EF-S and EF lenses

[HoboSyke]

Hi all. I was reading on another forum and come across this quote.

"As the 70-200f/4L lens is an EF not an EF-S it will be subject to the 1.6 crop factor of the 300D ... effectively meaning 112-320mm. Keep in mind that this is a crop factor, not a magnification factor. This means that at 200mm the lens would have the same field of view as a 320mm lens."

Does this mean that EF-S lenses such as the 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS USM lens wont be affected by the 1.6x crop factor?

Cheers!

 

[tempra]

They still have the crop factor, otherwise the whole focal length thing will get a bit complicated, so the 17-85 is something like a 28 - 135 on the 300D

 

['Daniel']

They still have the crop factor, otherwise the whole focal length thing will get a bit complicated, so the 17-85 is something like a 28 - 135 on the 300D

No EF-S lenses are designed for the 1.6 crop factor hence them only working on 1.6 chips and not full frame or film.

 

[tempra]

No EF-S lenses are designed for the 1.6 crop factor hence them only working on 1.6 chips and not full frame or film.

Sorry, are you saying I'm wrong or right?

 

['Daniel']

Errrm I'm not sure, if thats not obvious then maybe I misunderstood you.

:meh:

 

[tempra]

Heh, you've confused me, but the 18-85 EF-S is 28-135 equivalent on a 300d.

More here http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_1785_456_is/index.htm

 

['Daniel']

I see, I was mistaken. Nevermind. Thanks for the info.

 

[Digital Matt]

All lenses on a camera that is not full frame are subject to the crop factor. The sensor is "cropping" the image, and it doesn't matter what glass you put in front of it. EF-S simply are smaller and lighter than EF lenses, and only work with cameras with the EF-S mount.

 

[Big Mike]

That's right, the 'crop factor' has to do with the sensor size in the camera...not the lens at all.

EF-S lenses were designed to be a cheap and wide alternative for these crop cameras. Otherwise, we would have to buy expensive ultra-wide lenses.

When someone says,

"This means that at 200mm the lens would have the same field of view as a 320mm lens."

they are comparing it to the field of view on a 35mm (or full frame digital). If you don't have a preconceived notion of what the field of view on 35mm film is...then there is nothing really to worry about.

 

[THORHAMMER]

too bad they never made a full line of decent ef-s lenses.... it would be good for us oldschool canon DSLR users... lol

 

[Big Mike]

I seem to remember Canon saying that the first one (18-55) would be the only one...and that they were moving to all full frame. :roll:

They have been stepping up the EF-S line with the new 17-55 F2.8 IS...but it's really expensive for an EF-S lens.