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 11 Jan 2013 (Friday) 19:55
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Do I Want an EF-S Lens?

 
manderson
Member
202 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Abingdon, MD USA
     
Jan 11, 2013 19:55 |  #1

In keeping with the "no question is a stupid question", well, here goes:

Everything I read leads me to understand that an EF lens on a crop body is going to perform great because framing is in the center of the glass, and the outer egdes of the lens, which are normally the problem areas, are not used. With a much more vast array of EF lenses available, it seems you could achieve just about any lens specific desire or requirement on a crop body, and theoretically have better quality. It appears to me that FF is coming into the consumer price range, and crop bodies could soon be considered more of a specialty type camera, for those who want "the reach" as it is referred to. And you get better "reach" on a crop body with an EF lens. So why would I even want an EF-S lens?




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
treck_dialect
Senior Member
Avatar
689 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: QC Philippines
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:00 |  #2

10-22 is an efs lens. cant get that wide on a crop with an ef lens.


well hello
http://aleccorpuz.word​press.com/ (external link)
Flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
3Rotor
Senior Member
818 posts
Gallery: 19 photos
Likes: 201
Joined May 2009
Location: Oklahoma
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:01 |  #3

If you're on a budget, some of the better EF-S lenses will out perform many regular EF lenses. Then you have to take weight and size into consideration as well. Different strokes for different folks.


Instagram (external link)
www.jessemak.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeffreyG
"my bits and pieces are all hard"
Avatar
15,521 posts
Gallery: 42 photos
Likes: 594
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Detroit, MI
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:04 |  #4

manderson wrote in post #15476947 (external link)
So why would I even want an EF-S lens?

Typically you want EF-S for a lens on your 1.6X body that is not otherwise available.

Ultra wide? If you want a lens as wide as 10mm, you can use a 1.6X specific lens or you can forget about it.

Also the 1.6X specific wide angle zooms (typically 17-XX or the Canon 15-85) are not quite available in EF, and then with a big cost penalty.

As examples, for f/2.8 constant wide angles you can use the Canon 17-55 or the 3rd party similar choices. The EF 16-35L would do as an alternate, but it costs a huge amount more, lacks IS and is a lot shorter on the long end. For most 1.6X shooters one of the 1.6X specific lenses will be a better fit and a better value.

Similarly, a slower but broader range zoom like the EF-S 15-85 is pretty much not available in any EF lens. There is no EF zoom that gets down to 15mm for the first, and there are no 18-200 kind of zooms that are EF specific either.

There are some EF-S lenses that can be replaced / bettered with EF lenses, and these typically only really give you a cost advantage. Examples are the 60mm macro and the 55-250.


My personal stuff:http://www.flickr.com/​photos/jngirbach/sets/ (external link)
I use a Canon 5DIII and a Sony A7rIII

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 159
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:08 |  #5

manderson wrote in post #15476947 (external link)
Everything I read leads me to understand that an EF lens on a crop body is going to perform great because framing is in the center of the glass, and the outer egdes of the lens, which are normally the problem areas, are not used.

You are misunderstanding the truth. Every point in an image projected by a lens is made up of light rays coming through every point on the lens' glass.

A so-called "crop body" (a camera having the APS-C format) has a sensor that is smaller than the image circle projected by a Canon EF mount lens. Thus, if the edges/corners of the image projected by the lens aren't as sharp as the center, the captured image in an APS-C format camera will be sharper at the corners than if a so-called "full-frame" camera were used.

manderson wrote in post #15476947 (external link)
And you get better "reach" on a crop body with an EF lens.

This is wrong. There is no difference in the focal lengths between a Canon EF-mount lens and a Canon EF-S mount lens. An EF-S lens dialed to 50mm (and focused at infinity) will provide the very same image as an EF 50mm (also focused at infinity) would on an APS-C format camera.

manderson wrote in post #15476947 (external link)
So why would I even want an EF-S lens?

