Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 29 Jan 2011 (Saturday) 21:22
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

1.6 Crop Deconverter??

 
gonzogolf
dumb remark memorialized
29,151 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 1190
Joined Dec 2006
     
Jan 30, 2011 06:56 |  #16

Altering a lens, or using a wider lens still wouldnt make the sensor bigger, which is the point of FF, not altering the field of view of the lens..




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Jan 30, 2011 07:03 |  #17

phigment wrote in post #11741494 (external link)
Actually, if you really wanted to recreate the shot with your 7D you would need to use a 200mm and do a panoramic shot.

Why?


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
phigment
Member
230 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2009
Location: Waterloo, Ontario, Canada
     
Jan 30, 2011 08:43 |  #18

SkipD wrote in post #11741521 (external link)
Why?

Well, using a 135mm on a crop would only recreate the angle of view. The depth of field would be different.

So, I guess you could use a larger aperture on the 135mm lens, but then you would have to compensate with a faster shutter speed. That may modify other charateristics of the scene (i.e. flowing water).. but then again, you couldn't recreate flowing water quite right with a panoramic either.

Anyways, think I'm just rambling now...


A7R, Firin 20mm, CV 21/4, CV 40/1.4, 100ZE, 300 4LIS, Tamron 150-600, Jupiter 8, RX100 IV

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Jan 30, 2011 09:06 |  #19

phigment wrote in post #11741817 (external link)
Well, using a 135mm on a crop would only recreate the angle of view. The depth of field would be different.

So, I guess you could use a larger aperture on the 135mm lens, but then you would have to compensate with a faster shutter speed. That may modify other charateristics of the scene (i.e. flowing water).. but then again, you couldn't recreate flowing water quite right with a panoramic either.

Anyways, think I'm just rambling now...

And you're getting WAY too deep. I seriously doubt that any newbie who needs to read about the "crop factor" even remotely understands depth of field. As you suggested, that detail could easily have been dealt with by a knowledgeable photographer if it made any difference.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Shane ­ W
Senior Member
839 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Traverse City, Michigan
     
Jan 30, 2011 09:10 |  #20

Yea, that's a good idea... put another tube of glass between a 35L so I feel good knowing it IS 35mm on a crop camera! Then I would screw on a UV filter or two to "protect" it!

The focal length of a lens is just that... the focal length, so if you are shooting a 30mm on a crop vs. a 50mm on FF cam, will the end photo be the same if you shot the same subject from the same distance? No.


Shane W

70D | Sig 10-20 | EF-S 15-85 | EF 70-200 2.8L | Sig 150-500 | Viv 28 2.5 | Sig 30 | Tak 50 1.4 [COLOR=blue]| EF 100 2.8 Macro | 1.4x TC | Nodal Ninja 3 | Tripods | Some Flashes | My flickr  (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Player9
Senior Member
658 posts
Joined Mar 2007
     
Jan 30, 2011 09:32 |  #21

So many of the folks using these cameras have never had a 35mm SLR and have never (and will never) own a so-called "full frame" DSLR. They only need to know what they see: 12mm lens is "ultra wide;" 18mm lens is "wide;" a 30mm lens is "standard;" a 60mm lens is "telephoto;" a 250mm lens is a "super tele." No conversions necessary.


60D, EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5, EF-S 18-135mm 3.5-5.6 IS, EF-S 55-250mm f/4-5.6 IS, Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8, EF 28mm f/1.8, EF 50mm f/1.8, EF-S 60mm f/2.8 macro, EF 85mm f/1.8, 430ex, 220ex, Alien Bee B400 (2), Alien Bee B800 (2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Refresh ­ Image
Senior Member
557 posts
Joined Jan 2011
     
Jan 30, 2011 09:41 |  #22
bannedPermanent ban

Austin Fern wrote in post #11741422 (external link)
You still don't need to sets of lenses, you simply have two sets of tools. You want FF, you pick up your FF tool. You don't you pick up your crop tool. If you're simply talking about getting a wider FOV on your crop, you're still talking about adding a different piece of glass in front of the sensor.

No good reason for this.

-F

Is that true ? Let's say you are a wedding photographer and happen to have mixed cameras. You would need a wide zoom on one camera and normal zoom on another. So which lenses would you buy ?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Jan 30, 2011 09:49 |  #23

Refresh Image wrote in post #11742026 (external link)
Is that true ? Let's say you are a wedding photographer and happen to have mixed cameras. You would need a wide zoom on one camera and normal zoom on another. So which lenses would you buy ?

I could easily see having the very same lens on two different format EOS cameras for weddings. The 24-70, for example, would work quite well on both formats when hauling both around for quick changes. There's no way I would carry two cameras with precisely the same field of view for both.

With both cameras set up for the same field of view, there would be no advantage to carrying the second camera other than backup. I'd usually have my backup handy but I wouldn't carry it with a lens providing the same field of view.

