should i upgrade my gear??

darich · Sep 12, 2006

Digital Matt said:
The purpose of the EF-S lens mount is to let the lens protrude farther into the body. It allows them to make super wide angle lenses cheaper, and lighter, with fewer elements. It doesn't change the fact that the sensor is not the same size as a 35mm negative. The DSLR is based on the 35mm format in order for it to use normal 35mm lenses. You can't switch formats mid stream.

I realize this whole crop factor is another issue, but I think it's one to consider when buying a full frame camera. It's really one of the major perks to getting the 5D.

I know it doesn't change the size of the sensor or change the 1.6x factor but i thought that because the EF-S lenses were made specifically for cameras with a 1.6x factor, the lens was made to accommodate this and 10mm was actually 10mm and not 16mm.

darich · Sep 12, 2006

thebeginning said:
I used to think that too, but it's not true, 10mm is 10mm on an EF-S lense.

i've always thought it was silly to buy expensive cameras as a hobbyist, but that might just be me. I usually go by this...'if you can make immediate profits or it can HELP you make immediate profits more easily, then it is worth a buy'. if that doesnt apply it gets a littel tougher. if you print bigger, yes, the 5d will do a better job. how often do you print? I know clients arent quite as particular about printing quality as some of us 'photo people' are, so they might still be very pleased with 20d images. i know many pros still use nikon's d2h, d1x, and 1d cameras, each of which has less than 5 megapixels. If you are getting complaints then yes, it is time to upgrade. if not, and you are fairly pleased with what you have now, there really is no need to.

most of the prints I've sold have been 30x20 inches. panoramics are 30x10inches. So using your logic i should go for it. prints that size would be improved and while i've not received any complaints from buyers (quite the opposite actually) it may mean i can sell images to more exacting places for calendars etc.

i think i'll end up getting one!!!

Orgnoi1 · Sep 12, 2006

darich said:
I know it doesn't change the size of the sensor or change the 1.6x factor but i thought that because the EF-S lenses were made specifically for cameras with a 1.6x factor, the lens was made to accommodate this and 10mm was actually 10mm and not 16mm.

a 10mm lens IS a 10mm lens, and a 16mm lens IS a 16mm lens... a 10mm is never actually a 16mm... its just a cropped picture...

Taken from the DPReview Site:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1019&message=18749568

6. EF-S lenses

Canon EF-S series lenses are not suitable for use on a FF35 camera. They are suitable for use on certain (but not all) 1.6x cameras (or on a camera with a smaller format that Canon might introduce, perhaps "1.7x").
The unique feature of the EF-S lens is that it is built within a different design envelope than an EF lens, in the following ways:

a. They are required to generate an image only large enough to embrace a 22.5 mm x 15.0 mm format (the so-called "image circle" issue). Canon EF lenses are required to generate an image large enough to embrace a 36 mm x 24 mm format.

b. They are permitted to have a protuberance at the rear that is greater than permitted for an EF lens. This is accommodated in EF-S compatible cameras by having a reflex mirror arrangement that allows the clearance required to accommodate that greater protuberance.
EF-S lenses are designated and marked with their focal length, just like all SLR interchangeable lenses. (Some people would say, "with their 'real' focal length". That's the only kind there is.)

With respect to those aspects of lens behavior that are determined by focal length and aperture, an EF-S lens of a certain focal length and aperture will behave, on a 1.6x camera, just as would an EF lens of that focal length and aperture on that camera.

Digital Matt · Sep 12, 2006

The kit lens that comes with Canon Digitals, the 18-55mm, is an EF-S lens, and it is made to cover the 28-80mm standard kit lens range. The 17-85m lens replaces the 28-135mm. The 10-22 is meant to cover the 16-35mm range.

Yes, 10mm is 10mm. The lens focal length is measured from the back of the lens to the film plane. That's not in question. What effective focal length, or Field of View it gives you, is what we are talking about. It's a 10mm lens, that gives you the same field of view as a 16mm lens does, on a full frame camera, or 35mm camera.

From Luminous Landscape:

Since the first APS-C sized imagers appeared in DSLRs a few years ago, photographers have struggled with not having lenses which can provide super-wide angle coverage. With a 1.6X factor, (on Canon DSLRs, at least), a 16mm focal length, like that of Canon's 16-35mm zoom, becomes just 25mm at the wide end.

Recently a number of even wider-angle lenses have become available, and the latest of this batch, at least for owners of the Canon 20D and Rebel, is the recently announced Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM. This lens is the equivalent on a reduced frame camera of a 16-35mm in full-frame terms.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/Canon-10-22mm-test.shtml

darich · Sep 12, 2006

Don't know if i should thank you guys- it may mean i have to purchase a 17-40 lens with the 5D!!!!

thebeginning · Sep 12, 2006

your 24mm will be as wide as the 15mm mark on your 10-22 when using your 20d. if that's not wide enough for you, i'd recommend selling the 10-22 and buying a 17-40. Typically people that own a 20d and a 5d use the 5d for wide stuff and short telephoto and the 20d for longer telephotos.

