ef-s lenses and the 7D

Has the announcement of the 7D changed anyone's mind about ef-s lenses? I get tired of reading comments here about how ef-s lenses are no good, shouldn't buy one, about to be phased out, etc.

gasrocks wrote in post #8570110
Has the announcement of the 7D changed anyone's mind about ef-s lenses? I get tired of reading comments here about how ef-s lenses are no good, shouldn't buy one, about to be phased out, etc.

No if the thread about the 15-85 is to be believed, Half the people in there are whining because the 15-85 is $800, which while steep, if it delivers excellent performance is a fair price for a serious walkaround lens...

$800. is MSRP, not street price.

The 7D has inspired me to once again CONSIDER Ef-S lenses!! lol. Especially something like a Tokina 12-24... mmmm. (well, given I have a 5D and no 2nd body, I can't really say I ditched EF-S lenses because I hated them, just couldn't use them).

gasrocks wrote in post #8570140
$800. is MSRP, not street price.

True, I'm unsure how much it will be when it hits street..I was figuring more like $700 at first I suppose [More in line with the Nikon 16-85 and Sony 16-80] and figuring it will drop to about $600 by next year

gasrocks wrote in post #8570110
I get tired of reading comments here about how ef-s lenses are no good, shouldn't buy one, about to be phased out, etc.

You are listening to the wrong people. Some folks would complain about winning the lottery. These people obviously have no experience with the 10-22 and 17-55.

The only EF-S lens I've "considered" (i.e., actually bought) is the EF-S 17-55/2.8 IS. It's the most used lens in my kit. Since I'm a FF/cropper shooter, I'm happy for any new (and hopefully better) EF-S or EF lens that Canon develops.

My 10-22mm is one of my best in the bag. Not used as much as my 17-40L but on par as far as image quality and build. Should be an "L" IMO

I am in the process of switching from the 5d to the 7d. Backwards move many would say, but I think it will be good in the end. I just picked up a 10-22 for the wide end, just wish it was an L lens. There is something reassuring about the feel of the L lens. That being said, we'll see how the 24-105 performs at the longer length.

EF_S lenses are good, I just wish they had weathersealing and build of the L lens. Leave the red stripe off for all I care.

EF_S lenses will never be phased out.

gasrocks wrote in post #8570110
Has the announcement of the 7D changed anyone's mind about ef-s lenses? I get tired of reading comments here about how ef-s lenses are no good, shouldn't buy one, about to be phased out, etc.

Hasn't changed my mind, but it shows that Canon is commited to the APS-C format.

The complaints about the 15-85 pricing is rather pointless and stupid. The 17-85 MSRP is $600.... I expect the 15-85 price to settle around $600, lower if they bundle it into kits. The only complaint I have is that Canon cheaped out and made it f/3.5-5.6 instead of f/3.5-4.5.

I think the glass can be just as good as any other lens. You are sacrificing build and weather-sealing usually when purchasing them. I don't use them because well, I can't with the 5D. My biggest pet peeve with them was the lack of a 24mm equivalent with a longer edge. (i.e. 17-55 isn't wide enough for me on crop). With the 15-85 announcement, I'm glad crop users finally have something for that focal range. The price is meh, but as its the only lens for Canon crop users at that FL, of course it will come at a premium. But like you said, it will probably be cheaper than that and will go down after the buzz around it dies down.

toxic wrote in post #8570522
Hasn't changed my mind, but it shows that Canon is commited to the APS-C format.

The complaints about the 15-85 pricing is rather pointless and stupid. The 17-85 MSRP is $600.... I expect the 15-85 price to settle around $600, lower if they bundle it into kits. The only complaint I have is that Canon cheaped out and made it f/3.5-5.6 instead of f/3.5-4.5.

it may not have been a price thing, it could have been a practical decision, going to f/3.5-4.5 or f/4 fixed aperture may have made the lens bigger heavier or optically compromised

Wouldnt it be worse if they did make it an f/4 fixed aperture but it wasnt good unless you shot it at f/5.6?

I love my 10-22mm and I'm really considering selling my 50mm 1.4 for the 60mm Macro soon.

gasrocks - The announcement of the 7D hasn't really changed my mind about EF-S lenses, actually hadn't given it any thought unitl your post.

I really do like the specs for the 7D and plan on buying one to replace my trusty 40D. Kind of like a 1.6 crop 1D Mark III. That will give me two fast fps cameras in my bag. I also like the 18 megapixels.

There are several very good aps-c lenses on the market, most have already been mentioned. One that I sold a while back that I loved was the Tammy 17-50.

If the 7D has few problems, when it is released, I believe that Canon will have hit one "out of the park."

I've owned two copies of the 10-22mm EFS and one 17-55 IS EFS. The 10-22mm IMO was one of the sharpest wide angles I ever used, and I simply loved the extra reach and speed of the 17-55 on my 30D and 40D.

But for some reason, I never was able to really bond with and enjoy my EFS glass like I did my heavy L zooms. The plastic build always put me off just a tick. I eventually replaced my 17-55mm with a 16-35L. I owned a 17-40L prior to the EFS version. I just liked my L build lenses better, I'm not ashamed to say it.

I'm still debating adding the 7D but even so I doubt I'll go back to using EFS lenses, that said I have the luxury of a 5D as well for the wide stuff.

Perhaps if they just put L build on an EFS lens, they don't need to call it L just build them a tick better. Perhaps on par with the 70-300 DO for me?