Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

The Promise of DSLRs

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
July 30, 2005 11:53:50 AM

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

It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
before DSLRs would accep the many lens
from old 35mm SLRs.

Has that actually happened ?


<rj>

More about : promise dslrs

Anonymous
July 30, 2005 11:55:48 AM

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

<RJ> wrote:
> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
> from old 35mm SLRs.
>
> Has that actually happened ?
>
>
> <rj>
Yes

Scott
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 1:04:31 PM

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

Some cameras have aftermarket 'adapters' to mount old mechanical lenses
on DSLRs...you use the lens 'stopped down' to meter the light (which is
what early SLRs with behind-the-lens metering in the 'early days'
(60's) did, because the body has no way to know the aperture setting on
the lens. You also have to manually stop down the lens for actual
picture taking, since the electronic body has no way to close down the
diaphram. But the brands of lenses that can be adapted this way are
limited by lens design as well as by DSLR camera body design.
There are also some adapters to permit Brand A electronic lenses to be
mounted on Brand B DSLRs. But you may only be able to take Generation
2 Brand A lenses and use them, but not be able to use Generation 1
Brand A lenses on the Brand B body.

--Wilt
Related resources
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 5:27:52 PM

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

"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>
> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
> from old 35mm SLRs.
>
> Has that actually happened ?

Yes. Unless you shoot Canon.

>
>
> <rj>
July 30, 2005 5:38:53 PM

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

RJ wrote:

>
> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
> from old 35mm SLRs.
>

Why cripple the camera doing that? Many of the "old 35mm lenses" just
aren't up to the task.

--

Stacey
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 5:51:12 PM

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

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 13:27:52 -0400, "Kinon O'cann"
<Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:

>
>"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
>news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>>
>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>
>> Has that actually happened ?
>
>Yes. Unless you shoot Canon.

Indeed. With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I can't
use modern Canon lenses, no way!

Nikon 1 : Canon 0

Which pains me.

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 7:22:43 PM

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

"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>
> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
> from old 35mm SLRs.
>
> Has that actually happened ?
>
>
> <rj>

Yes.

Deep.
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 9:34:29 PM

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

"wilt" <wiltw@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1122739471.469172.210280@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Some cameras have aftermarket 'adapters' to mount old mechanical lenses
> on DSLRs...you use the lens 'stopped down' to meter the light (which is
> what early SLRs with behind-the-lens metering in the 'early days'
> (60's) did, because the body has no way to know the aperture setting on
> the lens. You also have to manually stop down the lens for actual
> picture taking, since the electronic body has no way to close down the
> diaphram. But the brands of lenses that can be adapted this way are
> limited by lens design as well as by DSLR camera body design.
> There are also some adapters to permit Brand A electronic lenses to be
> mounted on Brand B DSLRs. But you may only be able to take Generation
> 2 Brand A lenses and use them, but not be able to use Generation 1
> Brand A lenses on the Brand B body.
>
> --Wilt

One word - Pentax.

Deep.
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 11:14:40 PM

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

"Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote in message
news:1122745763.d93a6e915a6bd53d02cd6d25dcf1a908@teranews...
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 13:27:52 -0400, "Kinon O'cann"
> <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:
>
>>
>>"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
>>news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>>
>>> Has that actually happened ?
>>
>>Yes. Unless you shoot Canon.
>
> Indeed. With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I can't
> use modern Canon lenses, no way!
>
> Nikon 1 : Canon 0
>
> Which pains me.
>
> Mike


EF lenses can be used on any Canon DLSR. What modern Canon lenses are you
referring to?

Mark
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 11:21:26 PM

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

Stacey wrote:

> RJ wrote:
>
>>
>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>
>
> Why cripple the camera doing that? Many of the "old 35mm lenses"
> just
> aren't up to the task.
>
> --
>
> Stacey
They didn't work like modern lenses but quality was there with the
best ones; wide range zooms didn't exist, auto focusing was expensive
and rare and many lenses were preset apertures only instead of auto
irises.
--
Neil
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 1:12:07 AM

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

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 19:14:40 -0400, "Mark B."
<mbohntrash54@comcast.net> wrote:

>"Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote in message

>> Indeed. With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
>> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I can't
>> use modern Canon lenses, no way!
>>
>> Nikon 1 : Canon 0
>>
>> Which pains me.
>
>EF lenses can be used on any Canon DLSR. What modern Canon lenses are you
>referring to?

I think you've misread; my gripe is that I can't use EF lenses on my
old Canon FD body. There's no adapter available. And worse, I can't
use my FD glass on modern Canon cameras; there are no good adapters
available, it's physically impossible to make an adapter that doesn't
require optical elements to achieve infinity focus.

I can however use virtually any Nikon lens ever made on my old Canon
FD body, because there IS a simple mechanical adapter to do this.

I'm convinced that Canon engineered this situation deliberately as a
case of forced obsolescence. I've never owned a Canon EF mount camera
or lens, and I never will.

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 1:12:08 AM

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

In article <1122772218.cd750ffa7225d03ed52d9ebcbe103a08@teranews>, Mike
Ross <mike@corestore.org> wrote:

> I think you've misread; my gripe is that I can't use EF lenses on my
> old Canon FD body. There's no adapter available. And worse, I can't
> use my FD glass on modern Canon cameras; there are no good adapters
> available, it's physically impossible to make an adapter that doesn't
> require optical elements to achieve infinity focus.
>
> I can however use virtually any Nikon lens ever made on my old Canon
> FD body, because there IS a simple mechanical adapter to do this.
>
> I'm convinced that Canon engineered this situation deliberately as a
> case of forced obsolescence. I've never owned a Canon EF mount camera
> or lens, and I never will.

How far back do you want to go? FD lenses haven't been made in some
time. Get a clue!
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 2:01:27 AM

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

"Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote in message
news:1122745763.d93a6e915a6bd53d02cd6d25dcf1a908@teranews...
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 13:27:52 -0400, "Kinon O'cann"
> <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:
>
>>
>>"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
>>news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>>
>>> Has that actually happened ?
>>
>>Yes. Unless you shoot Canon.
>
> Indeed. With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I can't
> use modern Canon lenses, no way!
>
> Nikon 1 : Canon 0

All the old Pentax lenses will meter properly, Nikon 0,, Canon 1/2, Pentax
1.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 2:10:34 AM

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

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 18:39:29 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:

> > I'm convinced that Canon engineered this situation deliberately as a
> > case of forced obsolescence. I've never owned a Canon EF mount camera
> > or lens, and I never will.
>
> How far back do you want to go? FD lenses haven't been made in some
> time. Get a clue!

So if a company has a policy of (or history of apparent) planned
obsolescence, they can take advantage of your statute of limitations
that effectively erases that past? Better to remember such things
in order to lessen the chance of getting burned by new camera or
lens designs whose future is questionable.

Big clue - don't listen to you!
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 2:10:35 AM

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

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 22:10:34 -0400, ASAAR <caught@22.com> wrote:

>On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 18:39:29 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:
>
>> > I'm convinced that Canon engineered this situation deliberately as a
>> > case of forced obsolescence. I've never owned a Canon EF mount camera
>> > or lens, and I never will.
>>
>> How far back do you want to go? FD lenses haven't been made in some
>> time. Get a clue!
>
> So if a company has a policy of (or history of apparent) planned
>obsolescence, they can take advantage of your statute of limitations
>that effectively erases that past? Better to remember such things
>in order to lessen the chance of getting burned by new camera or
>lens designs whose future is questionable.
>
> Big clue - don't listen to you!

You don't buy motor vehicles, do you?
Or TVs, or ovens, or clothes, or just about anything except gardening
implements, either, it would seem.

Time, and technology, march on.

--
Bill Funk
replace "g" with "a"
funktionality.blogspot.com
July 31, 2005 3:10:08 AM

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

"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>
> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
> from old 35mm SLRs.
>
> Has that actually happened ?
>
The Pentax dSLR cameras are very backwards compatible offering metered
manual evne with M42 thread mount lenses.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 3:10:09 AM

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

In article <kNWdnRS_YNWM3HHfRVn-hA@rogers.com>, Darrell <spam@this.eh>
wrote:

> The Pentax dSLR cameras are very backwards compatible offering metered
> manual evne with M42 thread mount lenses.

Yeah, I'll bet my old screw mount lenses for my 1969 Spotmatic would
work great for digital.
July 31, 2005 3:11:32 AM

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

"Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote in message
news:1122745763.d93a6e915a6bd53d02cd6d25dcf1a908@teranews...
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 13:27:52 -0400, "Kinon O'cann"
> <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:
>
>>
>>"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
>>news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>>>
>>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>>
>>> Has that actually happened ?
>>
>>Yes. Unless you shoot Canon.
>
> Indeed. With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I can't
> use modern Canon lenses, no way!
>
> Nikon 1 : Canon 0
>
> Which pains me.
>
More like Pentax 1, Canon 0, and Nikon 0.5

;) 
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 3:52:54 AM

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

In article <3l1s9dF104q1eU3@individual.net>, fotocord@yahoo.com says...
> Why cripple the camera doing that? Many of the "old 35mm lenses" just
> aren't up to the task.

*Yawn.*

Justify your new, expensive and largely unneeded lens mount in any way
you can, Stacey.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
July 31, 2005 3:58:56 AM

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

"Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in
news:XMSGe.67166$oJ.51064@news-server.bigpond.net.au:

>
> "Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote in message
> news:1122745763.d93a6e915a6bd53d02cd6d25dcf1a908@teranews...
>> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 13:27:52 -0400, "Kinon O'cann"
>> <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
>>>news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>>>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>>>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>>>
>>>> Has that actually happened ?
>>>
>>>Yes. Unless you shoot Canon.
>>
>> Indeed. With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
>> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I can't
>> use modern Canon lenses, no way!

Is this thread about '70s film bodies? With Canon D-SLRs you can
definitely use modern Canon lenses, no problem! It is the old Canon FD
lenses that you can't use, unless you use an optical adaptor that will
lose some quality or a non optical adaptor that will lose the ability to
focus at infinity.

>> Nikon 1 : Canon 0
>
> All the old Pentax lenses will meter properly, Nikon 0,, Canon 1/2,
> Pentax 1.

If you have old Nikon MF lenses then Pentax scores 0, Nikon scores 1/2
because it can't meter (unless we are talking pro bodies, in which case
Nikon scores and solid 1) and Canon with an adaptor plate scores 1
because it works and can meter.

If you have Pentax K mount lenses then the Pentax D-SLR is the best
option.

If you have Leica R or Olympus OM or Pentax M42 screw mount lenses or
wish to use a telescope with T-Mount adapter than you can use any Canon
D-SLR.

If you have old Canon FD lenses then you are out of luck, sorry.


--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 25-June-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
July 31, 2005 4:57:19 AM

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

"Kinon O'cann" <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote in message
news:0dOdnQFgV5wAJXbfRVn-uQ@comcast.com...
>
> "<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
> news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>>
>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>
>> Has that actually happened ?
>
> Yes. Unless you shoot Canon.
>

Or Nikon.

And it is not just Digital Cameras, mostly they won't work on current
Autofocus Film Cameras either.

Roy G
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 5:21:23 AM

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

"MarkH" <markat@atdot.dot.dot> wrote in message
news:4vUGe.606517$Cl1.409448@fe03.news.easynews.com...
> "Pete D" <no@email.com> wrote in
> news:XMSGe.67166$oJ.51064@news-server.bigpond.net.au:
>
>>
>> "Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote in message
>> news:1122745763.d93a6e915a6bd53d02cd6d25dcf1a908@teranews...
>>> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 13:27:52 -0400, "Kinon O'cann"
>>> <Yes.it's.me.Bowser> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>>>>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>>>>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>>>>
>>>>> Has that actually happened ?
>>>>
>>>>Yes. Unless you shoot Canon.
>>>
>>> Indeed. With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
>>> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I can't
>>> use modern Canon lenses, no way!
>
> Is this thread about '70s film bodies? With Canon D-SLRs you can
> definitely use modern Canon lenses, no problem! It is the old Canon FD
> lenses that you can't use, unless you use an optical adaptor that will
> lose some quality or a non optical adaptor that will lose the ability to
> focus at infinity.
>
>>> Nikon 1 : Canon 0
>>
>> All the old Pentax lenses will meter properly, Nikon 0,, Canon 1/2,
>> Pentax 1.
>
> If you have old Nikon MF lenses then Pentax scores 0, Nikon scores 1/2
> because it can't meter (unless we are talking pro bodies, in which case
> Nikon scores and solid 1) and Canon with an adaptor plate scores 1
> because it works and can meter.
>
> If you have Pentax K mount lenses then the Pentax D-SLR is the best
> option.
>
> If you have Leica R or Olympus OM or Pentax M42 screw mount lenses or
> wish to use a telescope with T-Mount adapter than you can use any Canon
> D-SLR.
>
> If you have old Canon FD lenses then you are out of luck, sorry.

You are correct, the Nikons will not go onto the Pentax, however if there is
an adapter then the Pentax will meter but the Nikon still will not with the
old lenses.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 5:41:26 AM

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

On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 21:57:31 -0700, Bill Funk wrote:

> You don't buy motor vehicles, do you?
> Or TVs, or ovens, or clothes, or just about anything except gardening
> implements, either, it would seem.

Sure I do. Even some cameras. My clothing tends to be low-tech
though, with the occasional new miracle fiber. But I prefer making
the decision as to when a product is obsolete enough to be replaced.
I can understand why old products such as VCRs would be phased out
as DVDs are increasingly popluar. And why the few remaining models
would not be as feature laden as they once were. But many of the
missing features were never removed from the latest models. They
simply weren't documented, and required remotes from older models to
access the 'missing' functionality.

Sometimes planned obsolescence is aided and abetted by huge doses
of cluelessness. Several years ago I called GE to order a
'beam-tripper' bulb used to detect an open door in one of their
freezers (Hotpoint actually, I think) for my parents. I was
actually told by a GE tech. rep. that "That model was discontinued
many years ago and the bulb it uses is no longer available."
Sheesh, it used a standard bayonet base, low current 12v bulb that I
could have bought in almost any auto parts store. I ordered a
couple via the internet ("The Bulb Man"?) and when they arrived,
naturally the bases had GE's brand imprinted on them.


> Time, and technology, march on.

Being led by fife and drum. But somewhere along the line a wrong
turn was taken and we're now heading down the low road.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 6:01:05 AM

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

"Mark B." <mbohntrash54@comcast.net> writes:
> "Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote:

>> With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
>> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I
>> can't use modern Canon lenses, no way!

> EF lenses can be used on any Canon DLSR. What modern Canon lenses
> are you referring to?

I don't think his 1970s Canon F-1 is a DSLR.

When Canon introduced the EF-mount, they left the owners of the old
FD-mount bodies out in the cold, just as the recent EF-S mount has
left the owners of D30, D60 and 10D bodies out in the cold.

This is called planned obsolescence - and Canon is very good at it.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 6:01:06 AM

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

In article <q5oe8jc08u.fsf@kaksi.ifi.uio.no>, gisle+news@ifi.uio.no
says...
> When Canon introduced the EF-mount, they left the owners of the old
> FD-mount bodies out in the cold, just as the recent EF-S mount has
> left the owners of D30, D60 and 10D bodies out in the cold.

I don't feel out in the cold.

In fact, I don't feel the need to own any of the EF-S lenses.

Number of EF lenses: 60+
Number of EF-S lenses: 4
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 8:35:55 AM

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

In article <1122772218.cd750ffa7225d03ed52d9ebcbe103a08@teranews>,
mike@corestore.org says...
> I'm convinced that Canon engineered this situation deliberately as a
> case of forced obsolescence. I've never owned a Canon EF mount camera
> or lens, and I never will.

They did this so they could build a better AF motor system in the lens
and not be hindered by trying to design everything to fit the smaller FD
mount. Additionally, the EF mount is LARGER than the FD or Nikon
mounts, so putting really large glass on the end of the camera is less
of an issue.

If you don't own EF glass, what can I say? You're missing out on some
excellent telephoto and telephoto zoom lenses.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 8:38:26 AM

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

In article <facoe1hvsk4quokpf1ui22qq4nomhdlh5t@4ax.com>, caught@22.com
says...
> > How far back do you want to go? FD lenses haven't been made in some
> > time. Get a clue!
>
> So if a company has a policy of (or history of apparent) planned
> obsolescence, they can take advantage of your statute of limitations
> that effectively erases that past? Better to remember such things
> in order to lessen the chance of getting burned by new camera or
> lens designs whose future is questionable.

No, the switch to the FD mount was done in the early 80s. It's old
news.

Canon's lens quality and selection since the switch to EF has improved.
So when they switched mounts, they did it for the AF and the quality and
they did it quickly in the 1980s. Nothing wrong with that.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 8:38:27 AM

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

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 04:38:26 GMT, Brian Baird wrote:

>> So if a company has a policy of (or history of apparent) planned
>> obsolescence, they can take advantage of your statute of limitations
>> that effectively erases that past? Better to remember such things
>> in order to lessen the chance of getting burned by new camera or
>> lens designs whose future is questionable.
>
> No, the switch to the FD mount was done in the early 80s. It's old
> news.

Yes, the switch was done in the early 80's. To / from, whatever.
What I said remains true nonetheless, and applies to all companies,
not just Canon.


> Canon's lens quality and selection since the switch to EF has improved.

Whether true or not, it's a point that I neither addressed nor
disputed. That's quite a collection of Canon lenses you own. If I
had also accumulated 64 of them, I'd be well beyond the need to
justify it. And there's no way that I could if I tried. :) 

[no implications here that your acquisitions couldn't be justified]
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 8:49:09 AM

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

"Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote in message
news:1122772218.cd750ffa7225d03ed52d9ebcbe103a08@teranews...
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005 19:14:40 -0400, "Mark B."

> I think you've misread; my gripe is that I can't use EF lenses on my
> old Canon FD body. There's no adapter available. And worse, I can't
> use my FD glass on modern Canon cameras; there are no good adapters
> available, it's physically impossible to make an adapter that doesn't
> require optical elements to achieve infinity focus.
>
> I can however use virtually any Nikon lens ever made on my old Canon
> FD body, because there IS a simple mechanical adapter to do this.
>
> I'm convinced that Canon engineered this situation deliberately as a
> case of forced obsolescence. I've never owned a Canon EF mount camera
> or lens, and I never will.
>
> Mike
> --
> http://www.corestore.org
> 'As I walk along these shores
> I am the history within'

Sometimes, a company finds itself painted into a corner with its hardware.
IMO, this is what happened to Canon, the old FD mount wasn't adequate,
probably in diameter, for the upcoming AF lenses. Thus Canon was faced with
a dilemma, either have inadequate AF lenses, or dump the mount and engineer
one from the start to work well. We had several FD mount cameras in our
family, AT-1, AE-1 AE-1P (2) and A-1, when we decided to go to an AF system.
Since we would be replacing lenses no matter what we bought, Nikon, Minolta,
Pentax or stick with Canon, we looked at everything. We thought the Canon
ergonomics made more sense to us, since the designs were similar to the
older ones. So, that's what we bought. Some people are vindictive about
this, deciding that, since Canon screwed them, they'll buy an entirely new
system just so Canon won't get any of their money. Great, if that's what
gives you satisfaction. But Canon's lens system, particularly their USM and
IS lenses, has remained more extensive, and many of those people may have
lost out in the long run. Those of us who remained objective (after all, we
had to buy an entirely new system, anyway) have had access to AF lenses that
others just haven't.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
July 31, 2005 11:29:54 AM

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

Mike Ross <mike@corestore.org> wrote in
news:1122772218.cd750ffa7225d03ed52d9ebcbe103a08@teranews:

> I think you've misread; my gripe is that I can't use EF lenses on my
> old Canon FD body.

That's pretty funny!

You can't use EF lenses on your old FD camera, of course not! How would
your camera set the aperture?

I'll bet you can't play DVDs in your 8-track either!

The FD lens system was fine in its day, but 25 years ago Canon realised
that the limitations of the FD system was going to be a big hindrance in
the development of AF lenses. Canon took a huge risk and must have lost
many sales at the time when they changed their mount, luckily time has
shown their decision to be the right one.

Anyone that would think that Canon made the change to force the FD lenses
into obsolescence is a fool. There is no justification for stating that
Canon has shown a pattern of using planned obsolescence to sell new
cameras/lenses, they have only changed their lens mount the once and they
had good practical reasons to do so.

--
Mark Heyes (New Zealand)
See my pics at www.gigatech.co.nz (last updated 25-June-05)
"There are 10 types of people, those that
understand binary and those that don't"
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 12:11:43 PM

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

"<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>
> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
> from old 35mm SLRs.
>
> Has that actually happened ?
To some extent.
Canon can use the EOS range of lenses (ie Autofocus), you can't use the
older lenses.
Nikon can and can't use their old lenses - while the mounts are the same,
some models won't work with older lenses.
Pentax can use all their old lenses (with a K->Thread adapter if you are
using old thread mount lenses), but there are some metering quirks
associated with using lenses that don't have an "A" position on the aperture
ring.
Minolta can use their AF lenses. There may be adapters to the old mount
available, not sure.
Olympus have a completely new lens mount and specification that is not
compatible with their old film lenses, however I believe that adapters are
available. I haven't actually seen an adapter or used one, but I suspect
there would be metering quirks, similar to the pentaxes.
Obviously with all of the above, if using a non-AF lens you don't magically
get AF.
>
>
> <rj>
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 12:11:44 PM

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

"Justin Thyme" <pleasedontspamme@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:AWSGe.667$lj1.13457@nnrp1.ozemail.com.au...
>
> "<RJ>" <baranick@localnet.com> wrote in message
> news:ms4ne198tum30qfm2aa0lc2vsbljcmak1v@4ax.com...
>>
>> It was supposed to be "just a matter of time"
>> before DSLRs would accep the many lens
>> from old 35mm SLRs.
>>
>> Has that actually happened ?
> To some extent.
> Canon can use the EOS range of lenses (ie Autofocus), you can't use the
> older lenses.
> Nikon can and can't use their old lenses - while the mounts are the same,
> some models won't work with older lenses.
> Pentax can use all their old lenses (with a K->Thread adapter if you are
> using old thread mount lenses), but there are some metering quirks
> associated with using lenses that don't have an "A" position on the
> aperture ring.

Pretty quirky, you have to press one button and then apperture priority
works very nicely, great if you want to use some of the old long glass but
will work for any lens including telescopes, etc with an M42 or T mount.

> Minolta can use their AF lenses. There may be adapters to the old mount
> available, not sure.
> Olympus have a completely new lens mount and specification that is not
> compatible with their old film lenses, however I believe that adapters are
> available. I haven't actually seen an adapter or used one, but I suspect
> there would be metering quirks, similar to the pentaxes.
> Obviously with all of the above, if using a non-AF lens you don't
> magically get AF.
>>
>>
>> <rj>
>
>
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 12:28:21 PM

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

In article <7apoe1tt47sg2khkujn0j2rg20n52t163f@4ax.com>, ASAAR
<caught@22.com> wrote:

> One reason I didn't get a more advanced Powershot S-series camera
> was that Canon changed to a different lithium rechargeable battery.
> Now I prefer purchasing cameras that use AA batteries. To their
> credit, Canon does offer some AA powered cameras. Just not for any
> of the models I'm interested in. My personal opinion, which you are
> free to disagree with, is that lithium batteries should be limited
> to extremely small, quality cameras, as well as high end "pro" DSLRs
> and maybe a few high end P&S 'prosumers'. But the DSLRs should have
> the ability to use AA batteries through the use of optional
> accessories. To their credit, Canon and Nikon do offer these items.

So now you're going to bitch about batteries? I use a 10D which uses
proprietary batteries. I can leave the thing on all day long and it
keeps working and have never had one of these proprietary batteries
fail.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 12:53:08 PM

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

Randall Ainsworth <rag@nospam.techline.com> wrote:
: In article <kNWdnRS_YNWM3HHfRVn-hA@rogers.com>, Darrell <spam@this.eh>
: wrote:

: > The Pentax dSLR cameras are very backwards compatible offering metered
: > manual evne with M42 thread mount lenses.

: Yeah, I'll bet my old screw mount lenses for my 1969 Spotmatic would
: work great for digital.

Well, Darrell said that the lens would fit, not that it would be the
prefered lens to use. :) 

I have several old Pentax K mount lenses that I used on my old Pentax 35mm
SLR back in the early 70s. They do fit and work on my Ist-DS DSLR body.
But they are old enough that they do not have AF or Auto Aperture. But
they do work. So I have purchased some more "modern" lenses with these
features for use with this camera body. I don't worry if they are
"digital" lenses or made for 35mm film. Just that they have the features
that will give me full function of the camera.

