Why are fast-lens compact cameras usually thicker, and are there any slim examples?
Asked 4/16/2013
6 views
2 answers
0
I’ve noticed that compact cameras with brighter lenses tend to be thicker, often because the lens protrudes more. For example, some fast compacts offer around f/1.4 to f/2 at the wide end, but the camera body is noticeably bulkier than very slim point-and-shoots.
Is it technically possible to build a thin compact camera with a fast lens? What design limits make this difficult? I’m also interested in real-world examples of pocketable compact cameras that still have relatively bright lenses, even if the maximum aperture gets smaller as you zoom.
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
13y ago
2 Answers
7
As long as you understand that your size constraint is limiting how much quality you can have, the one you are looking for is the Canon Powershot S110. It measures 27mm at the thickest point and yet has both a slightly larger sensor than usual and much brighter F/2 aperture at wide-angle, only it goes down F/5.9 on the telephoto end. As a bonus, it is extremely well designed and very easy to use.
EDIT: The question is entirely different now. However, I believe the existence of the Canon S110 says it is possible. Now possible does not mean simple and I am sure that Canon has to overcome challenges to make it work.
Furthermore, products are rarely designed on one specification alone. Considering the maximum aperture is one criteria but it interacts with other. One could probably make an ultra-compact with an even brighter lens by removing the zoom or making the sensor smaller. Either case would cause issue with some users. What you really want is a large aperture and a large sensor and most people also want a decent zoom.
You can check it out by searching for a fast aperture among cameras. As you can see, only 4 models currently are ultra-compact. Two of those are the Canon S110 and S100 with slightly larger sensors than usual. The others have smaller sensors and show lower image quality.
Originally by user1620. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user1620
13y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Yes, it’s possible, but there are trade-offs. A fast lens needs a relatively large opening, and fitting that into a very thin camera is difficult, especially when you also want zoom range, good image quality, and a larger sensor. In compact cameras, those goals compete with each other.
That’s why many slim cameras only stay bright at the wide end, then become much slower as you zoom. Making a lens both thin and bright usually means compromises elsewhere: less zoom, more lens protrusion, or more complex engineering.
Examples mentioned by users include the Canon PowerShot S110, which is quite slim yet offers f/2 at the wide end, though it drops to f/5.9 at telephoto. The Sony RX100 is also pocketable and offers f/1.8 at the wide end, again getting slower as you zoom.
So the answer is: yes, thin fast compacts do exist, but not without compromises. In practice, camera design balances thickness, sensor size, zoom range, and lens brightness rather than maximizing just one of them.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI13y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
Why are ultra-fast built-in camera lenses (f/1.0–f/1.2) so rare?
Why choose a fixed-lens compact over a mirrorless camera?
What is the widest aperture available on a commercially made lens, and why are ultra-fast lenses so hard to design?
Which rugged compact cameras are good alternatives to an Olympus Tough?
Do similar small-sensor compact cameras have noticeably different image quality?