Having two different fields of view by simply dropping one camera and picking up the other is a good thing and I would do that all the time when I was photographing weddings, auto races, and all sorts of other events.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
RPCrowe
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,042 posts
Likes: 1114
Joined Nov 2005
Location: San Diego County, California, USA
     
Jan 30, 2011 09:50 |  #24

Why not just use a wider lens... The 12-24mm Tokina f/4 is not a terribly expensive glass but, provides excellent image quality and is built like a tank...


See my images at http://rpcrowe.smugmug​.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Refresh ­ Image
Senior Member
557 posts
Joined Jan 2011
     
Jan 30, 2011 09:57 |  #25
bannedPermanent ban

SkipD wrote in post #11742058 (external link)
I could easily see having the very same lens on two different format EOS cameras for weddings.

Certainly 24-70 is not that good at wedding on a crop body. You will have problems with most group shots, people at tables etc.
But I actually asked what wide angle lens the previous poster would buy.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Jan 30, 2011 10:50 |  #26

Refresh Image wrote in post #11742096 (external link)
Certainly 24-70 is not that good at wedding on a crop body.

I would seriously argue that point, but different photographers have different styles. My 24-70 f/2.8L rides on my 20D far more than the other two lenses I have for it (16-35 f/2.8L and 70-200 f/2.8L IS) and is the first lens I would normally choose to use in a setting such as a wedding.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tempest68
Senior Member
Avatar
980 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 4
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Manchester, PA
     
Jan 30, 2011 11:04 |  #27

Refresh Image wrote in post #11740200 (external link)
Because when you have two cameras with different sensors you would not have to have two separate sets of lenses.

To me having two cameras with different sensors means that I would need less lenses, not more if they're all EF (no EF-S) lenses like the 16-35 and one of the 70-200's. Since each lens will have a different composition depending on FF or crop, there is a lot of flexibility with just two lenses and two bodies. Need to go really wide, then the 16-35 would be on the FF. Need closer to a "normal" view, then the 16-35 on the crop. Some telephoto, then 70-200 on the FF. And wanting even more "reach", the switch the 70-200 over to the crop.


Jim
Canon: EOS 3, 40mm f2.8 STM, 85mm f1.8 USM. Voigtlander: R3A, 28mm F2.8 SL II, Nokton 40mm f1.4, 50mm f2 Heliar.
Nikon: SB-25. Yongnuo: YN565EX, YN-622C transceiver (x2)
Sony: A7S, a6000, 24-240mm f3.5-6.3 G, Nissin i40.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
According to the lazy TF, My flatulence rates
Avatar
55,074 posts
Likes: 2200
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Jan 30, 2011 11:34 |  #28

tempest68 wrote in post #11742443 (external link)
To me having two cameras with different sensors means that I would need less lenses...

Interesting perspective. I like it.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bang ­ Bang ­ Boy
Goldmember
Avatar
1,347 posts
Joined Nov 2010
Location: South Africa
     
Jan 30, 2011 14:28 |  #29

This ****s hilarous. Never seen such a discussion about the crop factor. I just got a 28mm f/2.8 to act sort of a cheap fifty on my 50d. When I got the 5d(two days ago) I got a nifty fifty until I can afford the sigma.


Lots of old stuff but hey I am a student
Photojournalist in Johannesburg.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tempest68
Senior Member
Avatar
980 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 4
Joined Aug 2008
Location: Manchester, PA
     
Jan 30, 2011 15:12 |  #30

gjl711 wrote in post #11742586 (external link)
Interesting perspective. I like it.

Thanks.

I am a hobbyist as far a photography goes. But if I were making a living at it, and thus had to have a backup body, the versatility of one FF and one crop with a smaller selection of lenses might make sense.

Anytime I see someone that is making money from their equipment, I always try to see what they're using. One observation about studio work (at least in my area) is that they save money by using middle-of-the-road lenses since their lighting will make more of an impact on the result. I've seen studios and mobile studios (think Santa at the mall) using the 28-105 or the 24-85 (I didn't know this lens existed until I saw a studio using it - never seen this one asked about on POTN in a which lens should I buy thread) or the Tamron 28-75. And obviously for the casual consumer buying the prints, these lenses produce results that are good enough.


Jim
Canon: EOS 3, 40mm f2.8 STM, 85mm f1.8 USM. Voigtlander: R3A, 28mm F2.8 SL II, Nokton 40mm f1.4, 50mm f2 Heliar.
Nikon: SB-25. Yongnuo: YN565EX, YN-622C transceiver (x2)
Sony: A7S, a6000, 24-240mm f3.5-6.3 G, Nissin i40.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,899 views & 0 likes for this thread
1.6 Crop Deconverter??
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Dman780
1493 guests, 317 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.