So for backward compatability, in this particular case, the old lenses are
compatable and useable without any adapters or converters. But newer
lenses with more additional functions may be more prefered.

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 1:02:34 PM

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

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 04:35:55 GMT, Brian Baird <no@no.thank.u> wrote:

>In article <1122772218.cd750ffa7225d03ed52d9ebcbe103a08@teranews>,
>mike@corestore.org says...
>> I'm convinced that Canon engineered this situation deliberately as a
>> case of forced obsolescence. I've never owned a Canon EF mount camera
>> or lens, and I never will.
>
>They did this so they could build a better AF motor system in the lens
>and not be hindered by trying to design everything to fit the smaller FD
>mount. Additionally, the EF mount is LARGER than the FD or Nikon
>mounts, so putting really large glass on the end of the camera is less
>of an issue.

*Yes* - it's larger, so it should have been fairly straightforward to
engineer a simple mechanical adapter that would allow the use of FD
lenses on EF cameras. The kind of stuff I shoot I wouldn't even a
problem with stopped-down metering if I could just hang the glass on
the camera. In fact such an adapter exists. But they also changed the
frelling *register*, so that optically it's a non-starter, you can't
get infinity focus.

>If you don't own EF glass, what can I say? You're missing out on some
>excellent telephoto and telephoto zoom lenses.

I don't own EF glass because I don't own an EF body. I have my Canon
F-1s, the original mechanical bodies from the 1970s, and I love them
and I'll use them til they fall apart. I have a fair collection of
very nice FD glass. My modern digital stuff is all Nikon, because I
can use the modern AF Nikon lenses on the F-1 and get infinity focus.
I can't do that with modern Canon AF lenses.

Mike
--
http://www.corestore.org
'As I walk along these shores
I am the history within'
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 4:28:14 PM

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

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 08:28:21 -0700, Randall Ainsworth wrote:

>> My personal opinion, which you are
>> free to disagree with, is that lithium batteries should be limited
>> to extremely small, quality cameras, as well as high end "pro" DSLRs
>> and maybe a few high end P&S 'prosumers'. But the DSLRs should have
>> the ability to use AA batteries through the use of optional
>> accessories. To their credit, Canon and Nikon do offer these items.
>
> So now you're going to bitch about batteries? I use a 10D which uses
> proprietary batteries. I can leave the thing on all day long and it
> keeps working and have never had one of these proprietary batteries
> fail.

Do you need to take a remedial reading course? I think the 10D
safely falls into the category of high end cameras where the use of
lithium batteries is justified. Your inability to comprehend what
you read indicates that you probably shouldn't be trusted to use a
10D. It's the heavy use (over their relatively short life - three
years or so) that makes lithium rechargeables cost effective for
pros. The average owner of a lithium battery-using P&S is going to
find (whether they realize it or not) that their costly lithium
battery will have to be replaced long before they get the hundreds
of recharge cycles that the batteries are capable of providing when
new. More like a couple of dozen recharges if they're lucky. And
if they get a second battery (as many people do, so that they can
continue shooting while the other battery is charging) that
effectively doubles the battery cost without significantly
increasing battery longevity. You still have that 3 year battery
life window to consider. Use 'em or lose 'em. In your case,
although it has nothing to do with batteries, you've lost it.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 4:28:15 PM

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

In article <fvtpe19h9s4829nkfihtmqed5o91dsdqo0@4ax.com>, ASAAR
<caught@22.com> wrote:

> Do you need to take a remedial reading course? I think the 10D
> safely falls into the category of high end cameras where the use of
> lithium batteries is justified. Your inability to comprehend what
> you read indicates that you probably shouldn't be trusted to use a
> 10D. It's the heavy use (over their relatively short life - three
> years or so) that makes lithium rechargeables cost effective for
> pros. The average owner of a lithium battery-using P&S is going to
> find (whether they realize it or not) that their costly lithium
> battery will have to be replaced long before they get the hundreds
> of recharge cycles that the batteries are capable of providing when
> new. More like a couple of dozen recharges if they're lucky. And
> if they get a second battery (as many people do, so that they can
> continue shooting while the other battery is charging) that
> effectively doubles the battery cost without significantly
> increasing battery longevity. You still have that 3 year battery
> life window to consider. Use 'em or lose 'em. In your case,
> although it has nothing to do with batteries, you've lost it.

I'm trying to see your point but I can't get my head far enough up my
ass.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 6:04:11 PM

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

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005 10:26:47 -0700, Randall Ainsworth, one of the
original butthole surfers wrote:

> I'm trying to see your point but I can't get my head far enough
> up my ass.

Sorry. I thought that its usual position would suffice.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 6:34:38 PM

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

: I have several old Pentax K mount lenses that I used on my old Pentax 35mm
: SLR back in the early 70s. They do fit and work on my Ist-DS DSLR body.
: But they are old enough that they do not have AF or Auto Aperture. But
: they do work. So I have purchased some more "modern" lenses with these
: features for use with this camera body. I don't worry if they are
: "digital" lenses or made for 35mm film. Just that they have the features
: that will give me full function of the camera.

: So for backward compatability, in this particular case, the old lenses are
: compatable and useable without any adapters or converters. But newer
: lenses with more additional functions may be more prefered.

Well-said. Using older lenses on the Pentax may be a bit quirky, but at least
it's reasonably possible. With Nikon's "backwards-compatibility," there's a myriad of
confusing permutations on the mount... some of which will actually *damage* your
camera if you attach it. Also, there is *no* metering from what I understand.

I don't fault Pentax for making old lenses (i.e. pre-A K-mount lenses)
"obsolete" in the interest of cost savings. At least they made a very workable option
to continue to use them. Like you said, it may be preferred to get newer lenses with
more functions, but at least they don't force it on you.

-Cory

--

*************************************************************************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
*************************************************************************
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 7:02:49 PM

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

Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> writes:
> Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
>> "Mark B." <mbohntrash54@comcast.net> writes:
>>> "Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote:

>>>> With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
>>>> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I
>>>> can't use modern Canon lenses, no way!

>>> EF lenses can be used on any Canon DLSR. What modern Canon lenses
>>> are you referring to?

