XD series croppers = "L" series EF-S?

[heyimnick]

Do you think it would be a smart move by Canon? Personally, I would love to see it.

[muusers]

I dont see how a name for a cameraserie relates to the making of a whole new series of lenses, and downgrading the "L" designation.

For me, the fact that a EF-s lens can't be used on ALL eos-camera's is enough to NOT assign the 'L'.

[majipoor]

I think the only reason to produce EF-S lenses is to be able to offer some cheaper options to crop owners which are mostly reluctant to spend too much $ on lenses. It is easier (= cheaper) to design a lens for a small sensor.

I don't see the need to have EF-S L lenses: EF L lenses can be used on any DSLR and you just need to take the crop factor into account to make your choice. It would be a silly decision IMHO.

[Lisa]

I think the only reason to produce EF-S lenses is to be able to offer some cheaper options to crop owners which are mostly reluctant to spend too much $ on lenses. It is easier (= cheaper) to design a lens for a small sensor.

I don't see the need to have EF-S L lenses: EF L lenses can be used on any DSLR and you just need to take the crop factor into account to make your choice. It would be a silly decision IMHO.

Mostly, But you need to take into account the 17-55mm 2.8 IS. It costs the same as some L's.

[TeamSpeed]

Good threads on this topic already, here is one: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=650967&highlight=why+efs

Basically no, EFS won't be labeled as L.

[heyimnick]

I dont see how a name for a cameraserie relates to the making of a whole new series of lenses, and downgrading the "L" designation.

For me, the fact that a EF-s lens can't be used on ALL eos-camera's is enough to NOT assign the 'L'.

Because Canon is stepping up their game with the 1.6s. Why wouldn't they make higher quality EF-S lenses for higher quality APS-C cameras? Just a though.

[ed rader]

Because Canon is stepping up their game with the 1.6s. Why wouldn't they make higher quality EF-S lenses for higher quality APS-C cameras? Just a though.

price. plus do you need weathersealed lenses on minimally sealed cameras?

ed rader

[timnosenzo]

Do you think it would be a smart move by Canon?

Not really, but no one knows for sure if they will ever do it. I mean, they claimed the Pro1 had an L lens. :rolleyes:

400193

[Lisa]

Because Canon is stepping up their game with the 1.6s. Why wouldn't they make higher quality EF-S lenses for higher quality APS-C cameras? Just a though.

Why should they? The price would be about the same and only 1.6 crop bodies could use it.

[Lisa]

Not really, but no one knows for sure if they will ever do it. I mean, they claimed the Pro1 had an L lens. :rolleyes:


Fixed lenses are a different story.

[heyimnick]

price. plus do you need weathersealed lenses on minimally sealed cameras?

ed rader

I thought the 7D was weathersealed? Hmm, research might be off lol.

[TeamSpeed]

I thought the 7D was weathersealed? Hmm, research might be off lol.

It is better sealed, but how much is better is yet to be determined.

[KenjiS]

Because Canon is stepping up their game with the 1.6s. Why wouldn't they make higher quality EF-S lenses for higher quality APS-C cameras? Just a though.

They already did, the 15-85 is MUCH higher quality build-wise than the older ones

My guess is there will be some higher end EF-S optics, We're going to see a few more like the 17-55/15-85 [Maybe a really nice upgrade to the 10-22..and maybe another prime or two]

EF-S stuff to me is going to replace Canon's upper end consumer tier...lenses like the 28-135 and that..

[fi20100]

No EF-S L lenses... ever. The L lenses will always be usable on all EOS dSLR cameras.

[toxic]

Weathersealing isn't an "L" requirement...only certain, newer lenses have it.

I think there'll be more high-end EF-S lenses, they just won't be labeled "L".

[lowcrust]

Not really, but no one knows for sure if they will ever do it. I mean, they claimed the Pro1 had an L lens. :rolleyes:

400193

Is that thing for real? I've never seen it before.

/*off to wikipedia!*

[tkbslc]

Because Canon is stepping up their game with the 1.6s. Why wouldn't they make higher quality EF-S lenses for higher quality APS-C cameras? Just a though.

They do have some higher quality EF-S lenses, they just don't call them L.


17-55
60 f2.8
15-85 (supposedly)
10-22.

I think the bigger problem is people who think a lens has to be L to be good enough for them. Optically, the 17-55, 60 f2.8 and 10-22 are as good as their L counterparts on FF.

[czeglin]

I don't see the need to have EF-S L lenses: EF L lenses can be used on any DSLR and you just need to take the crop factor into account to make your choice. It would be a silly decision IMHO.
Exactly. 1.6 is a pretty darn large crop factor! If they made a crop equivalent of the 70-200 f/2.8 IS I would be all over it. The 70-200 is a bit long for me as-is and definitely heavier than it needs to be. Even the primes don't necessarily translate well. There is undoubtedly less value in a TS-E 17mm on a crop than on a FF. You're forced to pay for a huge image circle that you're not even using. There isn't a crop equivalent (10-11mm).

[CyberDyneSystems]

All the current L series already are "for" the Crop cameras....

they just happen to fit old Film cameras too.

[frankchn]

Even the primes don't necessarily translate well. There is undoubtedly less value in a TS-E 17mm on a crop than on a FF. You're forced to pay for a huge image circle that you're not even using. There isn't a crop equivalent (10-11mm).

If you are going to use a L TS-E lens, you probably care enough about image quality (and/or rich enough) to get a FF camera go on along with it.

W.r.t. the 70-200, what about the Tokina 50-135mm f/2.8 Pro DX AF?

[Stealthy Ninja]

Weathersealing isn't an "L" requirement...only certain, newer lenses have it.

I think there'll be more high-end EF-S lenses, they just won't be labeled "L".

Agreed.