EF-S here to stay ?

gus · February 27, 2005

I mentioned earlier that i have seen sites that show you what to cut where so that you can get EF-S to fit EF cameras.

Its a fair investment for the 10-22. I asked in a shop here & they wanted $1000 USD for one. I think they are about $800 @ B&H. Right up there $ wise with L stuff.

Shay Stephens · February 27, 2005

I can't help but to think they are an interim lens. Although I really like the 1.6x crop factor cameras, and hope they continue to make them, it just doesn't seem like the ef-s is here to stay. That is my gut feeling. I am probably wrong and they will outlast ef lenses hehehe.

For work, I am buying ef lenses, for kick around, I am using ef-s. They have at least a 10 year run I would think.

*Warning, the following has been pure conjecture based on nothing but vapor, smoke, and possibly mirrors.

Humungus wrote:

I mentioned earlier that i have seen sites that show you what to cut where so that you can get EF-S to fit EF cameras.

Its a fair investment for the 10-22. I asked in a shop here & they wanted $1000 USD for one. I think they are about $800 @ B&H. Right up there $ wise with L stuff.

David_S85 · February 27, 2005

Humungus wrote:

I mentioned earlier that i have seen sites that show you what to cut where so that you can get EF-S to fit EF cameras.

Its a fair investment for the 10-22. I asked in a shop here & they wanted $1000 USD for one. I think they are about $800 @ B&H. Right up there $ wise with L stuff.

Quite an investment I'd say! As a prospective 20D owner, I have been wondering the same thing. I like the idea of the S lenses (less weight and length), but what if (or when) the silicon gets cheap enough that crop factors go away or become less than the 1.6 and 1.5 sizes? No worko. To date, Canon has only a small handful of these EF-Ss. The regular EF series seems to work fairly consistantly with all their cams, and are much easier to sell used. Plus little to no light falloff issues; important with wides.

S-series lenses. Flash in the pan, or long-term workhorses?

gus · February 27, 2005

David_S85 wrote:

Quite an investment I'd say! As a prospective 20D owner, I have been wondering the same thing. I like the idea of the S lenses (less weight and length), but what if (or when) the silicon gets cheap enough that crop factors go away or become less than the 1.6 and 1.5 sizes? No worko. To date, Canon has only a small handful of these EF-Ss. The regular EF series seems to work fairly consistantly with all their cams, and are much easier to sell used. Plus little to no light falloff issues; important with wides.

S-series lenses. Flash in the pan, or long-term workhorses?

Tks shay

David the bit about the silicon was where i was headed but talk on the net (camera reviewers) seem to think that this silicon gap will be needed to keep canons higher lever cameras just that...a better camera.

The 10-22 does review extreamly well i might add over anything sigma has.

patch29 · February 27, 2005

Don't forget Nikon is producing a similar style of DX lenses that will only work on its digital cameras which currently have a 1.5x crop factor if they change that it will cause some issues too. So far they have kept all there DSLRs to 1.5x I believe.

One problem with the new small sensor lenses is that they are slow, no 2.8 or faster lenses. I wonder if they will be able to produce faster versions of these lenses, look at what a 14/2.8 costs.

I also wonder if you can actually use an EF-S on a 1.3 or 1.0 crop camera? I would think you would get a lot of vignetting, potentially an artistic effect like the old 8mm circular fisheye lenses. I don't think you would get the whole image circle though.

luckyrwe · February 27, 2005

They'll stay as soon as I see an EF-S L lens.

gus · February 27, 2005

luckyrwe wrote:

They'll stay as soon as I see an EF-S L lens.

Same bloomin' price though !

patch29 · February 27, 2005

Humungus wrote:

Same bloomin' price though !

Not Likely

David_S85 · February 27, 2005

patch29 wrote:

I also wonder if you can actually use an EF-S on a 1.3 or 1.0 crop camera? I would think you would get a lot of vignetting, potentially an artistic effect like the old 8mm circular fisheye lenses. I don't think you would get the whole image circle though.

You can't. The rear lens element would come too close to the mirror; let alone the image circle is too small for FF coverage.

patch29 · February 27, 2005

David_S85 wrote:

You can't. The rear lens element would come too close to the mirror; let alone the image circle is too small for FF coverage.

That's what I figured, but Humungus wrote about the site where guys were hacking them, got any links for us, so we can investigate?

David_S85 · February 27, 2005

patch29 wrote:

That's what I figured, but Humungus wrote about the site where guys were hacking them, got any links for us, so we can investigate?

Hacking a lens?

Now I've heard everything.

patch29 · February 27, 2005

David_S85 wrote:

Hacking a lens? Now I've heard everything.

