Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 'EF-S 17-55mm' means?  (Read 2990 times)
Gregory
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


WWW
« on: August 04, 2006, 11:38:08 AM »
ReplyReply

I'm unsure about the focal length of the EF-S lenses. the '-S' lenses are designed specifically for the non-FF cameras such as my 350D with a focal multiplier of 1.6x. one of my most significant gripes with the 350D is it's inability to shoot 'wide' photos because even my 20-35/2.8L becomes 32-56mm.

my question is: does the multiplier apply to the EF-S lenses? is a EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM lense actually a 17-55mm lense when used with the 350D?
Logged

Gregory's Blog: An Aussie in HK
Equipment: Canon EOS 1D Mark III, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-300 DO
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2006, 11:51:59 AM »
ReplyReply

It is a 17-55mm lens even if you attach it to your washing machine.

Apply the multiplier to get the equivalent fov.  So on a 1.6 crop camera is about a 28-90 equivalent.
Logged
Gregory
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 04, 2006, 12:02:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
It is a 17-55mm lens even if you attach it to your washing machine.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72583\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
in other words, it's very difficult to get true 'wide' on a non-FF camera, or a lense with a maximum focal length of around 18mm/1.6x = 11.25mm.

without using the EF-S lenses, what are photographers' favourite wide (zoom) lenses when using a non-FF camera?
Logged

Gregory's Blog: An Aussie in HK
Equipment: Canon EOS 1D Mark III, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-300 DO
ARD
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2006, 12:13:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
in other words, it's very difficult to get true 'wide' on a non-FF camera, or a lense with a maximum focal length of around 18mm/1.6x = 11.25mm.

without using the EF-S lenses, what are photographers' favourite wide (zoom) lenses when using a non-FF camera?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=72584\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

17-40 f4L
Logged
jimhuber
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 147


WWW
« Reply #4 on: August 04, 2006, 12:39:51 PM »
ReplyReply

Yes, that's basically it: the 17-40 f/4L. The 16-35 f/2.8L buys you one stop wider for about twice the price, and the 14mm prime is too expensive for most users of reduced-frame dSLRs - about three times the price of the 17-40. The other non-L primes seem to be no better than the 17-40 L zoom (20/2.8, 24/2.8, 28/1.8, 28/2.8, 35/2) as long as you don't need a wider aperture than f/4. Hopefully soon Canon will improve their wide angle lenses...

So the only EF-S lens you really need is the 10-22, and you only need it if you have a real need for "super-wide" angles of view, as it's equivalent to the 16-35 on a full-frame camera. But the 17-85 IS lens is a very handy all-around lens, so I own only those two EF-S lenses. The rest are all EF.
Logged
DarkPenguin
Guest
« Reply #5 on: August 04, 2006, 12:53:01 PM »
ReplyReply

My Tokina 12-24 makes a nice 17 or so to 24 on a FF camera.  (Before 17 it vignettes badly on FF.)  It is wonderful on a crop camera.
« Last Edit: August 04, 2006, 12:53:38 PM by DarkPenguin » Logged
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #6 on: August 04, 2006, 12:55:00 PM »
ReplyReply

I love my 16-3 2.8, built like a rock and sharp too.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad