24-105 lens on a 450d? Major mismatch?

[AWGD8]

Originally Posted by tabsy

Hi everyone
I own a 45d which was my first SLR and had it for about a year now. I am a newbie needless to say and have just added a new lens to my repertoire - 50mm 1.4, but also want a decent telephoto zoom whoich is sharp and versatile. I am venturing abroad so want a top notch lense for my photography.

So I am thinking of getting a 24-105mm , loving what I seen and heard so far but many people are of the opinion that the glass is unsuited to to the camera I am currently using.

Is there really a mismatch? Will the picture quality be lower if the lens is mounted on a 450d...

Also, I still dont actually get this crop factor malarkey.

Thanks,
Tabs

Welcome to the forum!

Go ahead and get yourself a nice 24-105mm. I`m pretty sure that crop body will not

last that long and you`ll change it to Full Frame anytime soon.

If you like to keep the 450D, then pls. stop lurking here at POTN.

[P51Mstg]

As long as you understand the focal legnth issues, no problem.

The problem for me, the few times I've had an L Lens on a Rebel (plastic) camera, is that the body is so light and the lens is so heavy, that the lens feel like it weighs about 3x the camera.... That is strange feeling....

Of course I'd rather have the Rebel as light carry around camera for a day of shooting snapshots at the amusement park than a Canon G anything (I had a G-9 and it wasn't too great).... Rebel isn't that much bigger and at least you can take pictures indoors with it.


Mark H

[h14nha]

Originally Posted by tabsy

Hi everyone
I own a 45d which was my first SLR and had it for about a year now. I am a newbie needless to say and have just added a new lens to my repertoire - 50mm 1.4, but also want a decent telephoto zoom whoich is sharp and versatile. I am venturing abroad so want a top notch lense for my photography.

So I am thinking of getting a 24-105mm , loving what I seen and heard so far but many people are of the opinion that the glass is unsuited to to the camera I am currently using.

Is there really a mismatch? Will the picture quality be lower if the lens is mounted on a 450d...

Also, I still dont actually get this crop factor malarkey.

Thanks,
Tabs

You dont actually say what you want to photograph so no one can actually give you exact advice. Have a look at VerseDMB pic and that should show you what your 450d is capable of producing.
As for the crop factor, as the 450d ( and the 500/550/50/7d ) has a smaller size sensor, any focal lengths on any lenses you look at, have to be multiplied by 1.6.
ie a 100mm lens become 160mm on all the above cameras yours included. As a guide our eyes in general see at 50mm if that makes sense to you.
The 450d produces some superb images, have a look through the gallery devoted to the 450d/XSi.
I cant comment on the lens your looking at as I have no experience with it I'll leave that to people who own it.

[gjl711]

Originally Posted by P51Mstg

...the few times I've had an L Lens on a Rebel (plastic) camera, is that the body is so light and the lens is so heavy, that the lens feel like it weighs about 3x the camera.... That is strange feeling.......

I read this so often here on POTN but still totally don't get it. I've shot with heavy lenses on xxxD cameras and on 1D cameras and really cant notice a difference what so ever. Best I can figure it's my shooting style.

I hold the camera with my left hand under the lens supporting nearly 100% of the weight of the camera/lens combo. My right hand is there just to provide balance and press the shutter but carries no weight. This guy pretty much holds it the same way I do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7ZDPnXeBeo

The only thing I can notice between shooting with a light lens or heavy lens is that the position of my right hand changes due to a change in the center of rotation for the body/lens pair. I've never experienced that strange feeling though.

[SkipD]

Originally Posted by h14nha

As for the crop factor, as the 450d ( and the 500/550/50/7d ) has a smaller size sensor, any focal lengths on any lenses you look at, have to be multiplied by 1.6.

ie a 100mm lens become 160mm on all the above cameras yours included. As a guide our eyes in general see at 50mm if that makes sense to you.

The items I put in bold in the quote above are totally incorrect. The focal length of a lens does not change when you put it on different format cameras (format referring to the size of the film frame or digital sensor in a camera).

Now for the truths regarding the "crop factor" issues:

The "crop factor" is a reference number that relates to the difference in sensor size between cameras like the Canon 40D and a 35mm film (or a so-called "full-frame" digital) camera. Let me list the facts:

35mm film cameras have a film frame size of approximately 24x36mm, while the Canon 40D, for example, has an APS-C sized sensor, measuring approximately 15x22.5mm.

