Will Canon's Future lens Manufacturing Techniques Change for both FF and Crop?

Can Cannon produce a UWA lens for both FF and Crop bodies? First off, is it possible to make a lens compatible with both sensors? I say yes, because some lenses manufactured by Canon perform well with both sensors. However, while shooting wide open, it appears that the lenses are not interchangeable. I understand that a mirror of body 'X' may touch the lens designed for both sensors. Engineering wise, is this a major obstacle or a marketing scam? Why does it seem that marketing people rule Canon? Damn, even other industries for that matter! Furthermore, I have not taken a lens apart, but is flexibility between both sensors even possible in the 21st century and who would not buy into it? Even if Canon produced lenses that play well with both sensors, the gear people will still buy stuff for both sensors and continue their compulsive ways, thus keeping Canon's business philosophy live and well.

SITUATION: Person 'XY' is on the market for a fisheye lens, but desires a lens for both crop and FF sensors respectively, so he/she researches the 8-15mm 4L. If one uses the particular lens in question at 8mm, then there is vignetting with a crop body. So one buys a lens specifically designed for a crop body and is very happy until the purchase of a FF sensor body. Buy+Sell+Buy+Sell, where or when does it stop? Are unoccupied camera bodies a good thing? Were there such complaints when digital cameras began to replace film? I was around, but rather young! I say yes to the last question too!

Like I stated, I have a crop body, but I plan to buy a FF sensor body sooner than later, but how soon? Am I asking for too much? Can two platforms coexist with interchangeability? I think it is possible, but do other people agree or give a crap? Are other people ok with lens segregation, saying manufacturers have the technology to design lenses for both sensors? I do not claim to understand the physics or concepts which a dslr must abide by, but it seems awfully fishy to me: pun intended.

Maybe I'm confused and lack the knowledge to comprehend such challenging concepts, but it seems like a marketing scam to me. If my questions or concerns are ignorant, then I will drift back into oblivion with the rest of the trolls.....

Furthermore, this thread appears to be wrote by a whiny punk, but I assure you it has substance and I am stepping down from the soap box now!

photohistorian wrote in post #13756512
Can Cannon produce a UWA lens for both FF and Crop bodies? First off, is it possible to make a lens compatible with both sensors? I say yes, because some lenses manufactured by Canon perform well with both sensors. However, while shooting wide open, it appears that the lenses are not interchangeable. I understand that a mirror of body 'X' may touch the lens designed for both sensors. Engineering wise, is this a major obstacle or a marketing scam? Why does it seem that marketing people rule Canon? Damn, even other industries for that matter! Furthermore, I have not taken a lens apart, but is flexibility between both sensors even possible in the 21st century and who would not buy into it? Even if Canon produced lenses that play well with both sensors, the gear people will still buy stuff for both sensors and continue to be compulsive, thus keeping Canon's business philosophy live and well.

SITUATION: Person 'XY' is on the market for a fisheye lens, but want a lens for both crop and FF sensors respectively, so he/she researches the 8-15mm 4L. If one uses the particular lens in question at 8mm, then there is vignetting with a crop body. So one buys a lens specifically designed for a crop body and is very happy until the purchase of a FF sensor body. Buy+Sell+Buy+Sell, where or when does it stop? Are unoccupied camera bodies a good thing? Were there such complaints when digital cameras began to replace film? I was around, but rather young! I say yes to the last question too!

Like I stated, I have a crop body, but I plan to buy a FF sensor body sooner than later, but how soon? Am I asking for too much? Can two platforms coexist with interchangeability? I think it is possible, but do other people agree or give a crap? Are other people ok with lens segregation, saying manufacturers have the technology to design lenses for both sensors? I do not claim to understand the physics or concepts which a dslr must abide by, but it seems awfully fishy to me: pun intended.

Maybe I'm confused and lack the knowledge to comprehend such challenging concepts, but it seems like a marketing scam to me. If my questions or concerns are ignorant, then I will drift back into oblivion with the rest of the trolls.....

Furthermore, this thread appears to be wrote by a whiny punk, but I assure you it has substance and I am stepping down from the soap box now!

why would canon do that? so you can have cross compatibility ?

EF lenses work on all canon DSLRs.

ed rader

So if you don't like Canon....the solution is very simply....purchase elsewhere.