>> I don't think his 1970s Canon F-1 is a DSLR.
>>
>> When Canon introduced the EF-mount, they left the owners of the old
>> FD-mount bodies out in the cold, just as the recent EF-S mount has
>> left the owners of D30, D60 and 10D bodies out in the cold.
>>
>> This is called planned obsolescence - and Canon is very good at it.

> Complete nonsense. A rare event from you, Gisle. All EOS film
> cameras, and digitals from the D30 to the 1Ds MkII, *all* can use
> the huge range of EF lenses.

Please read what I wrote. I said *FD-mount bodies*. *None* of the
EOS cameras you list come with an FD-mount. Again: How many Canon
FD-mount Canon bodies can use modern Canon lenses? I believe the
answer is zero.

> The EF-S lenses - all four of them! - are designed for the
> 1.6-crop-sensor cameras 300D, 350D, and 20D, to give the 1.6-crop
> cameras approximately the same focal ranges as corresponding EF
> lenses do on full-frame. How is that 'leaving the owners of D30,
> D60 and 10D bodies out in the cold'?

The owners of the D30, D60 and 10D bodies are left out in the cold
because the D30, D60 and 10D are 1.6-crop sensor cameras that can not
use Canon lenses designed for 1.6 crop sensor cameras.

If you own one of these cameras and need a wide angle lens, you either
have to buy an EF-mount lens paying a premium for coverage your camera
can't handle. Or - if you need something like a 10-22 mm rectilinear
lens - there simply isn't one avilable from Canon in the EF-mount,
/only/ in the EF-S mount.

Canon could have designed the new range of lenses to use the existing
EF-mount, just as Nikon's DX-range of lenses will fit on any camera
with the F-mount. The fact that they did not indicates that Canon
are trying to get their users to «upgrade» through planned
obsolescence.

> Canon's upside is a beautifully engineered system; downside is that
> the system won't accept old lenses. Nikon's upside is they can
> still use old lenses in a manual manner; downside is they are still
> limited by the old mount. Take your pick.

How is a modern Nikon, such as the D2X, in any way «limited» by the
old F-mount? It has fast and silent autofocus (SWM), electronic
communication between lens and body that integrates beautifully with
their i-TTL flash system - in short, it has everything that Canon had
to redesign their mount to get.

In addition, the D2X can use some excellent and very fast manual
focus lenses that I bought over 30 years ago! (And a lot more of
these are available at a very low cost second hand.)

And all digital Nikon bodies work great with my old and pre-digital
SB-28 Nikon Speedlights! Look at the prices EZ Speedlites are going
for at eBay, and you'll notice that Canon has (again!) managed the
engineering masterstroke of making their previous dedicated TTL-flash
system obsolete so that their users need to replace their entire kit
to use dedicated flash with digital bodies.

True, Canon has some very fine products, but the fact that they over
and over again find an engineering pretext to make the kit you already
own obsolete is something to take into account when computing the cost
of ownership of Canon vs. Nikon (or Pentax).
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 7:25:44 PM

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

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
>
> "Mark B." <mbohntrash54@comcast.net> writes:
> > "Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote:
>
> >> With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
> >> modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I
> >> can't use modern Canon lenses, no way!
>
> > EF lenses can be used on any Canon DLSR. What modern Canon lenses
> > are you referring to?
>
> I don't think his 1970s Canon F-1 is a DSLR.
>
> When Canon introduced the EF-mount, they left the owners of the old
> FD-mount bodies out in the cold, just as the recent EF-S mount has
> left the owners of D30, D60 and 10D bodies out in the cold.

> This is called planned obsolescence - and Canon is very good at it.

Complete nonsense. A rare event from you, Gisle. All EOS film cameras,
and digitals from the D30 to the 1Ds MkII, *all* can use the huge range
of EF lenses. The EF-S lenses - all four of them! - are designed for
the 1.6-crop-sensor cameras 300D, 350D, and 20D, to give the 1.6-crop
cameras approximately the same focal ranges as corresponding EF lenses
do on full-frame. They are not essential, those three cameras can also
use all of the EF lenses as well. How is that 'leaving the owners of
D30, D60 and 10D bodies out in the cold'?
>
As I understand it, Canon's FD mount would have made things difficult
for the new generation of high-tech bodies and lenses, with their
requirements for auto-focus, and the ability to report aperture, focal
length and distance to the camera, with digital recording and
sophisticated metering in mind. Canon (IMHO very wisely) designed the
new generation EF/EOS system to use entirely electronic control of focus
and aperture, allowing the focus motor to be fitted into and tailored
for each lens design - the USM motor in a 10-22mm lens is nothing like
the motor in 100-400, for example. This gave them the advantage of the
fastest focusing of any camera, unlike Nikon who persisted for some time
with the motor in the camera body, mechanically coupled to the lens.
Unlike Canon, who bit the bullet and produced the new mount, giving the
coup de gras to the FD, Nikon and others persevered with their existing
mount, with modification to allow electronic focusing, aperture control,
distance reporting, etc, while still allowing the use of older lenses
which will no longer interface with the camera so they can only be used
manually.

Canon's upside is a beautifully engineered system; downside is that the
system won't accept old lenses. Nikon's upside is they can still use
old lenses in a manual manner; downside is they are still limited by the
old mount. Take your pick.

Colin D.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 9:26:49 PM

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

papenfussDIESPAM@juneauDOTmeDOTvt.edu writes:
> With Nikon's "backwards-compatibility," there's a myriad of
> confusing permutations on the mount... some of which will actually
> *damage* your camera if you attach it.

The only F-mount lenses that can damage the body are the pre-AI lenses
manufactured before 1976. Btw, with these lenses, you can see that
the coupling shoe (aka "rabbit ears") will bump into the housing and
most will people understand that forcing this is not a good idea.

Pre-AI Nikkors are easy to convert into AI (Aperture Index) lenses.

> Also, there is *no* metering from what I understand.

Depends on the body. Consumer bodies like D70 and D50 will not
meter with these lenses. Pro bodies like D2X and D2H will.

Shame on Nikon for removing this feature from the lower end line.
But you can still *use* them with an external meter or with rules
of thumb (sunny-16 and friends).
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
August 1, 2005 6:21:23 AM

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

In article <1122814845.da64de7e91d141de070fdb0b2cbeb920@teranews>,
mike@corestore.org says...
> My modern digital stuff is all Nikon, because I
> can use the modern AF Nikon lenses on the F-1 and get infinity focus.
> I can't do that with modern Canon AF lenses.

