So uhh where are the other EFS lenses ?

[AzzKicker]

title says it all.


I thought the EFS was the new lens for Digital SLR's ? Why havent any other ones been produced

[kb244]

EF-S is specifically for the digital rebel. Its a way of keeping people from reselling the kit lens to be used on older or other Canon SLR models, although there are hacks around this. I also assume its because the back of the lens on a EFS mount is closer to the sensor, and was one way to acheive the 18mm wide angle. But thats just my assumption. The good thing is any EF lens will work on the rebel, so I'm not complaining and would be kind of silly to change the mounts on a mass ammount of their lesns, as many of us bought a canon body so that we could carry over our existing lens.

[evilenglishman]

good question. If they aren't going to supply these lenses why bother with in the forst place?

[AzzKicker]

Well according to Popular Photography in their previous issue there is a difference in lenses for 35mm cameras and Digitial cameras. It has to do with rear of lens element being farther away or blah blah. If you notice the back of a EFS lens and a regular EF lens there is a difference. So I thought that cannon was gonna release an all new line of DIGITAL LENSES.

I mean ya why make just one lens.

I could care less though anyway since the kit lens is pretty much crap, not a lot of crap, just a little

[KennyG]

The 300D and the one and only EF-S lens were designed as a package to make a very low-cost wide angle lens. It isn't anything more complicated than that. There is no technical advantage or money saving to use the design in longer lenses, except for maybe something like a 28-80.

To quote Canon - "The EF-S lens is therefore seen as a specialised lens in the EF range. It is the EF range which we are committed to and to which Canon continues to invest substantial development resource."

[Jesper]

There was a post somewhere here a few days ago about why the EF-S mount is not compatible with the normal EF mount. Let's not repeat the whole thing again.... :?

The EF-S lens doesn't have the full image area of a full-frame 35 mm lens, so if you'd use it on an EOS film camera, you'll see a circle with an image and the edges of the photo will be black. Someone posted an example of that, a photo made with a modified Rebel kit lens.

I certainly hope there will be no more EF-S lenses!! In the future (don't know how long it will be...) there will most likely be affordable DSLRs with a full-size 24 x 36 mm sensor, and your EF-S lenses will be useless with such a camera. Remember, your lenses will last MUCH longer than your Digital Rebel or 300D!

[MarkH]

I think the EF-S is a stupid idea! Had they designed the lens to comfortably fit the standard EF mount then they would have sold quite a lot of these lenses. They could have sold it for $150 seperately and still sold a bunch of them to the owners of the D30, D60 and 10D. I ended up buying a Sigma 18-50 DC for my 10D, if it doesn't work with my next D-SLR then I'll sell it with my 10D. The Sigma is cheap, small, light and takes decent pics, but I would have bought the Canon if it had been designed to work with my 10D.

[kb244]

The market that Canon was aiming at with the rebel, was mainly intended for people used to the pro-sumer market that was looking for a bit more but did not want to spend nearly 600$ more on just a body ( no lens ). So Canon had to come up with a "kit" since most consumers upgrading from P&S cameras expect to get the whole package deal. The included lens allowed them to reduce the price of the kit. While it doesnt have as long a focal range, or other included features as the Pro1, thats a completely different market of consumers.

[AzzKicker]

so why not just use the lenses that are sold with the Rebel 2000 etc type lenses.

My Rebel2000 came with a 28-80 or something like that. Thats a cheap lens. My point is why make a completely new lens when theres already cheap CANON lenses out there that can be sold with a Body for cheap

[KennyG]

My point is why make a completely new lens when theres already cheap CANON lenses out there that can be sold with a Body for cheap

Because they can make this lens really cheaply, a lot less cost than any standard EF zoom lens. This helps them hit their price point for the 300D. It is simple a matter of profit, and there's nothing wrong with that.

[evilenglishman]

Because they can make this lens really cheaply, a lot less cost than any standard EF zoom lens. This helps them hit their price point for the 300D. It is simple a matter of profit, and there's nothing wrong with that.

but couldnt they have sold it with the 50mm 1.8 cheaper? or even the 28-90 F4 II

[kb244]

My point is why make a completely new lens when theres already cheap CANON lenses out there that can be sold with a Body for cheap

Because they can make this lens really cheaply, a lot less cost than any standard EF zoom lens. This helps them hit their price point for the 300D. It is simple a matter of profit, and there's nothing wrong with that.