EF-S lenses were originally designed to provide photographers with less expensive wide-angle choices as compared to the EF lenses produced at the time. This was possible due to the technical specification changes applied to the EF-S design. The EF-S lens can reach further into the mirror box than an EF lens - something that makes designing short focal length lenses less expensive. Also, the EF-S lens projects a smaller image circle - something that saves money in the design and production of the lens.


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

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
archer1960
Goldmember
Avatar
4,930 posts
Gallery: 6 photos
Likes: 81
Joined Jul 2010
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:13 |  #6

Ad 3Rotor said: weight and size and cost.


Gripped 7D, gripped, full-spectrum modfied T1i (500D), SX50HS, A2E film body, Tamzooka (150-600), Tamron 90mm/2.8 VC (ver 2), Tamron 18-270 VC, Canon FD 100 f/4.0 macro, Canon 24-105 f/4L,Canon EF 200 f/2.8LII, Canon 85 f/1.8, Tamron Adaptall 2 90mmf/2.5 Macro, Tokina 11-16, Canon EX-430 flash, Vivitar DF-383 flash, Astro-Tech AT6RC and Celestron NexStar 102 GT telescopes, various other semi-crappy manual lenses and stuff.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
manderson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
202 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Abingdon, MD USA
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:25 |  #7

JeffreyG wrote in post #15476970 (external link)
Ultra wide? If you want a lens as wide as 10mm, you can use a 1.6X specific lens or you can forget about it.

This comment, and your entire post, really answered my initial question. thx




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
melcat
Goldmember
1,122 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:32 |  #8

manderson wrote in post #15476947 (external link)
Everything I read leads me to understand that an EF lens on a crop body is going to perform great because framing is in the center of the glass, and the outer egdes of the lens, which are normally the problem areas, are not used.

No. First of all, as Skip says, it's the edges/corners of the image that are thrown away, although the outcome is what you said. If you have a full frame body you can see that, and crop them away in Photoshop.

But you are wrong on a larger level. When you print or look at the image from your 1.6 crop camera, you have to blow it up 1.6 times to get the same size, so any blurriness caused by the lens is also blown up 1.6 times.

Which effect wins? It depends on the lens, and whether the middle or the corners matter more to you. You have to look at test results for the full frame lens on crop.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,204 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2655
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:36 |  #9

sometimes EF-S lenses can do things that EF lenses just can't...

want to shoot handheld at 20mm f2.8 with a shutter of 1/10 of a sec...i can't think of an EF lens that can do that(disregarding those that say they have super technique for you make the shutter even slower :))...or even 44mm f2.8 1/15...there's a tamron lens that can accomplish that, but no current canon lens can...
want to go from 15mm to 85mm in less than 2 seconds...can't do that with an EF lens...

and as mentioned before the large majority of the UWA's...anything below 12mm...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kin2son
Goldmember
4,546 posts
Likes: 3
Joined May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:38 |  #10
bannedPermanent ban

manderson wrote in post #15476947 (external link)
Everything I read leads me to understand that an EF lens on a crop body is going to perform great because framing is in the center of the glass, and the outer egdes of the lens, which are normally the problem areas, are not used.

Even if this is true, the crop body sensor isn't as good as the ff one....

So you might be using the centre of the glass, but the overall result is still isn't as good as it's on ff with the same EF glass.


5D3 Gripped / 17-40L / Σ35 / 40 Pancake / Zeiss 50 MP / Σ85 / 100L Macro / 70-200 f2.8L II IS / 430 EX II / 580 EX II / Canon 2xIII TC / Kenko Ext. Tubes
EOS M / EF-M 18-55 / EF-M 22f2 / Ricoh GR aka Ultimate street camera :p
Flickr (external link) | My Images on Getty®‎ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scott ­ M
Goldmember
3,174 posts
Gallery: 70 photos
Likes: 270
Joined May 2008
Location: Michigan
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:42 |  #11

manderson wrote in post #15477043 (external link)
I do understand there is no difference in focal length, but isn't there improved "reach" performance in that crop sensors have a greater pixel density and more pixels are being used on the subject? This is something I read and would like to understand better.