That's a bizarre logic, but if it works for you, whatever.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
August 1, 2005 3:01:42 PM

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

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
> The owners of the D30, D60 and 10D bodies are left out in the cold
> because the D30, D60 and 10D are 1.6-crop sensor cameras that can not
> use Canon lenses designed for 1.6 crop sensor cameras.
>
> If you own one of these cameras and need a wide angle lens, you either
> have to buy an EF-mount lens paying a premium for coverage your camera
> can't handle. Or - if you need something like a 10-22 mm rectilinear
> lens - there simply isn't one avilable from Canon in the EF-mount,
> /only/ in the EF-S mount.

The owners of these cameras are in exactly the same position as
when they were brand new - at least in regard to on-brand glass. Did
Canon ever promise any reduced coverage lenses in EF-mount?

> Canon could have designed the new range of lenses to use the existing
> EF-mount, just as Nikon's DX-range of lenses will fit on any camera
> with the F-mount. The fact that they did not indicates that Canon
> are trying to get their users to «upgrade» through planned
> obsolescence.

The fact that they did not indicates that they wanted to make better
lenses. That is, better from Canon's perspective which may well include
being easier and cheaper to make.

- Len
Anonymous
August 1, 2005 4:55:17 PM

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

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
> Colin D <ColinD@killspam.127.0.0.1> writes:
>
>>Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
>>
>>>"Mark B." <mbohntrash54@comcast.net> writes:
>>>
>>>>"Mike Ross" <mike@corestore.org> wrote:
>
>
>>>>>With a suitable adaptor (which was hard to find) I can use my
>>>>>modern *Nikon* AF lenses on my old 1970s Canon F-1 body - but I
>>>>>can't use modern Canon lenses, no way!
>
>
>>>>EF lenses can be used on any Canon DLSR. What modern Canon lenses
>>>>are you referring to?
>
>
>>>I don't think his 1970s Canon F-1 is a DSLR.
>>>
>>>When Canon introduced the EF-mount, they left the owners of the old
>>>FD-mount bodies out in the cold, just as the recent EF-S mount has
>>>left the owners of D30, D60 and 10D bodies out in the cold.
>>>
>>>This is called planned obsolescence - and Canon is very good at it.
>
>
>>Complete nonsense. A rare event from you, Gisle. All EOS film
>>cameras, and digitals from the D30 to the 1Ds MkII, *all* can use
>>the huge range of EF lenses.
>
>
> Please read what I wrote. I said *FD-mount bodies*. *None* of the
> EOS cameras you list come with an FD-mount. Again: How many Canon
> FD-mount Canon bodies can use modern Canon lenses? I believe the
> answer is zero.
>
>
>>The EF-S lenses - all four of them! - are designed for the
>>1.6-crop-sensor cameras 300D, 350D, and 20D, to give the 1.6-crop
>>cameras approximately the same focal ranges as corresponding EF
>>lenses do on full-frame. How is that 'leaving the owners of D30,
>>D60 and 10D bodies out in the cold'?
>
>
> The owners of the D30, D60 and 10D bodies are left out in the cold
> because the D30, D60 and 10D are 1.6-crop sensor cameras that can not
> use Canon lenses designed for 1.6 crop sensor cameras.
>
> If you own one of these cameras and need a wide angle lens, you either
> have to buy an EF-mount lens paying a premium for coverage your camera
> can't handle. Or - if you need something like a 10-22 mm rectilinear
> lens - there simply isn't one avilable from Canon in the EF-mount,
> /only/ in the EF-S mount.
>
> Canon could have designed the new range of lenses to use the existing
> EF-mount, just as Nikon's DX-range of lenses will fit on any camera
> with the F-mount. The fact that they did not indicates that Canon
> are trying to get their users to «upgrade» through planned
> obsolescence.
>
>
>>Canon's upside is a beautifully engineered system; downside is that
>>the system won't accept old lenses. Nikon's upside is they can
>>still use old lenses in a manual manner; downside is they are still
>>limited by the old mount. Take your pick.
>
>
> How is a modern Nikon, such as the D2X, in any way «limited» by the
> old F-mount? It has fast and silent autofocus (SWM), electronic
> communication between lens and body that integrates beautifully with
> their i-TTL flash system - in short, it has everything that Canon had
> to redesign their mount to get.
>
> In addition, the D2X can use some excellent and very fast manual
> focus lenses that I bought over 30 years ago! (And a lot more of
> these are available at a very low cost second hand.)
>
> And all digital Nikon bodies work great with my old and pre-digital
> SB-28 Nikon Speedlights! Look at the prices EZ Speedlites are going
> for at eBay, and you'll notice that Canon has (again!) managed the
> engineering masterstroke of making their previous dedicated TTL-flash
> system obsolete so that their users need to replace their entire kit
> to use dedicated flash with digital bodies.
>
> True, Canon has some very fine products, but the fact that they over
> and over again find an engineering pretext to make the kit you already
> own obsolete is something to take into account when computing the cost
> of ownership of Canon vs. Nikon (or Pentax).


I doubt Canon use EF-S for change's sake. I don't know about SLR cameras
much so this theory might be incorrect.

I think Canon's original lens mount was small and had complicated
mechanical coupling so they changed to the simplified electronic
coupling and also increased the diameter of the lens mount.

Nikon's F-mount is smaller but digital sensor requires wider opening to
avoid light falloff at the edges (this is why the 4/3 specification has
an opening which is 2x the size of the sensor.) This maybe why Nikon
says they won't make full frame 35mm digial cameras. And maybe the
smaller opening means the lens is mounted closer to the film plane.

Maybe to compensate for the larger opening, Canon needs to use a
different mount to make a small lens get closer to the sensor.

Canon really has no need to change lens mount unnecessarily. There must
be a technical reason.
Anonymous
August 1, 2005 5:22:07 PM

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

In article <VYoHe.505$I04.358@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
someone@somewhere.net says...
> Maybe to compensate for the larger opening, Canon needs to use a
> different mount to make a small lens get closer to the sensor.
>
> Canon really has no need to change lens mount unnecessarily. There must
> be a technical reason.