If you want a lens for both FF and crop, simply get a EF lens. They are compatible on both body types.

"no it wouldn't change....why would it need to"?

People buying an aps-h or FF camera body will buy EF lenses, but they still work on aps-c bodies too. How I see it in practical use is; Someone is shooting with a 5Dmk2 and is using a 17-40L for the UWA landscapes and a 70-200L for portrait work... They decide they want a camera that has a higher fps and better AF for doing some sports shooting, let's say their kid's soccer games. The person might buy a 7D. Being crop the 17-40L now becomes a wide-normal zoom for the action right in front of you, and the 70-200 now reaches into the "super tele" range for even further shooting ability during the games. No buying extra lenses just for the crop body, you use what you already have. It even works out better in this case because you get the extra reach without losing a stop by adding an extender.

This is just my theory on why Canon doesn't bother. There are lenses designed for EF-S bodies to be UWA. Canon doesn't need to spend the money on R&D to make an all-body-in-one lens to keep 15mm = 15mm on either body. It would probably cost stupid amounts of money and no one would buy it because there are already lenses for each body. Unless, like on the 200-400mm they are developing with the built in teleconverter, they design a lens with a built in deconverter... Something that instead of magnifying the image, makes it smaller (wider) for the crop bodies. Lets pretend they were developing a 16-35mm f/2.8 with a 0.625x deconverter built in. You just flip the switch and you get a 10-22mm for using on crop bodies. But is it practical from a business stand point to design, test, pilot, produce working concepts, test, develope real life lenses, and finally sell them? Probably not. The 200-400mm f/4L IS TC1.4x (if it follows pricing similar to Nikon) will probably cost upwards of $6000. Would you spend $3000-$4000 on a special lens for either body? Or would you suck it up and buy a couple lenses to cover your ranges for less then $3000?

Not possible because the purpose of any FL lens is defined by the size of the frame that it covers.

• an ultrawide angle on APS-C (10mm) is an uberwide angle on FF
  
• a very wide angle on APS-C (15mm) is an ultrawide angle on FF
  
• a wide angle on APS-C (22mm) is a very wide angle on FF
  
• a normal (30mm) on APS-C is a wide angle on FF
  
• a short tele (50mm) on APS-C is a normal on FF

photohistorian wrote in post #13756512
Can Cannon produce a UWA lens for both FF and Crop bodies?...

Are you asking whether they can make a single lens mount to multiple bodies with different sized sensors? Then yes; as the others have pointed out, that would be the EF line of lenses. Those will work on any EF compatible film or digital body; whereas the EF-S line only mounts to small sensor, digital bodies.

If you are asking whether they can make one lens that covers the "UWA" focal length on both sensor sizes, then, no, they cannot.

Any given lens projects an image circle of a given size; this image circle size is the same, no matter what you do with the lens.

EF lenses project an image circle that is sized to cover a regular, 35mm film or sensor. When mounted on a smaller sensor, then only the central part of the projected circle is captured; the rest of the circle falls outside the area of the sensor. (place a shotglass over a postage stamp, for a visual) [not to scale]

EF-S lenses are designed to project a smaller image circle that matches the size of the smaller sensors. If this lens were mounted to a 35mm sensor/film body, then the image circle projected would not cover the sensor and still wind up with only that smaller amount of data being recorded, along with vignetting where there was no data recorded by the sensor. (place an 8x10 piece of paper under a shotglass, for a visual) [not to scale]

The sensor size determines how much of the data from that image circle is captured by the camera, not the lens.

Thanks for the information folks! I understand the mounting of EF and EF-S lenses to each particular body, hence my questions. Now I understand that it is physically impossible to have interchangeability of lenses between FF and crop sensor bodies in the current lens lineup, utilizing current lenses. Also, Snydremark your example filled answer is what I sought!

photohistorian wrote in post #13756512
SITUATION: Person 'XY' is on the market for a fisheye lens, but desires a lens for both crop and FF sensors respectively, so he/she researches the 8-15mm 4L. If one uses the particular lens in question at 8mm, then there is vignetting with a crop body.

Maybe I just don't understand how it works with UWA or fisheye lenses, but if there's vignetting on a crop body, how does the FF body not have vignetting? Every test/review that I've seen for lenses show that putting a lens on a crop body has less vignetting (because it's "cropping" out the corners).

