Canon EF vs. EF-S Query?!

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Doug Mitton" <doug_mitton@hotmail.x.com> wrote in message
news:2rtjq09ue74ir02padedk74ek5oesdooka@4ax.com...
> Hello all;
>
> When I wanted to make the plunge into DSLR I took the recommendation
> of some friends and selected the Canon line and the Rebel in
> particular as an entry level model. My plan is that in the future I
> can gladly accept hand-me-downs from my friends ... ie. upgrading to a
> used body that is steps up from the Rebel.
>
> I want my investment in accessories to be portable to the higher level
> models so I have only been buying EF lenses. I use the supplied EF-S
> that came with the Rebel to fill a niche.
>
> I have seen several posts here making various arguments concerning EF
> vs. EF-S lenses. The point of my post is why would anyone want to
> select the newer (restricted useage) EF-S lenses over the standard EF
> version? Is there some advantage that I haven't been able to pick out
> of the discussions so far?
>
> I hope this doesn't start a war but maybe just bring to light some
> technical difference I haven't been able to pick up on myself.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> --

There are lenses at widths available in EF-S that aren't available in the
regular EF line, such as the 10-22 EF-S which would be the equivalent of the
16-35 in the EF lenses, or with features, like the 17-85 IS, which comes
close to giving the same field of view with the RebelD and 20D as the 28-135
IS does on film or a full sensor.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Doug Mitton wrote:


> I have seen several posts here making various arguments concerning EF
> vs. EF-S lenses. The point of my post is why would anyone want to
> select the newer (restricted useage) EF-S lenses over the standard EF
> version? Is there some advantage that I haven't been able to pick out
> of the discussions so far?

Start shopping for a zoom lens that starts at 18mm, goes to 55mm
and only costs 100 bucks US..

To save you the time and trouble.. There are none. Canon's
EF-S 18-55 is great bang for the buck..

Now start shopping for a rectilinear wide angle zoom lens that's
10mm on the wide end :-) :-)

I own a 10D and can't use the EF-S mount.. I'm kind of jealous.

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Doug Mitton <doug_mitton@hotmail.x.com> writes:

> I have seen several posts here making various arguments concerning
> EF vs. EF-S lenses. The point of my post is why would anyone want
> to select the newer (restricted useage) EF-S lenses over the
> standard EF version? Is there some advantage that I haven't been
> able to pick out of the discussions so far?

There are at least three advantantages with EF-S:

1. Cost. All other things being equal, a lens designed for a smaller
image circle should cost less to manufacture than one that also has
to perform for a larger image circle.

2. Bulk and weight. A lens designed for a smaller image circle should
be smaller an weigh less than one with the same focal length
designed for a larger image circle.

3. Ultrawideness. Canom does not offer a 10-22mm zoom that cover
the full image circle of 35mm film. If it ever did, the lens
would probably be very heavy and very expensive.

In theory, there should be a fourth advantage:

4. Quality. By optimizing the design for a smaller image circle, a
lens should have higher resolution (as measured in lp/mm) than
a lens that also needs to cover a larger circle.

However, none of the EF-S lenses manufactured so far has been of
outstanding optical quality - they are consumer grade lenses.
But in principle, if Canon wanted too - they should be able to make
an L-grade lens in the EF-S mount lens that outresolved its bigger
brother.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
========================================================================
When you say you live in the real world, which one are you referring to?