Humungus wrote:

I mentioned earlier that i have seen sites that show you what to cut where so that you can get EF-S to fit EF cameras.

It makes sense what you say about the lens sticking further into the camera, since the newer 1.6x crop cameras have smaller mirrors, if I remember correctly.

gus · February 27, 2005

He took a slice of the rear ..maybe a few mm to fit it to a 10D. I will have a look for it again....said it worked well from memory.

patch29 · February 27, 2005

Humungus wrote:

He took a slice of the rear ..maybe a few mm to fit it to a 10D. I will have a look for it again....said it worked well from memory.

I wonder if the 10D has a smaller mirror than the 1D(s) series cameras?

gus · February 27, 2005

patch29 wrote:

I wonder if the 10D has a smaller mirror than the 1D(s) series cameras?

Here it is mate
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html

.

mercphoto · February 27, 2005

David_S85 wrote:

I like the idea of the S lenses (less weight and length), but what if (or when) the silicon gets cheap...

Silicon always gets cheaper

...enough that crop factors go away or become less than the 1.6 and 1.5 sizes?

That's confusing. While big silicon (i.e. FF) will get cheaper, smaller silicon will always be less expensive than big silicon. 1.6 will always be cheaper than 1.0.

To date, Canon has only a small handful of these EF-Ss.

To date, there have only been two bodies that can use those lenses, and lenses take a long time and lots of $$$ to develop.

The regular EF series seems to work fairly consistantly with all their cams, and are much easier to sell used.

I hear differing opions on how well the EF lenses work on the 1.6 cameras. The 16-35/2.8L is one example, which some love and some hate on the newest digital cameras, but all seem to love on the film cameras. Point taken about EF easier to sell than EF-S, given the much larger potential audience.

I personally would be very surprised to see the APS-C sensor disappear. My only complaint about EF-S lenses is I want to see faster variants.

patch29 · February 27, 2005

Humungus wrote:

Here it is mate
http://www.bobatkins.com/photography/tutorials/efs-10d.html

Thanks. He only did it for a 10D, not any others, too bad a lens that wide on a FF would be fun.

IF YOU PUT THIS LENS ON A CAMERA WITH A LARGER MIRROR, YOU'RE ASKING FOR A DISASTER. On any film based body, or on a 1Ds or probably on a 1D, the mirror will HIT THE LENS AND CAUSE DAMAGE.

fish · February 28, 2005

Interesting topic and one that I've pondered before, primarily just before I plonked down big bucks on a 10-22 EF-S.

My take is that they are here to stay. As was previously mentioned, lenses take a lot of money to design and produce. If Canon wasn't committed to the APS-C sensor form factor, they wouldn't invest in the lens technology. Canon is a very savvy company. They don't often make stupid mistakes.

Further, I think the existence of EF-S lenses bodes well for the lowend of the dSLR market. I would fully expect to see additional bodies introduced over the next 12-18 months that take advantage of EF-S. The interesting part is why they work on the 20D, as that's definitely not the lowend of the market.

Canon will recoup their investment in volume. Not the kind of volume that the 20D is going to generate, but in the volume that the varients of the drebel are going to bring. Let's take a look at Canon's film SLR range. There are three or four Rebels in the line. New ones come out all the time. I suspect Canon is going to do the same thing with the drebel. Make lots of models at varying price ranges and get people into the EF-S form factor.

The fact that the 10-22/3.4-4.5 is a stellar lens is just icing on the cake for us 20D owners (drebelers too). Sure, it would be nice to see an f2.8 version of it, but it would be a lot heavier and a lot more spendy.

To date, I've invested in exactly one EF-S lens. Will I buy more? I don't know, but I don't think so. It's probable that I will move to a FF sensor SLR at some point in the future when they develop one that doesn't cost a left nut. I'm confident I'll be able to sell the 10-22 no problem. It's a great lens. Then again, looking back at my previous argument, there's also a good chance that the FF camera I buy will accept EF-S lenses. Can you imagine an FF camera with a true rectilinear 10-22 zoom? Boggles the mind.

So. I have two L lenses. I will probably get more sometime in the future. They are high quality lenses, weatherproof, and built like tanks. And they don't seem to mind sharing the Domke with an EF-S lens. :giggle

pretty good pui ramble, huh? :booze

luckyrwe · February 28, 2005

For those of us who do not have a camera using the EF-S format, then the announcement of new EF-S lenses from Canon is about as exciting as a new lens from Pentax. Actually when I hear aboutt he nice wide EF-S lens and I sit here with a MarkII, I feel like I was off on the lottery by one measley number.