Hell, I'm sure most of the "Professional Amatures" will be more than happy with the kit lens, and might never upgrade it. Though the option is there.

[PacAce]

so why not just use the lenses that are sold with the Rebel 2000 etc type lenses.

My Rebel2000 came with a 28-80 or something like that. Thats a cheap lens. My point is why make a completely new lens when theres already cheap CANON lenses out there that can be sold with a Body for cheap

The 28-80 on the DRebel will no longer get you the same picture that it got you on the film camera. What you effectively have now is a 45-128 mm lens. The 18-55 lens gives you back the 28-80 pictures since it's effectively a 28.8 to 88 lens in 35mm equivalent.

If Canon hadn't done this, I'm sure a lot of DRebel buyers would have been complaining about the lack of a lens in this range without paying a lot of money for it.

[kb244]

so why not just use the lenses that are sold with the Rebel 2000 etc type lenses.

My Rebel2000 came with a 28-80 or something like that. Thats a cheap lens. My point is why make a completely new lens when theres already cheap CANON lenses out there that can be sold with a Body for cheap

The 28-80 on the DRebel will no longer get you the same picture that it got you on the film camera. What you effectively have now is a 45-128 mm lens. The 18-55 lens gives you back the 28-80 pictures since it's effectively a 28.8 to 88 lens in 35mm equivalent.

If Canon hadn't done this, I'm sure a lot of DRebel buyers would have been complaining about the lack of a lens in this range without paying a lot of money for it.

He's got a point there, even at 28mm its still considered wide. If this was not offered, you can imagine the ammount of money needed to be spent on a 15 maybe 16mm wide angle lens, just to get the equivilant wide provided by the kit lens. I know there are some super-wide to standard zoom lens, but they're pricey from what i've seen. Its also very unlikely that canon is going to advertize a sigma, tamron, or quantery with their DRebel, so average consumers, would not know what to look for, and most retail places that sell the rebel ( IE: best buy, circuit city, compusa ) dont sell any lens other than the kit lens (in the store I mean, theres a couple lens you can get on the website, but most i've ever seen in those types of stores was a 70-300 for a short time )

[Tom W]

There was a post somewhere here a few days ago about why the EF-S mount is not compatible with the normal EF mount. Let's not repeat the whole thing again.... :?

The EF-S lens doesn't have the full image area of a full-frame 35 mm lens, so if you'd use it on an EOS film camera, you'll see a circle with an image and the edges of the photo will be black. Someone posted an example of that, a photo made with a modified Rebel kit lens.

I certainly hope there will be no more EF-S lenses!! In the future (don't know how long it will be...) there will most likely be affordable DSLRs with a full-size 24 x 36 mm sensor, and your EF-S lenses will be useless with such a camera. Remember, your lenses will last MUCH longer than your Digital Rebel or 300D!

The fact that Canon hasn't persued the smaller, less expensive APS sized lenses might be seen as an indication that the future may bring about larger sensors instead. That is a good thing.

[AzzKicker]

There was a post somewhere here a few days ago about why the EF-S mount is not compatible with the normal EF mount. Let's not repeat the whole thing again.... :?

The EF-S lens doesn't have the full image area of a full-frame 35 mm lens, so if you'd use it on an EOS film camera, you'll see a circle with an image and the edges of the photo will be black. Someone posted an example of that, a photo made with a modified Rebel kit lens.

I certainly hope there will be no more EF-S lenses!! In the future (don't know how long it will be...) there will most likely be affordable DSLRs with a full-size 24 x 36 mm sensor, and your EF-S lenses will be useless with such a camera. Remember, your lenses will last MUCH longer than your Digital Rebel or 300D!

The fact that Canon hasn't persued the smaller, less expensive APS sized lenses might be seen as an indication that the future may bring about larger sensors instead. That is a good thing.

I think thats why they dont care about EFS. I see all DSLRS having the 35mm size Sensor in the future. When that happens there willl be no need for newer lenses etc.