That is a function of the camera's sensor, and is irrelevant when comparing the same focal lengths of EF or EF-S lenses. A 17mm focal length is 17mm and will perform as 17mm, regardless of whether the lens is EF or EF-S.

At the ultra-wide angle, as others have mentioned, there is really no good EF lens solution for a crop body. You need something in the 10mm - 12mm range for UWA on a crop sensor, and that is almost exclusively crop-only lenses (except for the Sigma 12-24mm).

Most standard "walk around" EF zoom lenses are no wider than 24mm, which will not give you a wide angle view on a crop body. The best "walk around" zoom lens solutions are crop-only lenses, such as the EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8, EF-S 15-85mm, Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 OS, etc. Canon does make a EF 17-40mm f/4 L, but it was really intended as an ultra wide lens for full frame cameras, and there are much better crop-only solutions that offer a better focal range, faster aperture, image stabilization, etc.

The only reason to avoid crop-only lenses is if you either currently have, or will very shortly be purchasing, a full frame body.


Photo Gallery (external link)
Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
melcat
Goldmember
1,122 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:57 |  #12

kin2son wrote in post #15477091 (external link)
Even if this is true, the crop body sensor isn't as good as the ff one....

I assume you're referring here to the higher noise and the diffraction setting in at wider f-stops. I hadn't gone there, and those things are in addition to the effect I mentioned above, of blowing up lens aberrations by 1.6x.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CactusJuice
Senior Member
853 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:58 |  #13

manderson wrote in post #15476947 (external link)
In keeping with the "no question is a stupid question", well, here goes:

Everything I read leads me to understand that an EF lens on a crop body is going to perform great because framing is in the center of the glass, and the outer egdes of the lens, which are normally the problem areas, are not used. With a much more vast array of EF lenses available, it seems you could achieve just about any lens specific desire or requirement on a crop body, and theoretically have better quality. It appears to me that FF is coming into the consumer price range, and crop bodies could soon be considered more of a specialty type camera, for those who want "the reach" as it is referred to. And you get better "reach" on a crop body with an EF lens. So why would I even want an EF-S lens?

Yes you want the Canon 10-22mm. This lens is rocks! My 7D loves it!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
manderson
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
202 posts
Likes: 24
Joined Dec 2012
Location: Abingdon, MD USA
     
Jan 11, 2013 20:59 |  #14

Originally Posted by manderson
"I do understand there is no difference in focal length, but isn't there improved "reach" performance in that crop sensors have a greater pixel density and more pixels are being used on the subject?"

Scott M wrote in post #15477101 (external link)
That is a function of the camera's sensor, and is irrelevant when comparing the same focal lengths of EF or EF-S lenses. A 17mm focal length is 17mm and will perform as 17mm, regardless of whether the lens is EF or EF-S.

I'm glad you replied to this. I deleted my original post because I didn't understand my own question. :oops:

But given your response, I honestly do not technically understand this whole thing about reach being better with an EF lens on a crop body.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
melcat
Goldmember
1,122 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Jan 11, 2013 21:10 |  #15

manderson wrote in post #15477164 (external link)
But given your response, I honestly do not technically understand this whole thing about reach being better with an EF lens on a crop body.

Define "reach". I think you will find it is some nebulous word used by beginners in forums that has no precise definition.

The measurement that is actually used, and is useful, is "angle of view". This lets you calculate how big the image will be on your sensor if you point the lens at something at a known distance (using trigonometry). When you decrease the sensor size, you narrow the angle of view.




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

3,440 views & 0 likes for this thread
Do I Want an EF-S Lens?
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 Yekeen Jamiu
898 guests, 319 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.