You complained 17-40 was not wide enough, so feel free to sell 17-40 and buy 10-22.
I got it, you buying lenses not for taking pictures, but as an investment? In that case it is good point, same as " I don't want any BP-511 spare batteries because someday I plan on replacing my camera with a FF camera," or " I don't want BG-E2 grip because someday I plan on replacing my camera with a FF camera."
R
That's exactly what I said: FF lens soft corners cropped by 1.6x sensor.
Check MTF of almost any EF lens and look at blue thin lines, that's a sharpness @ F8. It fells after 13mm on almoat every lens significantly. So even stopped down EF lens on FF will not give you corners as good as on 1.6x.
But the 17-40 makes a nice standard zoom on a crop camera (27-65 effective).
Given that batteries are cheap and only last for a couple of years if you use them or not (lithium-ion cells have a short shelf life) who cairs what you buy. On the other hand a good lens can last you for a decade or more and is a good deal more expensive. A Sigma 12-24 will give you decently wide on a crop camera and truely wide when you move to FF. Planning ahead seems fairly sensible.
Nope. Why don't we talk about 1.6x sensors in couple of years surpass in IQ current FF ones?
17-55IS is even better and Sigma 12-24 on 1.6x is 20% longer than 10-22, that's a lot.
Perhaps.
Well, I was told that 10 years ago.
And you carefully ignored the point about crop lenses.
OK, here's the MTF of the 17-40 (and Canon don't have a great rep for wide lenses). An MTF of 50 is considered acceptable. The VERY extreme corners are an issue at F8. Chances are you'll be stopped down to f11 or f16 for landscape work anyway.
Try capturing the individual pano images at slightly longer FL than the widest a lens is capable of. They will have not as much barrel distortion (the "fisheye effect") and will be easier to stitch. Will of course need more images (not much more, actually) to capture the whole pano, though.
Ditto. Lovely images.
Try capturing the individual pano images at slightly longer FL than
the widest a lens is capable of. They will have not as much barrel
distortion (the "fisheye effect") and will be easier to stitch.
Will of course need more images (not much more, actually) to
capture the whole pano, though.
--
Best regards,
Bruno Lobo.
http://www.pbase.com/brunobl
I buy lenses based on what my current and possible future needs are. I try to make decisions that will save me money in the long run.
Either a backup camera or give it to my wife.
I'm buying the lenses which suit my needs the best today and there is nothing better as walk-around zoom for 1.6x today than 17-55/2.8 IS, and nothing wider among zooms, than 10-22. period. If tomorrow I decide to go FF I'll sell EF-S lenses the same way I'd sell 30D.
This is news to me! What format do you want me to use when I shoot your wedding? 1.6X crop, FF (1x) or 2 1/4 film?
FranNo doubts about that. But I'm already completely satisfied with the noise level of 30D sensor, so I could not care less. My point is - cropped sensor will stay on advanced DSLRs.
Light comes in quanta. In other words, it's digital. You can't sense less than one photon. You can pack more photons into a smaller area by increasing the intensity of the light source, but for those of us who prefer to shoot with available light, that's not an option. The alternative, then is to capture more light with more area. Note that this is independent of sensor design.