[Tom W]

so why not just use the lenses that are sold with the Rebel 2000 etc type lenses.

My Rebel2000 came with a 28-80 or something like that. Thats a cheap lens. My point is why make a completely new lens when theres already cheap CANON lenses out there that can be sold with a Body for cheap

The 28-80 on the DRebel will no longer get you the same picture that it got you on the film camera. What you effectively have now is a 45-128 mm lens. The 18-55 lens gives you back the 28-80 pictures since it's effectively a 28.8 to 88 lens in 35mm equivalent.

If Canon hadn't done this, I'm sure a lot of DRebel buyers would have been complaining about the lack of a lens in this range without paying a lot of money for it.

Indeed, building an 18-55 mm lens to fit a full-framed sensor takes a considerably larger amount of precision-ground glass than does an 18-55 lens with an image circle that can only accomodate the smaller sensors. The diameter difference becomes smaller and smaller as the focal length gets longer.

[MarkH]

I don't get it, why can't Canon make a lens for the smaller image circle without EF-S, then sell the lens to owners of the 300D, 10D, D60 and D30? If Sigma can make DC lenses then why can't Canon?

[ron chappel]

I don't get it, why can't Canon make a lens for the smaller image circle without EF-S, then sell the lens to owners of the 300D, 10D, D60 and D30? If Sigma can make DC lenses then why can't Canon?
They could do that but there are major problems.

A)They can't make it like it is (but to fit 10D,D60,D30) because it NEEDS the lump built into the back to stop it being used on normal film bodies with their full sized mirrors.Anything that can fit all digital bodies will also fit every other EF mount camera-so the extended back focus design is out.

B)Make it without the extended back focus design so that it fits all EF mounts (but only provides an image circle big enough for the 1.6 crop digital bodies) and sell it for $150 as suggested above
Ain't gonna happen.To design a lens that way with the angle of view it has (AND be cheap) is impossible.Figure $200++ and it would STILL be a crappy lens .....and the rebel kit price would jump allarmingly

[MarkH]

They could do that but there are major problems.

A)They can't make it like it is (but to fit 10D,D60,D30) because it NEEDS the lump built into the back to stop it being used on normal film bodies with their full sized mirrors.Anything that can fit all digital bodies will also fit every other EF mount camera-so the extended back focus design is out.

B)Make it without the extended back focus design so that it fits all EF mounts (but only provides an image circle big enough for the 1.6 crop digital bodies) and sell it for $150 as suggested above
Ain't gonna happen.To design a lens that way with the angle of view it has (AND be cheap) is impossible.Figure $200++ and it would STILL be a crappy lens .....and the rebel kit price would jump allarmingly

So why does my Sigma 18-50 DC work OK on my 10D? How did Sigma make it so much cheaper than any similar lens with a full image circle?

[kb244]

They could do that but there are major problems.

A)They can't make it like it is (but to fit 10D,D60,D30) because it NEEDS the lump built into the back to stop it being used on normal film bodies with their full sized mirrors.Anything that can fit all digital bodies will also fit every other EF mount camera-so the extended back focus design is out.

B)Make it without the extended back focus design so that it fits all EF mounts (but only provides an image circle big enough for the 1.6 crop digital bodies) and sell it for $150 as suggested above
Ain't gonna happen.To design a lens that way with the angle of view it has (AND be cheap) is impossible.Figure $200++ and it would STILL be a crappy lens .....and the rebel kit price would jump allarmingly

So why does my Sigma 18-50 DC work OK on my 10D? How did Sigma make it so much cheaper than any similar lens with a full image circle?

Quality of glass perhaps, lack of inner/rear focusing perhaps, lack of Flourite/UD lens, maybe even lack of USM or similar speed AF motor?

[ron chappel]

Or i could be wrong too :oops: :wink:

I don't think i set out clearly what canon may have been thinking either.(because i'm not thinking too well tonight)

There is of course the issue of them not wanting to make an all purpose cheap lens because it would take away from sales of the better wide lenses.
Maybe it was even a simple thing like wanting to break the $1000 price barrier which any other lens just wouldn't have allowed....


