EF vs. EF-S

[lennon33x]

So every time I see someone recommend an EF-S lens, over an EF lens, a little bit of me cringes. Can someone please tell me why you would recommend an EF-S lens over an EF lens? Granted, I do know that not all lenses are created equal. I'm excluding for the most part the L series, as price can sometimes go up. Here's an example:

EF-S 60mm Macro - $400 vs. EF 50mm Macro $300 vs EF 100mm Macro $500

You can never use an EF-S lens on a FF camera, and most of them are made pretty shoddy (to my understanding and with my experience with them).

I have seen others asking for suggestions of similar ranges (i.e. 55-250) and getting suggestions when they could spend less and get a 75-300.


Am I missing something?

 

[lambertpix]

Well, right off the bat, it would probably be best to compare individual lenses, rather than making generalizations. There are certainly some EF-S lenses with cheaper build quality, but then again, those lenses cost a boatload less than "L" lenses, too. There are also some really nice EF-S lenses, too. The 17-55 f/2.8 is generally considered to be very near "L" quality, and the 10-22 is well-regarded, too.

Note that the best EF-S lenses are wide-angle lenses -- this is because you really need a purpose-built lens to cover wide focal lengths on a crop-sensor camera, whereas by the time you get to 30-50mm or so, any of Canon's EF lenses will work just fine. In the case of the macros you listed, the 60mm EF-S macro (Canon's only prime EF-S lens, I believe) not only has a USM focusing motor, it also focuses at a true 1:1 magnification, whereas the 50mm macro only focuses to half life-size.

In your other example, I'd prefer the 70-300 or any of Canon's 70-200 lenses to the 55-250, but the 55-250 is considered a better lens than the 75-300. Given the price range of FF cameras vs. crop-sensor cameras, I have a feeling that most people that plan an upgrade to FF in the foreseeable future are probably already looking at the better EF lenses vs. something like the 75-300, though.