Recommended ES-F lenses for 20d

kpsmithuk · May 17, 2013

Hi

Some of you may be familiar with my previous posts some may not.

I'm currently using a mixture of fd lenses via adapter as I had them available from the av-1.

35mm
50mm f1.8 and 1.4
70-150mm zoom f3.5
28-200mm macro wide angle zoom

I've started looking at proper es-f lenses a and want to get some that will give me the same or better capability.

I've so far been looking at these:

18-55mm zoom
55-250mm zoom

Both the above are cannon es-f

Also looked at an 80-250 macro wide angle though it would be fully manual or auto exposure only. Nice looking but would prefer a proper es-f mount macro lens.

The two above cannon lenses seem to be quite slow f3.5 and 4.0 respectively in comparison to my 50mm, do faster lenses exist? Is it so much of an issue with a dslr with all it's auto this and that?

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Buckster · May 17, 2013

I've owned and used two EF-S lenses; the 18-55mm and the 10-22mm. I used them both extensively with my 20D, 40D, then 7D, and got lots of great shots from both. A few years ago I sold my 20D and just a few weeks ago sold the 40D. With the 40D I sold the 18-55mm EF-S and a 28-135mm EF because I rarely used them anymore anyway.

The thing is, I've since moved on to mostly use a full frame camera, the Canon 5DMKII, with the 7D mostly as a backup, or to use for purposes where the 7D does a better job. The EF-S lenses don't fit the full frame camera, and my general walkaround lens for that has become the 24-105mm, replacing any need for the 18-55mm on the 7D or the 28-135mm on either the 7D or the 5DMKII. EF lenses fit the 7D and other APS-C sensor size bodys just fine, though there's a crop factor on them. I keep the 10-22mm EF-S lens and use it with the 7D because I haven't replaced that wide view lens yet for the full frame camera.

What I'm getting at is this: If/when you ever upgrade your camera body from the 20D or some other APS-C size sensor body to a full frame sensor body, any EF-S lenses you have will not work with the new body. If you mostly have EF-S lenses, that will mean buying new lenses for the full size body to cover the focal ranges you want/need to shoot with it, which will probably be all that you're used to shooting with the APS-C body and EF-S lenses.

Therefor, I would recommend that you steer away from EF-S lenses and go for full-frame EF lenses instead. The EF-S lenses are limited to APS-C bodies, while the EF lenses work on all the bodies in the Canon DSLR lineup.

The only place that plan might currently give you trouble is in the wide angle range, where standard EF lenses plus the crop factor of your APS-C sized sensor can limit your ability to achieve a truly wide field of view (multiply the EF lens focal length X 1.6 to get a handle on how the crop factor of an EF lens on an APS-C size body will affect your field of view). Thus, the reason I got the EF-S 10-22mm back when I was still shooting exclusively APS-C sized sensor bodies, and still use it currently with the 7D when I need a truly wide angle FOV.

So, if you need a wide angle lens currently, you might be stuck getting one of the EF-S mount lenses to cover it, if not from Canon, then from one of the 3rd party manufacturers, like Sigma or Tamron. For everything else though, I'd recommend full-size EF lenses to best cover your future lens needs on any body you might upgrade to.

Of course, if you somehow know that you're never ever going to go with a full-frame body, and will always shoot APS-C size bodies (assuming the manufacturers don't abandon that size in the future), then getting EF-S lenses now won't be a problem that pops up in your future at all.

Hope that wasn't too convoluted, and made sense for you.

kpsmithuk · May 17, 2013

Hi Buckster

Thanks for the explanation - not convoluted, it makes the point perfectly. Most of the work I do with the SLR is close up or portrait work where a narrower field of view doesn't make that much of a difference to me I have a point and shoot Samsung NV10 as well that I use as a daily/at party camera, I use the SLR for more special work, though it could become a daily as I get more skilled but I'm not likely to lug it and a sack of lenses round Corfu on my holiday at the moment.

I take your point about the wide angle and that may be an area where I stick to the EF-S, the others I'll make the investment in the EF lenses as I would eventually like to get a 5D/7D but lots of saving required for that to happen!! in the mean time I'll make do with my FD mounts and any EF lenses I can get hold of.

The FD mount manual lenses I have will teach me a lot of the basics of getting a good shot as intended and by design - not through the camera doing the work for me, then when I step up to the AF lenses I will understand why I get the pictures I get and how to change them / correct things usning the camera settings.

Thats the theory anyway.

iolair · May 17, 2013

My 18-55 has sat in a box for a long while. I don't rate it as a lens - convenient but too soft and too slow (Incidentally, f/3.5 is only at the wider end, it's even slower zoomed in). Instead I've been using the 28/2.8 and the 50/1.8 (and the 10-22mm to cover the wider end and then some). All are good lenses.

For longer ranges, I used a manual Jupiter 11A 135/3.5 (for quality) or a Kodak 80-210/4.5-5.6 (for convenience). The Jupiter is amazing but harder to live with; the Kodak only adequate but I'd rather invest my money in sub-100mm focal lengths than upgrade that.
If you want to cover that kind of range the 55-250mm is a convenient and inexpensive way to do it.

If you want a shorter zoom, the 17-55 EF-S is the standard to aim for, although it is pricey - and as pointed out, a lot to commit to if you may go to full-frame cameras that don't support it in the future.

The 55-250mm is a convenient and inexpensive way to cover the longer focal lengths though, similar to my Kodak.