I sure hope Canon decides to throw us non EF-S users a bone now and then.

mercphoto · February 28, 2005

luckyrwe wrote:

Actually when I hear aboutt he nice wide EF-S lens and I sit here with a MarkII, I feel like I was off on the lottery by one measley number.

I sure hope Canon decides to throw us non EF-S users a bone now and then.

Why be gloom? The 10-22 EF-S is the same as a 16-35 on a full-frame. Us APS-C people aren't getting anything you don't already have. And your version is a 2.8. Don't worry, be happy.

wxwax · February 28, 2005

Sounds to me like mungus is buying a 20D

gus · February 28, 2005

wxwax wrote:

Sounds to me like mungus is buying a 20D

No...mungus has simply done his research to know what costs are assoc with each camera & could catch the new punter out.

Do you really think i would buy something that fish could afford ?

fish · February 28, 2005

mercphoto wrote:

Why be gloom? The 10-22 EF-S is the same as a 16-35 on a full-frame. Us APS-C people aren't getting anything you don't already have. And your version is a 2.8. Don't worry, be happy.

Ed Zachary.

fish · February 28, 2005

Humungus wrote:

Do you really think i would buy something that Andy could afford ?

fixed it for ya, bud.

jimf · February 28, 2005

luckyrwe wrote:

I sure hope Canon decides to throw us non EF-S users a bone now and then.

When you've got the likes of the 24-70 f/2.8 L and 70-200 f/2.8 L, you really don't have the right to complain about needing a bone. The EF-S lens line is still rather sparse. Moreover, they're priced rather high relative to some very good EF offerings -- for instance, when it came time to choose between the 10-22 EF-S and something else, I bought the 17-40 f/4 L (what a great lens for the money).

Over time I expect to pick up more EF-S lenses since their compactness will be valuable while travelling, but when I want a great lens....

Seamus · February 28, 2005

fish wrote:

Interesting topic and one that I've pondered before, primarily just before I plonked down big bucks on a 10-22 EF-S.

So. I have two L lenses. I will probably get more sometime in the future. They are high quality lenses, weatherproof, and built like tanks. And they don't seem to mind sharing the Domke with an EF-S lens. :giggle

pretty good pui ramble, huh? :booze

How often do you use the 10-22 lens. I'm thinking of getting a replacement for the kt lens (18-55) and am leaning towards a 24-70 range. I think it would be a better walk around lens. The 10-22 is a great lens as your pics show, I just think it is a little specialised.

fish · February 28, 2005

shay wrote:

How often do you use the 10-22 lens. I'm thinking of getting a replacement for the kt lens (18-55) and am leaning towards a 24-70 range. I think it would be a better walk around lens. The 10-22 is a great lens as your pics show, I just think it is a little specialised.

I use it quite a bit. It's very light, so makes a good walkaround lens. I don't think it's any more specialized than any other wide angle lens...unless you consider wide angle to be specialized.

rutt · February 28, 2005

I posted about this before here: http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=38236&postcount=9

I think what I wrote is still valid. It's in Canon's/Nikon's/Fuji's best interest to keep the FF technology out of the mass market until the sales of the cameras with the smaller sensors slow down and they need something else to tempt us with. All the better if we go out and buy lenses now that we will have to replace when we upgrade. It's just good business on their part.

wxwax · February 28, 2005

rutt wrote:

All the better if we go out and buy lenses now that we will have to replace when we upgrade. It's just good business on their part.

I remember reading how much Canon upset people when their new generation of lenses was not backwards compatible with their old ones. Nikon didn't do that and gained some style points.

I wonder if either really relishes repeating the exercise?

fish · February 28, 2005

wxwax wrote:

I remember reading how much Canon upset people when their new generation of lenses was not backwards compatible with their old ones. Nikon didn't do that and gained some style points.

I wonder if either really relishes repeating the exercise?

What are you referring to, waxy? EF lenses?

jimf · February 28, 2005

rutt wrote:

I posted about this before here: http://www.dgrin.com/showpost.php?p=38236&postcount=9

I think what I wrote is still valid. It's in Canon's/Nikon's/Fuji's best interest to keep the FF technology out of the mass market until the sales of the cameras with the smaller sensors slow down and they need something else to tempt us with. All the better if we go out and buy lenses now that we will have to replace when we upgrade. It's just good business on their part.

I think the problem I see with that is there's no real reason for them to ever use full frame sensors in the consumer or prosumer spaces; the quality is already "good enough" with today's sensors, and the less expensive manufacturing of APS-C sensors and glass are very worthwhile in volume markets like that.

Moreover, that's about the only thing that they're going to have to differentiate pro-level bodies from prosumer in a year or two as competition forces full feature sets and large buffers down the product line.

EF-S here to stay ?

Comments