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 04 Mar 2011 (Friday) 15:32
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

EF Lenses on Crop Bodies

 
metalordie
Senior Member
Avatar
269 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: new jersey
     
Mar 05, 2011 18:07 |  #61

ShotByTom wrote in post #11962031 (external link)
Come to think of it...a lens that cost as much as a 24-70 should include a property telephoto to! It doesn't cover wide angle OR telephoto...ASTOUNDING​!!


good point. the only reason i have the older version 28-70 2.8 is because i bought it for 70$ otherwise i would never drop the retail on the 24-70. its so standard and overpriced at that. even on a FF i find it minimal to say the least.


Stephanie

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
richardfox
Goldmember
Avatar
1,883 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Bellbrook, Ohio, USA
     
Mar 05, 2011 18:18 |  #62

DanielFotografie wrote in post #11956661 (external link)
Who uses 'em, and what's your experience like?

In my case, I have a buddy who uses the Canon 24-70 F2.8L on a crop body and it astounds me that people would pay so much for a lens that doesn't even provide a proper wide angle.

Uh, that's why it's a "mid-range" lens. I bet it doesn't have "proper" telephoto range either!

"Proper" is HIGHLY subjective! My 10-22 doesn't have "proper" telephoto qualities, and my 100-400 doesn't have "proper" wide angle capabilities.

That's why one has a broad selection of lenses!


Canon 50D gripped, EF 50/1.8, EF-S 10-22, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-200 f/2.8L, 100/2.8 macro, 100-400L, 300 2.8L, Canon 500 f8 mirror with chipped EF mount, 580EX, 1.4x and 2x Canon teleconverters, Canon EF Life-Size converter.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
metalordie
Senior Member
Avatar
269 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: new jersey
     
Mar 05, 2011 19:36 |  #63

richardfox wrote in post #11962862 (external link)
Uh, that's why it's a "mid-range" lens. I bet it doesn't have "proper" telephoto range either!

"Proper" is HIGHLY subjective! My 10-22 doesn't have "proper" telephoto qualities, and my 100-400 doesn't have "proper" wide angle capabilities.

That's why one has a broad selection of lenses!

i agree that i would rather have 2 different lenses than a 24-70 ( At THAT price it is)


Stephanie

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
egordon99
Cream of the Crop
10,247 posts
Likes: 3
Joined Feb 2008
Location: Philly 'burbs
     
Mar 05, 2011 19:39 |  #64

metalordie wrote in post #11962817 (external link)
good point. the only reason i have the older version 28-70 2.8 is because i bought it for 70$ otherwise i would never drop the retail on the 24-70. its so standard and overpriced at that. even on a FF i find it minimal to say the least.

How much SHOULD the 24-70L cost? What do you mean by "so standard" and "even on FF i find it minimal" ? :confused:




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"I am a little creepy"
Avatar
12,477 posts
Gallery: 140 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 3114
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Omak, in north-central Washington state, USA
     
Mar 05, 2011 21:54 |  #65

I think the OP assumes that all of us on here could really benefit from having a wider angle than the 24-70 provides.

This is simply not true, as there are many of us on here who have no use whatsoever for a wide angle lens. Some of us do not want to shoot with a wide field of view. Ever.

I think the OP needs to learn that many photographers who shoot very seriously have completely different needs than he does, due to the subjects they shoot and the demands of their clients.

I hope the responses on this thread have opened the OP's eyes a bit, and given him/her a greater comprehension of the many different styles of shooting that we all engage in.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
yogestee
"my posts can be a little colourful"
Avatar
13,845 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 35
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Australia
     
Mar 05, 2011 21:57 as a reply to  @ Tom Reichner's post |  #66

Why would anyone want to pay $1000+ for a prime that doesn't even zoom:rolleyes:


Jurgen
50D~700D~EOS M~G11~S95~GoPro Hero4 Silver
http://www.pbase.com/j​urgentreue (external link)
The Title Fairy,, off with her head!!

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShockFactor03
Member
Avatar
36 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: San Francisco, California
     
Mar 05, 2011 22:00 |  #67

I'm using the 16-35mm mk II on my 60D (1.6 FOVCF).

Did I mess up? Should I return it? No, I can't return it. Should I give it away?


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,475 posts
Likes: 154
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Mar 05, 2011 22:04 |  #68

ShockFactor03 wrote in post #11963928 (external link)
I'm using the 16-35mm mk II on my 60D (1.6 FOVCF).

Did I mess up? Should I return it? No, I can't return it. Should I give it away?

No and No.

Add the 24-70 to your kit and you'll have the same set of lenses that I use with my 20D (except that my 16-35 and 70-200 are the original versions).


