On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 14:37:57 -0700 (PDT), bigrocketman3@webtv.net (Steve McDonald) wrote:

> I guess it's just coincidence that the size of the lens barrels on
>all camcorders I've used is directly proportional to the width of their
>field of view when backed off to zero on the zoom (modified by CCD size,
>of course). The great difference in the size of 35mm film and a CCD and
>their proportional relationships to magnification with similar sized
>lenses, doesn't allow for very good comparisons regarding field of view.
>There was no reference to macro functions in the question or my answer.

????????????
Since all camcorders at their shortest zoom position
approximate 42-48mm lens FLs in 35mm-format in angle of
view, and those lenses vary from the tiny ones that fit
well within the 30mm thread of the PC9/TRV18 to the
fairly large-front lenses that come with the VX2000 and
GL2 (both with 58mm filter threads), I fail to see any
general correspondence between angle covered and lens
front size (just as there is no general correspondence
between "light gathering ability" and lens front size).
And, you did mention the advantages of WA converters
for "close-ups", as I recall...;-)