>>3284742Can someone basically explain to me what the trade-off is for a super-zoom camera compared to a camera without much zoom? Let's compare the LX15 Panasonic to the TZ100 or even the TZ200.
I understand that the LX15 performs better in low light, and I understand that it relates to the maximum aperture... This is logical. The wider the lens can open, the more light it can take it, the less it has to depend on ISO performance or shutter speed to allow in enough light to get to a certain quality.
What is less clear to me is how and why there needs to be a trade-off(as I understand it) between this wide, high aperture and the ability to zoom very far...
Can someone explain the basics of this? Why does a super-zoom typically have a lower aperture(higher f-number, in this case minimum of 2.8 compared to 1.4).
