have the same size sensor. They all have a "lens factor" of 1.5. This means that you just multiply the actual focal length of the lens to get the 35 mm equivalent and then you can make comparisons accurately from camera-to-camera. Most Canon's, for instance, have a lens factor of 1.6. On a Nikon DSLR, a 28 mm lens is the "35 mm equivalent" of a 42 mm lens. On most Canon DSLR's, the same 28 mm lens is the equivalent of a 45 mm lens.
These example are just to show you how freaking confusing it can all become if you try to make sense of the "X" power of a zoom lens.
Check the 35 mm equivalent specifications for the lens. This way, you will be leveling the field and comparing apples to apples. More or less.
Fisheye is the extreme of a wide angle lens. I think you are not using a fish eye lens, but a fish eye adopter. That is a lens that will "shorten" the focal length of a lens most of the time with 30 % sometimes with 50% when you put it in front of your lens. So you could make a 24 mm lens look or act like a 12 mm.
On your tele lens this only will slightly shorten the 55 mm, but even 50 % of 55 is 27 mm and can't be seen as a fish eye.
I think when you put this on a short lens, the picture you get will be round, like you were using a real fish eye.
Sorry, but salt water immersion is effectively just as destructive to your camera and lens as if they had been crushed or burnt. If the body and lens were immersed in seawater then they are complete write-offs as they will be completely beyond economic repair.
The whole thing is very complicated. In many of the new technologies, there are mechancal devices with very complicated electronics intigrated with them.
Sometimes you can get different opinions, but until the job is done and proven, it is difficult to know who is really right until everything has been done.
Personaly, If I like the camera, and I cannot find something that good for 250 EU, I would fix it.
Apparantly, the PRO-1 is one of the best small digital cameras that Canon ever made. I personaly own one. I have not taken too many pictures with it. But, when I use it, for the size its performance is impressive.
I ended up buying a small Canon camera that will fit in my shirt pocket to carry around with me. I use the Pro-1 for more serious pictures.
You are probably going to need a faster lens to get pictures like you want, like around the 1.* range. If you have the ASA at 1600 and aperture at the minimum in Av mode, try and keep the exposure time to 1/focal distance. Such as, if you are shooting 200 mm lens then maximum exposure time is 1/200 second. If you zoom out a bit to 50 mm then it may look better too. You may as well turn the megapixels down too because otherwise you'll just see the blur even more, I'd suggest 3.2 megapixels that will look good in 4x6 photos or on the web. Other than that, try and take pictures where the action is coming at you or going away. Get as close as possible too, so that you don't have to zoom as much. At the H.S. football games I go to it seems like they let anyone down near the field who has a big lens.