What the best purchase(s) for you depend very much on
- what you like to shoot
- where you see your photography going in the future
- your budget.
Give us some idea of those three, and we can give you some clearer suggestions.

kpsmithuk · May 17, 2013

I guess budget wise I'm at the cheaper end of new and second hand at sensible prices, i don't have hundreds of pounds for lenses at the moment.

In the future I'd like to invest in a 7d or 5d but no way i could justify the money.

I shoot stills mainly of our pets or other wildlife and family shots/close ups of our new arrival. Sometimes closeups of flowers /plants. I also use it for special occasions like weddings etc

I would like to do a few lanscapes/more outdoor work but that means polarising filters etc to get decent blue skys and other filters for clear water and minimising reflections etc plus the time to wander around with my lenses and camera.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Buckster · May 17, 2013

iolair said:
My 18-55 has sat in a box for a long while. I don't rate it as a lens - convenient but too soft and too slow (Incidentally, f/3.5 is only at the wider end, it's even slower zoomed in).

Really...

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-shoulder-kit-lens-justified.html#post2921127

kpsmithuk · May 17, 2013

The post linked makes a good point as does this. Some of those pictures look amazing to me, but I'm a total amateur l, I've tried pulling the waterfall shot of before but never got one quite that good.

I guess it's all about the skill and personal preference of the photographer when it comes down to it? You can be skilled but if you hate a lens for whatever reason you will always find fault, valid or otherwise

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

iolair · May 18, 2013

Buckster said:
iolair said:

My 18-55 has sat in a box for a long while. I don't rate it as a lens - convenient but too soft and too slow (Incidentally, f/3.5 is only at the wider end, it's even slower zoomed in).

Click to expand...

Really...

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...-shoulder-kit-lens-justified.html#post2921127

Very nice shots. But I stand by my opinion. A faster lens would do this and allow you to take shots with good subject/background separation using shallow depth of field, and giving more options for hand-held shots (my kit lens is non-IS) or freezing action due to better light gathering. A faster lens gives you more options.

The shots you posted do show what a good tripod can help you achieve - that also gives you more options.

I've taken some significant (at least to me) shots on my phone camera, and some good ones with that kit lens, and if those are what you have available of course you can get good results with the right planning and/or opportunity. But things like faster lenses, IS, tripods, lighting and filters give you more options.

On the other hand, I suppose zooms give you more options than primes, but in most circumstances I'd rather use a prime. Personal style/preference play a part too.

Buckster · May 18, 2013

"I don't rate it as a lens", but it is a lens, and it does work. "Too soft and too slow" - show the softness of the example shots I shared. Show how being "slow" was detrimental. Not everything needs to be shot wide open at apertures faster than f/3.5.

Your description made it seem like the lens is junk that couldn't even be used. Thus, it "sat in a box".

But it's not junk, it's not particularly soft, and it doesn't have to be the fastest lens to be useful for lots of stuff. And that's what I stand by.

iolair · May 18, 2013

My kit lens does sit in a box, because I have at least 4 lenses covering focal lengths within/near the kit lens' range that I'd rather use first. Personally speaking, I want more ability to isolate my subject using shallow depth of field, or shoot indoors using available light, than an 18-55 / 3.5-5.6 gives me. But, yes, people shooting for example landscapes with the camera on a tripod will have different needs/preferences to me. My personal experience is that the 18-55 is sufficiently softer than at least three of my primes that the softness bugs me, even though it may not be that absolutely significant.

It would be fairer if I add a caveat: I don't rate it as a lens compared to the others I have available for the types of image I prefer to create.

iolair · May 18, 2013

kpsmithuk said:
I guess budget wise I'm at the cheaper end of new and second hand at sensible prices, i don't have hundreds of pounds for lenses at the moment.

I shoot stills mainly of our pets or other wildlife and family shots/close ups of our new arrival. Sometimes closeups of flowers /plants. I also use it for special occasions like weddings etc

I would like to do a few lanscapes/more outdoor work but that means polarising filters etc to get decent blue skys and other filters for clear water and minimising reflections etc plus the time to wander around with my lenses and camera.

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

For pets and family, on a budget, I've got on well with Canon's 50mm 1.8, although on the 20D it's field of view is tight for any indoor group shots.

For wildlife on a budget, the 55-250, or similarly ranged lenses from 3rd party manufacturers, are adequate.

For landscapes, there may not be much advantage to autofocus EF/EF-S lenses over your manual ones, as you have time to perfect the manual focus.

For occasional flower/plant close-ups, extension tubes are worth looking into - cheap but effective.

Filters etc. are nice to have but there's plenty to try in landscapes without needing them.

kpsmithuk · May 19, 2013

OThanks for all the advice and opinions.

I'm getting the drift that the range of lenses required is down to personal preference or individual requirements.

I'll have a look at some extension tubes never heard of them. I'll keep my fd mounts for landscapes etc where i have the time to perfect.

I'll gradually invest in some ef and efs lenses for group shots etc indoors where that time won't always be available

Also want some natural skylight and uv filters for outdoors so i can get those lovely blue skys and lovely water shots.

Been doing a lot of reading on various settings so hopefully will have some lovely first pics for "critique" or criticism soon. Just need my adapter or ef 28-90 lens to arrive 1st!

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

kpsmithuk · May 19, 2013

The 50mm f1.8 is what i used extensively on the av-1 that or my 70-150 f3.5.

I might invest in the efs 35mm/50mm lenses at some point but my fd ones will suit for now

Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2