..and i have another related thought....
I can't help thinking that even canon aren't even sure what the future of digital holds.Do they pursue the 'dream' of full frame sensors for everyone? or will they take too long to come down in price?Maybe it will take YEARS.Should they concentrate on 1.6 crop sensors for consumers only?Lets' face it,-the image quality(low noise) is pretty damn good!..and 6Mp+ is fine for allmost every amatuer.
So maybe they can just graaaadddually change most cheap lenses over to EF-s?(over many years)

..And the biggie..!
What about in camera image stabilization?There are several ways to acheive it but if they make the sensor physically move to damp out vibration then that 35mm film camera image circle that most lenses currently have will come in mighty handy!
Digital still hasn't settled down properly by a long shot-even if prices seem to have bottomed out -mostly

[kb244]

...

image stabilization?There are several ways to acheive it but if they make the sensor physically move to damp out vibration then that 35mm film camera image circle that most lenses currently have will come in mighty handy!
Digital still hasn't settled down properly by a long shot-even if prices seem to have bottomed out -mostly

Well I know minolta or whoever is comming out with in-sensor image stabalization. But What I feel would be better would be having a IS attachment. Like a 1.4/2x Teleconvertor with an IS inside of it. That way any lens you have can be image stabalized via optics.

[Jesper]

Because they can make this lens really cheaply, a lot less cost than any standard EF zoom lens. This helps them hit their price point for the 300D. It is simple a matter of profit, and there's nothing wrong with that.

but couldnt they have sold it with the 50mm 1.8 cheaper? or even the 28-90 F4 II

It would be a bad idea to sell it with a 50mm prime lens - people want to have zoom - especially beginners who don't know or care a lot about the quality of lenses think that zoom is the most important aspect of a lens.

They could have sold the Digital Rebel with one of the existing cheap kit zoom lenses, but remember the 1.6x crop factor - an 28-90 would effectively become a 45-144mm lens. They wanted to sell the Digital Rebel with a lens that has an *effective* range (the crop factor taken into consideration) of 28-90mm, and that's the 18-55 EF-S.

Probably Canon discovered that they couldn't make a full-frame 18-55mm EF lens for $100, so they decided to make the non-full-frame EF-S lens. Because it's not full-frame, less glass is needed and it's cheaper to produce.

The EF-S mount is just a one time trick they needed to pull off to make the lens cheap enough.

[ron chappel]

Well I know minolta or whoever is comming out with in-sensor image stabalization.
Yeah-that one sounds VERY good :D :D
I'm not sure if they move the sensor in that one or apply correction by electronics only (i.e make the sensor bigger than it needs to be and use only part of it).If it's the latter then the extra image circle of 35mm lenses is not needed

It looks possible that canon's IS lenses may be pointless in the long term :shock:

[acs55812]

stumbled across this post after a search and had to chuckle a time or two as I read thru it

thought someone else might enjoy it too.:lol:

[ed rader]

title says it all.


I thought the EFS was the new lens for Digital SLR's ? Why havent any other ones been produced

what else did you need?

canon has given you the 10-22, 17-55 f2.8 IS, 60mm macro and 70-300 IS which are all optically excellent lenses for its entry-level line.

i really doubt that many more ef-s lenses are coming because they aren't needed.

ed rader

[joruiz]

Ed... those lenses didn't exist at the time AzzKicker asked that question. Check the date! :)

Now, I sure hope there are more EF-S lenses in the works... a 8mm fishy, for example ...

[ScottE]

what else did you need?

canon has given you the 10-22, 17-55 f2.8 IS, 60mm macro and 70-300 IS which are all optically excellent lenses for its entry-level line.

i really doubt that many more ef-s lenses are coming because they aren't needed.

ed rader

Ed,

I don't believe there is an EF-S 70-300.

But to answer your question, "What else did you need?" the answer that comes to my mind first is an EF-S 55-170 f/2.8 IS to be a companion to the 17-55 f/2.8 on EF-S cameras the way the 70-200 f/2.8 is a companion to the 24-70 f/2.8 on film cameras. I would like it to have a light weight poly-carbonate telescoping body similar to the 17-55 to keep the size and weight down. A tripod ring like the one that comes with the 70-200 would also be good, but I suppose that is asking too much.

Scott

[mrfourcows]

i guess such a question still holds even in different context and time.