Getting the teminology straight - lenses etc

Hello group,

Honestly I have spent hours on this and other forums and surfing google for these answers, so please bear with me.

I am a proud new owner of a canon S3. I really love it. I upgraded from a canon A95 which I decked out with
lensmateonline 37mm adapter
multiple additional macro filters +10, +7
circular polarizer
wide angle from tiffen
telephoto from tiffen

I am a physician and I do photography on the weekends with the kids and on trips, so perfection is not necessary, but I am trying to learn as best as I can.

So now, I am "decking out" my S3 and got the 52mm lensmateonline lens converter, HMC circular polarizer, macro set from raynox 3500 (a group of 3: +6, +12, +24)

Next year (or so) I am considering a telephoto lens (in the meanwhile I will play with what I have) and I encountered terms and concepts I have never heard of:
1.) High definition lens. What exactly is that? I found that at least the raynox 2020 defines somewhat a resolution measurment (260lines/mm), but it seems that many lenses don't publish their values. I looked at the opteka 2.2 and 3.3 which says that they have HD2 - i.e. 2X greater than the other high definition lenses. It doesn't take a genius to raise an eyebrow here. Can anyone shed some light on the issue?
2.) What is the resolution of the native S3 lens/lenses?
3.) At 6 mega pixels and the particular size of the receptor/chip in the camera, at what is the maximum resolution that can be captured anyway?
4.) length and use of step rings etc...: ok, so all these complex sites which describe focal length also notice the physical length of the last element of the lens/lens complex to the chip - are these factors similar then in lenses of the telephoto type as well? i.e. the fact that the raynox 2020 is 123mm long - is that a good thing, bad thing or just a fact? Does the width of the step up/down rings change the factors in our formulas as well?
5.) and last for now
what is this X2,3,4,5, or whatever number. I suppose it relates somewhat to question #4, but do I truly imitate a 990mm (35mm equivalent) when I use the raynox 2020?

Sorry for the long post, but it is hard to find a collection of information at my level.

Many thanks

ceriltheblade wrote in post #2943374
Next year (or so) I am considering a telephoto lens (in the meanwhile I will play with what I have) and I encountered terms and concepts I have never heard of:
1.) High definition lens. What exactly is that? I found that at least the raynox 2020 defines somewhat a resolution measurment (260lines/mm), but it seems that many lenses don't publish their values. I looked at the opteka 2.2 and 3.3 which says that they have HD2 - i.e. 2X greater than the other high definition lenses. It doesn't take a genius to raise an eyebrow here. Can anyone shed some light on the issue?

An add-on lens' resolution isn't meaningful except when measured with the prime lens it's intended for. By itsself, it's a marketing ploy.

ceriltheblade wrote in post #2943374
2.) What is the resolution of the native S3 lens/lenses?

AFAIK, no one's ever tested the lens alone; in any case, it isn't readily possible to divorce this from the sensor without disassembling the camera.

ceriltheblade wrote in post #2943374
3.) At 6 mega pixels and the particular size of the receptor/chip in the camera, at what is the maximum resolution that can be captured anyway?

About 240 lines/mm (sensor is 5.76x4.29 mm).

ceriltheblade wrote in post #2943374
4.) length and use of step rings etc...: ok, so all these complex sites which describe focal length also notice the physical length of the last element of the lens/lens complex to the chip - are these factors similar then in lenses of the telephoto type as well? i.e. the fact that the raynox 2020 is 123mm long - is that a good thing, bad thing or just a fact? Does the width of the step up/down rings change the factors in our formulas as well?

Length doesn't really affect too much except how bulky the camera/lens assembly will be (and how far out you can zoom the lens, depending on the lens mount assembly). Don't worry about all the formulas that may be out there unless you're getting seriously into macro work and need to knowwhat will give you a given magnification. Just go with what shows up on your LCD or EVF. The thread diameter of the adapter is the one real critical factor, as if your lens and adapter aren't the same they won't fit together.

ceriltheblade wrote in post #2943374
5.) and last for now
what is this X2,3,4,5, or whatever number. I suppose it relates somewhat to question #4, but do I truly imitate a 990mm (35mm equivalent) when I use the raynox 2020?

Sorry for the long post, but it is hard to find a collection of information at my level.

Many thanks

That's what, ideally, it means. This can be affected by spacing between the lens and converter lens, but (see #4) just go with what shows in your finder and don't worry about the numbers.

Jon, thanks so much for the answer. As a newbie to the whole field, I am one of those types of people who fall into the marketing ploys, hence my early questions. Once you take out the measurements out of the issue, I already feel better!
I am indeed going to get deeper into macros (and hence post-editing) but I am going the easy way by using various filters instead of reversed lenses etc.
If you don't mind - how did you come to the conclusion that according to the size of the sensor, the maximum resolution in lines/mm?
And, lastly, if I understand your explanation correctly, my use of the native lens, and the added telephoto of company X - the maximum I can expect is a resolution of approx 240 lines/mm so not to worry about anything "more" than that except in regards to thoughts about future cameras....

Thanks again and have a great day

Resolution is 1/2 the pixels divided by the size in mm. The S3's about 2800 pixels and 5.76 mm; it takes 2 pixels to define a line. So 1400/5.76 is about 244 lines/mm.

Again, thanks for the answer - what I am still missing is the "definition" of high definition. Is there an accepted industry definition?

Isn't "high definition" what the new digital TVs do? AFAIK, when used in advertising it's a marketing buzzword. High-resolution would vary depending on the image size (sensor size; bigger sensors can give better resolution in the final fixed-size print)