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ShockFactor03
Member
Avatar
36 posts
Joined Jan 2011
Location: San Francisco, California
     
Mar 05, 2011 22:35 |  #69

Thank you Skip, I appreciate your advice. The 24-70 is something I am considering. But no rush. I may get it when I buy a full frame if there are instant rebates available. (I'm speculating on the 5D mk III hehe)

I was just being sarcastic in my post.

In hind-sight, if I had known Canon was going to raise the MSRP, I should have added the 24-70 to my purchase a couple of months ago when B&H doubled the instant rebate if you bought a lens (or 2 or 3) with a select camera body.


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JustinRageth
Senior Member
Avatar
635 posts
Joined Dec 2010
Location: SE Wisconsin
     
Mar 05, 2011 23:00 |  #70

ChuckingFluff wrote in post #11957108 (external link)
Really? you get less coverage with this lens on your 1.3x crop than on a 1.6x crop. It's simple math your system weighs more and has less coverage, now that's silly. Then again this thread is silly from the beginning.

technically...wouldn't the coverage be the same? the range would just be higher values on a crop..a 10-20mm coverage on 1 camera and 20-30 on a crop camera (just for example) would have the same coverage


T4i Gripped, Sigma 17-70mm, 70-200 f/4L, 50mm 1.8
Panasonic TZ5
Flicker (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
metalordie
Senior Member
Avatar
269 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: new jersey
     
Mar 05, 2011 23:38 |  #71

egordon99 wrote in post #11963227 (external link)
How much SHOULD the 24-70L cost? What do you mean by "so standard" and "even on FF i find it minimal" ? :confused:

there is no "should". its all a matter of personal opinion. ;)


Stephanie

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
metalordie
Senior Member
Avatar
269 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: new jersey
     
Mar 05, 2011 23:40 |  #72

ShockFactor03 wrote in post #11963928 (external link)
I'm using the 16-35mm mk II on my 60D (1.6 FOVCF).

Did I mess up? Should I return it? No, I can't return it. Should I give it away?

yes you messed up you should definitely give it away rather than return it. oh nevermind i already own that one. :p


Stephanie

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
krb
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,818 posts
Likes: 7
Joined Jun 2008
Location: Where southern efficiency and northern charm come together
     
Mar 05, 2011 23:50 |  #73

JustinRageth wrote in post #11964230 (external link)
technically...wouldn't the coverage be the same? the range would just be higher values on a crop..a 10-20mm coverage on 1 camera and 20-30 on a crop camera (just for example) would have the same coverage

You are doing the math wrong. Using your sample of 10-20 coverage on one camera and coverage that starts at 20mm on the other means a 2x crop factor so it would be 20-40 coverage on the second camera.


-- Ken
Comment and critique is always appreciated!
Flickr (external link)
Gear list

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
raksphoto
Senior Member
456 posts
Gallery: 9 photos
Likes: 22
Joined Jun 2010
Location: California
     
Mar 06, 2011 01:14 |  #74

yogestee wrote in post #11963923 (external link)
Why would anyone want to pay $1000+ for a prime that doesn't even zoom:rolleyes:

Because you need the light gathering power for low-light photos ...


7D Mk II | 70D | 7D | 1D Mk III
EF-S 10-18mm f/3.5-5.6 IS STM | EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM |
EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS | EF-S 50-250mm f/4-5.6 IS II | EF 70-200mm f/4L |
EF 135mm f/2L | EF 100mm f/2 | EF 85mm f/1.8 | EF 50mm f/1.2L | EF 35mm f/1.4L
The main camera gear I use

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
C.Michael
Senior Member
Avatar
754 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Adelaide, South Australia
     
Mar 06, 2011 01:20 |  #75

stillinamerica wrote in post #11957520 (external link)
Here is the op question: "Who uses 'em, and what's your experience like?

In my case, I have a buddy who uses the Canon 24-70 F2.8L on a crop body and it astounds me that people would pay so much for a lens that doesn't even provide a proper wide angle."

I provided my answer with examples above, so yes I understand his question.

Yeah....I agree - As if you would pay that much for the 400L too - doesn't even have a proper wide angle! WTF it doesn't zoom either. What a joke.

Horses for courses mate.

Could say the same for the 24-105L - one of the best walk around lenses...


www.christophermorriso​n.com.au (external link)
Canon 5D Classic w/ grip | 50mm f/1.8 | 85 f/1.8 | 430EX II + YN460II

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

6,967 views & 0 likes for this thread
EF Lenses on Crop Bodies
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 dbetts
738 guests, 335 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

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.