EF-S exists to allow the rear element of the lens to be physically
closer to the sensor. This allows the lens to be smaller and simpler in
design, apparently.
--
http://www.pbase.com/bcbaird
Anonymous
August 1, 2005 6:17:21 PM

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

Leonard <user@example.net> writes:
> Gisle Hannemyr wrote:

>> The owners of the D30, D60 and 10D bodies are left out in the cold
>> because the D30, D60 and 10D are 1.6-crop sensor cameras that can
>> not use Canon lenses designed for 1.6 crop sensor cameras. If you
>> own one of these cameras and need a wide angle lens, you either
>> have to buy an EF-mount lens paying a premium for coverage your
>> camera can't handle. Or - if you need something like a 10-22 mm
>> rectilinear lens - there simply isn't one avilable from Canon in
>> the EF-mount, /only/ in the EF-S mount.

> The owners of these cameras are in exactly the same position as
> when they were brand new - at least in regard to on-brand glass. Did
> Canon ever promise any reduced coverage lenses in EF-mount?

That does not tell the whole story. When you buy into a leading
DSLR brand, you also buy into a /system/. People buy into a system
with the implicit promise that their present investment can be
incrementally extended by buying yet to be released new equipment
designed for that system.

When something pivotal in a camera system, such as the lens mount or
the dedicated flash interface, is changed without regard to backwards
compatibility, that promise is negated.

Canon's policy of cutting off owners of last year's equipment the
option to use this year's new releases - unless they "upgrade" - is
something prospective buyers need be aware off and and take into
account as part of the cost of ownership of the Canon camera system.

>> Canon could have designed the new range of lenses to use the
>> existing EF-mount, just as Nikon's DX-range of lenses will fit on
>> any camera with the F-mount. The fact that they did not indicates
>> that Canon are trying to get their users to «upgrade» through
>> planned obsolescence.

> The fact that they did not indicates that they wanted to make better
> lenses. That is, better from Canon's perspective which may well
> include being easier and cheaper to make.

Of course. But I don't see Canon having a definite edge (in price or
in performance) compared to other leading brands. This goes for
lenses, dedicated flash units, and cameras. It is true that Canon has
some really great stuff on the market, but they also sell some dogs.
That is the same as any the other leading brand of DSLRs.
--
- gisle hannemyr [ gisle{at}hannemyr.no - http://folk.uio.no/gisle/ ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kodak DCS460, Canon Powershot G5, Olympus 2020Z
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anonymous
August 1, 2005 6:17:22 PM

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

In article <q5oe8hx35a.fsf@kaksi.ifi.uio.no>, Gisle Hannemyr
<gisle+news@ifi.uio.no> wrote:

> Canon's policy of cutting off owners of last year's equipment the
> option to use this year's new releases - unless they "upgrade" - is
> something prospective buyers need be aware off and and take into
> account as part of the cost of ownership of the Canon camera system.

EF-S technology was not available when I bought my 10D, but looking
back, I still probably wouldn't have bought the lenses anyway.
Anonymous
August 1, 2005 6:17:23 PM

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

Randall Ainsworth wrote:
> In article <q5oe8hx35a.fsf@kaksi.ifi.uio.no>, Gisle Hannemyr
> <gisle+news@ifi.uio.no> wrote:
>
>
>>Canon's policy of cutting off owners of last year's equipment the
>>option to use this year's new releases - unless they "upgrade" - is
>>something prospective buyers need be aware off and and take into
>>account as part of the cost of ownership of the Canon camera system.
>
>
> EF-S technology was not available when I bought my 10D, but looking
> back, I still probably wouldn't have bought the lenses anyway.

I agree. I still will not buy an EF-S lens.

Can someone explain what has happened with flash systems? I had
a 430 flash, with long extension cords. They worked well with
my Elans, but now don't work with newer cameras (neither flash nor
cords). I had to buy newer cords and flash when I got my
D60 and 10D and now 1D Mark II.

I for one am glad Canon redesigned the lens mount. It allowed
newer designs with fast lenses, thus an optical advantage as
well as electrical. (I did not own Canon gear before EOS).

Roger
August 1, 2005 10:11:13 PM

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

Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
> Leonard <user@example.net> writes:
>
>>Gisle Hannemyr wrote:
>
>
>>>The owners of the D30, D60 and 10D bodies are left out in the cold
>>>because the D30, D60 and 10D are 1.6-crop sensor cameras that can
>>>not use Canon lenses designed for 1.6 crop sensor cameras. If you
>>>own one of these cameras and need a wide angle lens, you either
>>>have to buy an EF-mount lens paying a premium for coverage your
>>>camera can't handle. Or - if you need something like a 10-22 mm
>>>rectilinear lens - there simply isn't one avilable from Canon in
>>>the EF-mount, /only/ in the EF-S mount.
>
>
>>The owners of these cameras are in exactly the same position as
>>when they were brand new - at least in regard to on-brand glass. Did
>>Canon ever promise any reduced coverage lenses in EF-mount?
>
>
> That does not tell the whole story. When you buy into a leading
> DSLR brand, you also buy into a /system/. People buy into a system
> with the implicit promise that their present investment can be
> incrementally extended by buying yet to be released new equipment
> designed for that system.

And in fact EF lenses introduced after the release of the 10D can
be used with that camera. Buying into a system with the assumption
that a _particular_ piece of new equipment will become available is
somewhat rash. For example I think Canon ought to do an affordable
18mm lens in EF-S, but I don't suppose they will. If I thought I
would need a moderate-wide like that I'd have looked at other brands.

> When something pivotal in a camera system, such as the lens mount or
> the dedicated flash interface, is changed without regard to backwards
> compatibility, that promise is negated.

The EF-S mount is backward compatible with EF. The EF-S cameras can
use EF and EF-S lenses.

>>>Canon could have designed the new range of lenses to use the
>>>existing EF-mount, just as Nikon's DX-range of lenses will fit on
>>>any camera with the F-mount. The fact that they did not indicates
>>>that Canon are trying to get their users to «upgrade» through
>>>planned obsolescence.
>
>
>>The fact that they did not indicates that they wanted to make better
>>lenses. That is, better from Canon's perspective which may well
>>include being easier and cheaper to make.
>
>
> Of course. But I don't see Canon having a definite edge (in price or
> in performance) compared to other leading brands.

I've not really looked at the EF-S lenses, but if they only offer
similar performance/price to other brands' EF products, I would
assume that the EF-S advantage is being translated entirely into
increased margins for Canon.

- Len
!