Unwarranted Bashing of EF-S Lenses

The argument of not buying EF-S lenses because they will not work with full frame is totally unjustified, unless you know for sure you will be upgrading to full frame sometime soon.

If we surveyed the number of 1.6 crop vs FF Canons in use out there, I would be willing to bet that by far the 1.6 crop is the most popular.

Even if there was no upgrade to the 1.6 crop in the future (but we all no this is not true) the existing 350 & 20D cameras that will be in use for the many years to come would still warrant the purchase of a EF-S lens if it is a lens that work for you.

There has been a false mind set drilled into people on this forum looking for help deciding on a new lens to stay away from EF-S lenses as they will be useless in the future. Many say that Canon made a big mistake developing this line of lenses. This is like the fear mongering we hear from our politicians, scaring people away from what could be right for them.

This is in no way meant to discredit the long line of good EF lenses out there, just a concern as to some of the council given to photographers new to Canon dSLR's. People who are trusting our suggestions and will use them to formulate opinions of their own.

It's not just full frame cameras, btw. Its any camera that is not a 20D, 300D, 350D, so yes, it is limiting, and people should be aware of this, when deciding to buy a lens, especially with all the options the consumer has with Canon brand or quality 3rd part brands.

grego, I agree totally with what you say. I just think that the EF-S should be judged more on their cost and performance rather than the fact they will work only on the 1.6 crop. I am looking for a wide zoom and would pick the 10-22 in a heartbeat if it was price a little closer to the third party options, but I am still holding court on what to buy and it might just be Tokina or Sigma.

On the other hand, I really believe there is great value in the 17-85 I own as it is a wonderful range for a walkabout lens. The cost vs IQ is very good too.

But then for a move versatile lens in terms of body use, Sigma(24-70 2.8) and Tamron(28-75 2.8) lens. That's the thing. I do think they are better more versatile lens due to the speed more than anything else though more than the ef-s vs ef title.And they are less expensive.

I think knowing that these lens are limiting in the body use is important because many do use a variety of bodies. For example, 1D bodies are being bought up more and more and I've seen a decent amount selling or any other models.

That's all I mean.

grego, sorry but I am going to have to agree with you again (not much of an arguer, eh!!!). People do need to realise that EF-S lenses can't be used on other cameras as some people do upgrade but most do not, at least for quite a while. Even if you do upgrade you can sell the lenses when if you sell the body. My biggest concern is some people who immediately discount an EF-S lens for every situation "just because".

Oh I do judge it on its cost. Knowing that if Canon announces anything but a 1.6 crop body next year could make my fairly costly investment virtually worthless. I'm waiting to see what happens.

Hey guitarman, do you ever sleep, it's 3:00 AM in Ontario.

I would be real surprised if Canon does not upgrade the 1.6 crop.

I try and stay away from EF-S glass, and I own a 20D. However i did buy a 10-22 lens, since i only needed it for the Wide End....

Everyhting else i have is EF only... If i ever sold my 20D, i could sell the 10-22 w/o any drama..

What about a 1.3 crop?wont fit them as well as full frame.

What was the whole point behind the EF-S mount anyway?? I have read that it was to make wide angle lenses cheaper, but with the (so far) 1.6 crop factor of the EF-S mount cameras it's kind of self-defeating, ie, a 10-22 EF-S on the 20D is going to be longer (but still very acceptable) than a Tokina 12-24 on the 5D.

Now, if Canon made some things in the EF-S line that took advantage of the 1.6 factor rather than fought against it, the EF-S line would seem like a more exclusive club worth while joining, like so many here with their "L"'s

I'm up, it's 6:30 here in VA. And I am one person who probably won't go to full-frame for awhile just because it's too expensive, but I do have an EOS 3 and use it a lot. Those EF-S lens don't fit on it and not on my 10D, so I avoid them all together, but I have seen them, felt them, wondered about them, and even when I get my 20D or my XT, I have lenses that are prime or really good, so I don't need them. Lucky me. But I am always one to look at accessories for anything I buy. Canon boasts the variety of lenses, but now they don't fit every camera. You gotta look first!

SuzyView

It was to make lens that behaved like their film counter parts with respect to the actual focal lengths.

18-55 kit is like a 28-80
17-85 IS is like the 28-135 IS
10-22 is like 16-35

However, where they dropped the ball was not making it available for other bodies unlike the other 3rd party manufacturers

I don't even consider EF-S when looking at a lens. I do have the kit lens because I knew nothing about photography when I bought my Drebel a year and a half ago. Now I know enough to buy lenses that will work on my film and a FF camera.

What other choice do you have if you want true wide angle on a 1.6 crop camera?

It seems the EF-S lenses serve a specific purpose, which is fine by me. Ok, once the price of full frame sensors drops significantly, these lenses may become redundant for someone moving from 1.6 to FF. But at the present time it's more cost effective to go for a 1.6 crop and super-wide lens. Particularly if you also shoot with a long telephoto, as many do.