When camera manufacturers started designing digital SLR's, they decided that they should be about the same physical size of their 35mm SLR's. For that reason, they concluded that they could use the line of lenses they already had for their 35mm SLR's on the new digital SLR's.

All lenses designed for 35mm cameras project an image circle onto the film that covers the 24x36mm rectangle. The 35mm camera records the portion of that image circle that is defined by the opening behind the shutter for the film (24x36mm in size). A digital SLR with an APS-C sized sensor only records the smaller area (approximately 15x22mm) of the image circle projected by the lens.

When you put a 100mm lens on a 35mm camera and take a photograph, then put the same lens on a DSLR such as the Canon 40D and take the same photograph - same subject, same position for the camera - with the same lens, and then enlarge both photographs to the same size print (4x6 inches, for example), it will appear as though the photo from the Canon 40D was taken with a longer lens. That is because the image recorded by the Canon 40D was of a SMALLER PORTION of the image circle projected by the lens - cropped, if you will - compared to the image recorded by the 35mm camera.

The special lenses made by Canon for the Canon 40D (and other Canon APS-C cameras) are called the EF-S series. These project a smaller image circle, making the lenses less expensive to design and produce in wide-angle and extreme wide-angle formats. However, an EF-S lens set to 40mm will produce the exact same image as an EF lens set to 40mm. Focal length is focal length, period.

Now to the primary point that I want to make: NOTHING about lens EVER CHANGES when you put it on different format cameras. Focal length never changes. Aperture range never changes. The only thing that would change is the apparent field of view, and that change is not a function of the lens but it is a function of the size of the sensor or film that will record the image.

The "crop factor" calculation for "35mm equivalent focal length" has only one valid use. That is for comparing lens use on two different format cameras. Here's an example: Joe took a photo of Mount Rushmore with a 35mm camera from a particular place using a 200mm lens. You want to replicate that photo with your Canon 40D. What focal length do you need to do that from the same location that he took his photo? Divide the 200mm by 1.6 and you get the answer - 125mm. The "crop factor" is a REFERENCE between the two formats that lets you compare the field of view of particular focal lengths between the two formats.

The "crop factor" (related to using lenses essentially designed for 35mm SLR cameras) is always given assuming that the 35mm format (24x36mm) is the reference master. Something to realize, though, is that the 35mm film format is not, never has been, and never will be the "master" format against which all other camera formats are referenced. It is simply the format of the cameras that have also evolved into today's commonly used digital SLRs.

[watt100]

Originally Posted by gjl711

I read this so often here on POTN but still totally don't get it. I've shot with heavy lenses on xxxD cameras and on 1D cameras and really cant notice a difference what so ever. Best I can figure it's my shooting style.

I hold the camera with my left hand under the lens supporting nearly 100% of the weight of the camera/lens combo. My right hand is there just to provide balance and press the shutter but carries no weight. This guy pretty much holds it the same way I do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7ZDPnXeBeo

The only thing I can notice between shooting with a light lens or heavy lens is that the position of my right hand changes due to a change in the center of rotation for the body/lens pair. I've never experienced that strange feeling though.

right, makes you wonder if the people complaining their camera is not heavy enough are holding it wrong! They must pity the poor film photographers that were forced to shoot with lightweight 35mm models for so many decades. Those old photogs are surely glad we are in the modern electronic digital age where the good stuff like ipods and cell phones are big and heavy.

[AWGD8]

I have a 5d classic with the "Brick" lens, I get it when people say heavy lens on rebel body. My 5dc/brick combo are perfect when shooting at normal stance, but if you want to do more artistic shots, sometimes it is a PITA to hold the body with one hand.

I would not be able to get this picture using 2 hands because I was holding the base of the light pole. I was leaning back on this shot to frame the shot. I really wanted to include the base of the light pole as my foreground. (Left part of the picture.) If you look at the same pole from the other side of the bridge (The one with the rail), imagine how far back I was leaning and holding the camera with one hand.

BTW, this is 24mm on 24-70L but it`s a full frame body.

[mi000ke]

I was in a similar situation a few weeks ago. Wanted to upgrade from an 18-200 to better quality zoom (meaning shorter focal range) for my 7D. I was looking at the 15-85 vs. the 24-105. I analyzed about 1000 shots that were representative of the kinds of shots I typically take, and discovered (to my surprise) that 35% of my shots were at less than 24mm and 85% we at less than 85mm. The 15-85 was the obvious choice for me.