I personally purchase lenses that fit my style of shooting now, rather than what I may or may not shoot later. I just figure I can buy it and use it now, and sell it if my needs change later. It may be more expensive in the end, but I'd have what works for me now, rather than working w/ a compromise (for example, the 24-70 isn't as wide as I would like on a crop sensor camera, but it's a great focal range for FF cameras). But then again, for me, getting FF won't be in the near future, if at all, so I'm sure I would get lots of use out of my lenses before I sell it.

At 8mm on FF, it's a circular fisheye image, not covering the full frame. At 8mm on a crop, since the sensor is a rectangle, the circle edges don't catch the whole sensor on the long side, but the circle crosses the edge on the narrow, so vignette because no light hits it. Around 10mm, the whole sensor gets hit.

There's nothing holding one back from getting that lens to interchange between the two formats. Just don't use it at 8 on a crop.

Now how are you imagining they make lenses for both? That's a serious question. I don't think it's a conspiracy, but it really comes down to the focal lengths across the two sizes just not lining up in a useful way.

highergr0und wrote in post #13757255
At 8mm on FF, it's a circular fisheye image, not covering the full frame. At 8mm on a crop, since the sensor is a rectangle, the circle edges don't catch the whole sensor on the long side, but the circle crosses the edge on the narrow, so vignette because no light hits it. Around 10mm, the whole sensor gets hit.

There's nothing holding one back from getting that lens to interchange between the two formats. Just don't use it at 8 on a crop.

HTTP response: NOT FOUND | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Content warning: script

Now how are you imagining they make lenses for both? That's a serious question.

the 8mm is a sexy lens too :P

photohistorian wrote in post #13756836
Thanks for the information folks! I understand the mounting of EF and EF-S lenses to each particular body, hence my questions. Now I understand that it is physically impossible to have interchangeability of lenses between FF and crop sensor bodies in the current lens lineup, utilizing current lenses. Also, Snydremark your example filled answer is what I sought!

Glad it helped.

highergr0und wrote in post #13757255
At 8mm on FF, it's a circular fisheye image, not covering the full frame. At 8mm on a crop, since the sensor is a rectangle, the circle edges don't catch the whole sensor on the long side, but the circle crosses the edge on the narrow, so vignette because no light hits it. Around 10mm, the whole sensor gets hit.

There's nothing holding one back from getting that lens to interchange between the two formats. Just don't use it at 8 on a crop.

Now how are you imagining they make lenses for both? That's a serious question. I don't think it's a conspiracy, but it really comes down to the focal lengths across the two sizes just not lining up in a useful way.

Yes, the lens is awesome and expensive! Me still likes though! My point about the interchangeable lenses is this: there are lenses and other equipment being wasted. Is excess good? I suppose it depends who you ask. But, there are obvious restrictions, which will not allow the use of interchangeable lenses due to the design of sensors etc...

I love photography, but I do not want to spend tens of thousands of dollars to have duplicates of lenses, bodies, and other accessories. Of course I can sell whatever equipment I am not using, I do not want to buy it if I cannot use something for multi-purposes. Again, I am cheap and I might be expecting too much from Canon, Nikon etc...
I better start saving and just load up on crop body accessories, because that is what I currently own. Or, I should buy a FF sensor and be done with it, since crop lenses are cheaper than FF lenses. I do not know.

Thanks to all who have been civil during this discussion. I like to play with grown-ups!!!

I think that the EFS lenses are actually an example of Canon helping people to get lenses cheaply rather than Canon trying to make loads of money out of their customers

The whole point of the EFS range is to provide cheaper lenses for crop bodies as they are easier to manufacture due to their smaller image circle and generally cheaper build quality

If Canon only made EF lenses those with crop sensors would actually be paying for something they don't really need. Great examples are the EFS 17 55 f2.8 and EF 24 70 f2.8L. Taking into account the "crop factor" they will give very similar effective ranges and both offer as fast as possible with a zoom f2.8 but the EFS lens here in the UK is £770 and the EF L lens is £999. If you only want to use crop, which I guess covers the vast majority of all DSLR users then Canon is giving you a very useful discount of over 20% by not selling you things you don't need.

Canon aren't the only people who do this. Sigma also make lenses specifically for crop bodies and so do Nikon. Not sure about any others but there are probably more.