Jeff Canes · Sep 12, 2006

darin3200 said:
Have you reached the limits of your equipment?

there is a limit

Mihai · Sep 13, 2006

thebeginning said:
your 24mm will be as wide as the 15mm mark on your 10-22 when using your 20d. if that's not wide enough for you, i'd recommend selling the 10-22 and buying a 17-40. Typically people that own a 20d and a 5d use the 5d for wide stuff and short telephoto and the 20d for longer telephotos.

Exactly! Keeping the 20D for wide angles is just wrong! It should be keept for telephoto. That's where a 400mm becomes a 600mm. Match that with the 5D (for the same money)!

If you're not pressed, I'd wait for a better full size sensor camera. In less than a year it should be here. To be honest I'm was surprised when I saw Canon comming up with the Rebel XTi. I think that it killed a lot of 30D sales.
Then now have that market segment pretty well covered up (too well IMO), my guess it that they'll go for the full frame next.

M.

darich · Sep 14, 2006

thebeginning said:
your 24mm will be as wide as the 15mm mark on your 10-22 when using your 20d. if that's not wide enough for you, i'd recommend selling the 10-22 and buying a 17-40. Typically people that own a 20d and a 5d use the 5d for wide stuff and short telephoto and the 20d for longer telephotos.

Wouldn't i be better keeping the 20D and 10-22 for wide angle and the 20D for the long tele shots too?
The 5D would therefore cover most of my shots since i almost always use my 24-70 lens.
Buying a 17-40 will be more expensive than what the 10-22 is worth and since the focal length is the same i'd pretty much be throwing money away.
I can see exactly what you're getting at but why would i sell my 10-22 and spend more to get a 17-40 when i won't extend my focal range? Ok i can use the 5D for wide angles but would it be worth the extra outlay if my 20D can deal with that just now??

Digital Matt · Sep 14, 2006

darich said:
I can see exactly what you're getting at but why would i sell my 10-22 and spend more to get a 17-40 when i won't extend my focal range?

Because the 17-40 is a better lens than the 10-22. And why not use the extra resolution, and big beautiful sensor of the 5D for everything. I would, even for telephoto. You can crop a 5D raw file and still probably have as good as, or a better picture than from the 20D. The sensor is 1.2x bigger.

Rob · Sep 14, 2006

Mihai said:
Exactly! Keeping the 20D for wide angles is just wrong! It should be keept for telephoto. That's where a 400mm becomes a 600mm. Match that with the 5D (for the same money)!

If you're not pressed, I'd wait for a better full size sensor camera. In less than a year it should be here. To be honest I'm was surprised when I saw Canon comming up with the Rebel XTi. I think that it killed a lot of 30D sales.
Then now have that market segment pretty well covered up (too well IMO), my guess it that they'll go for the full frame next.

M.

A 400mm lens on a 1.5x crop factor sensor becomes a 400mm lens with a smaller field of view, not a longer focal length with greater magnification.

Look at this example by Fred: http://www.millhouse.nl/graphics/0500137cropfactor.jpg

What you get is *not* a longer lens or greater magnification, simply less field of view in the picture at exactly the same focal length.

FWIW, I think the only important things to bear in mind are the advantageous SNR of a larger sensor and the fact that AF-S lenses don't work on FF.

I'd have a 5D any day. Any day I had £££ spare for another body. Actually, I'd have a 1Ds Mk II N.... there's always the lottery eh? :lol:

Rob

darich · Sep 14, 2006

| realise the 17-40 is a better lens. the 10-22 is pretty good but not outstanding.
Looks like all things considered the best thing would be to sell the 20D and 10-22 lens nad use the 5D for everything. The lens lengths are the same but the full frame and higher res makes it a better option.
Like Rob i'd have the 1Ds MK II any day but since i need to pay for it, it kinda puts me off!! :lol:

I think i'll get the 5D and maybe throw in a 17-40 too. Might even treat myself and get a 430EX flash gun!!

anyone want to buy a 20D with 10-22mm lens???..................

Mihai · Sep 14, 2006

Rob said:
A 400mm lens on a 1.5x crop factor sensor becomes a 400mm lens with a smaller field of view, not a longer focal length with greater magnification.

Look at this example by Fred: http://www.millhouse.nl/graphics/0500137cropfactor.jpg

Rob, enlighten me please. Assume I have a 10Mpixels 5D that is full frame with a 600mm lens and that I have a 10Mpixels 30D with a 400mm lens.
I take the same picture with both of them. Apart from the noise (which is better for the 5D), can you tell them apart in any way? I mean, does it make any difference?

Thanks,
Mihai

Digital Matt · Sep 14, 2006

Mihai said:
Rob, enlighten me please. Assume I have a 10Mpixels 5D that is full frame with a 600mm lens and that I have a 10Mpixels 30D with a 400mm lens.
I take the same picture with both of them. Apart from the noise (which is better for the 5D), can you tell them apart in any way? I mean, does it make any difference?

Thanks,
Mihai

The same picture on the 30D will be cropped, because of the smaller sensor, to an equivalent field of view from a 640mm lens.