I don't know what other lenses you have, but if you are in doubt about what to get and don't currently have a wide-range zoom, I would suggest borrowing or renting something like the 18-200 and shooting a few hundred photos without consciously thinking about the focal length. Then see what focal lengths you naturally tend to favor (you can get this from the exif data). This will guide you to making a good decision.

[gjl711]

Originally Posted by mi000ke

...I analyzed about 1000 shots that were representative of the kinds of shots I typically take, and discovered (to my surprise) that 35% of my shots were at less than 24mm and 85% we at less than 85mm.... .

Not sure if you did it by hand or not, but there is a very nice freeware program that will show you those settings and more. Check out ExposurePlot.
http://www.cpr.demon.nl/prog_plotf.html

[windpig]

24-105 is my most used lens on crop or FF. Get a 10-22 and 24-105.

[msowsun]

Originally Posted by tabsy

Hi everyone
I own a 45d which was my first SLR and had it for about a year now. I am a newbie needless to say and have just added a new lens to my repertoire - 50mm 1.4, but also want a decent telephoto zoom which is sharp and versatile. I am venturing abroad so want a top notch lense for my photography.

So I am thinking of getting a 24-105mm , loving what I seen and heard so far but many people are of the opinion that the glass is unsuited to to the camera I am currently using.

Is there really a mismatch? Will the picture quality be lower if the lens is mounted on a 450d...

Also, I still dont actually get this crop factor malarkey.

Thanks,
Tabs

Lots of posts, and lots of bad advice.

- The OP is new to DSLR photography
- He probably has only the 18-55 kit lens and a 50mm 1.4
- He wants a telephoto lens
- Sounds like he wants ONE lens for his travel photography ("venturing abroad so want a top notch lens for my photography") He didn't say he wants a number of lenses.
- Because he is a "newbie" I seriously doubt he can afford to spend $1,800 on TWO lenses to go traveling with, like some of you have recommended.


There are some questions the OP has to answer before you can give any meaningful advice:

1) What is your budget?
2) What lenses do you have now?
3) How many lenses do you want to carry with you?
4) What type of photos do you like to shoot? (landscapes, architecture, street, candids, portraits, sports, etc)
5) What focal length do you typically use now?

[mi000ke]

Originally Posted by gjl711

Not sure if you did it by hand or not, but there is a very nice freeware program that will show you those settings and more. Check out ExposurePlot.
http://www.cpr.demon.nl/prog_plotf.html

Yes, did it by hand. Thanks for turning me on to this software.

[JEmerson]

Originally Posted by msowsun

Lots of posts, and lots of bad advice.

- The OP is new to DSLR photography
- He probably has only the 18-55 kit lens and a 50mm 1.4
- He wants a telephoto lens
- Sounds like he wants ONE lens for his travel photography ("venturing abroad so want a top notch lens for my photography") He didn't say he wants a number of lenses.
- Because he is a "newbie" I seriously doubt he can afford to spend $1,800 on TWO lenses to go traveling with, like some of you have recommended.


There are some questions the OP has to answer before you can give any meaningful advice:

1) What is your budget?
2) What lenses do you have now?
3) How many lenses do you want to carry with you?
4) What type of photos do you like to shoot? (landscapes, architecture, street, candids, portraits, sports, etc)
5) What focal length do you typically use now?

- this.

I'll also add #6

6) Is weight and/or build of high importance?

[apersson850]

Originally Posted by aboss3

17-55, on the other hand, is an awesome lens, and something else to consider. As for me, I find it too short on the longer end,

When I find the same, I simply exchange it for the EF 24-105 mm f/4L IS USM, or maybe the EF 28-135 mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM. Especially the latter is an underrated lens. Build quality is like the 17-55, but I can't see any image difference between the 28-135 and the 24-105.

[tabsy]

Originally Posted by AWGD8

Welcome to the forum!

Go ahead and get yourself a nice 24-105mm. I`m pretty sure that crop body will not

last that long and you`ll change it to Full Frame anytime soon.

If you like to keep the 450D, then pls. stop lurking here at POTN.

Funny you should say that as Im already looking at upgrading to 5D before they year is out!!!