Reading mode: Light Dark

Would you invest in EF-S?

Go to last post
I do agree with most people here. You just buy into crop gear, or you go lets say 5DII Now. Not only your, but also situation of gear will change rapidly in next few years, so you (OP) propably don´t have any idea about your next upgrade compatibility. For UWA you can buy nice EF-S lenses, for thin depth of field there are fast primes.

You won´t loose precious shots in the meantime (18-55 and 55-250 are good and cheap). That´s the main reason already pointed out.
 
Thanks again to all of you, I'll just buy EF-S wide for now :-)

As for used 5D mkII... people (mostly) buy FF when they know what they buy it for- they're serious cameras for serious use...and as I tend to buy for a longer period of time, I'm not comfortable with buying cameras with serious mileage on them...

...so I'd rather stay on current for a while and then buy a new camera :-$
 
William Woodruff said:
photonius said:
Freek07 said:
After quite a long time I'm starting to photograph again. I still have my old EOS 20D with kit lens 17-85 and two cheap EF lenses (75-300 and 50mm 1.8). I'd like to go a bit wider but the thing is...

...sooner or later I'll have to replace the camera anyway and I was always dreaming of FF, mostly because of lower noise and nicer bokeh but I'm not sure when I'll really buy it- it's like a distant dream :)
Click to expand...
bokeh is a property of the lens, not sensor size. in fact, lens selection for crop is larger than for FF. if you mean less DOF, yes that's true, but how often do you really use ultrathin DOF?
William Woodruff said:
I'm doing mostly static objects- I love long night shots, nature/landscapes and I'm learning some macro (using rings).

The thing is- if I buy 10-22 or something similar, I'd invest a substantial amount of money in lens that would be passe on FF body.
Click to expand...
well, because of the 1.6x focal length multiplier, you have to get a crop (EF-S, or similar from sigma/tokina/tamron) lens to get 10mm. No FF EF 10mm lens. the ef 16-35 is an ultrawide for FF, it will only be a normal lens on crop.
William Woodruff said:
What do you think- would you invest in EF-S? :-/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Well, there is the 8-16/f4L
Click to expand...
It's a tad fishy.... ;-)
 
tokina thing :-). 16-35L II FTW
 
There are crop cameras that are considered serious also. Its all about what you want from your camera. I think either you should jump on FF now, or simply stay the path of crop which has great cameras today and great lenses. Good luck.
 
Wilba. One thing I am confused about is the Ishikawa patent. When I do a search on google I get a bunch of junk not related to cameras at all. The one camera related link that comes up is your article. Plus Roger's link in 3b in broken: at least for me. I am assuming the 2003 patent he refers and quotes from is differen than the Ishikawa patent you mention which I was thinking was a patent from the 80s or 70a from either Canon or HP. Can you clear this up for me?

Secomd, we can debate Roger's conclusions in his article till the cows come home, but his test results clearly show an improvement in AF consistancy when using the 5D3 with newer lenses that it doesn't see with older lenses. Older bodies like the 5D2 do not see an improvement in AF consistancy with the newer lenses ether. So something has been improved and it has to be a combination of improvements in both the lens and the body. This was my original point and is a point the matters to all photographers. The how part of improvement is somethimg maybe better discussed in another thread not to derail this one too much more than we already have.
 
..but for a different reason. I said a few year ao that I will not buy a new Canon dslr lens because I saw mirroless comoing and Canon likely will not be in the game. Boy am I right about that. I would sell my 10-22 now if I need the money. Nice lens but it's not in my future.
 
jitteringjr said:
Wilba. One thing I am confused about is the Ishikawa patent. When I do a search on google I get a bunch of junk not related to cameras at all. The one camera related link that comes up is your article. Plus Roger's link in 3b in broken: at least for me.
Click to expand...
Go to http://www.pat2pdf.org and enter number 6603929.
jitteringjr said:
I am assuming the 2003 patent he refers and quotes from is differen than the Ishikawa patent you mention which I was thinking was a patent from the 80s or 70a from either Canon or HP. Can you clear this up for me?
Click to expand...
No, that's the one we're both talking about. The text he quoted is in that document.
jitteringjr said:
Secomd, we can debate Roger's conclusions in his article till the cows come home,
Click to expand...
Let's not. :-)
jitteringjr said:
but his test results clearly show an improvement in AF consistancy when using the 5D3 with newer lenses that it doesn't see with older lenses.
Click to expand...
I haven't checked it out in detail, but I accept that's what he found.
jitteringjr said:
Older bodies like the 5D2 do not see an improvement in AF consistancy with the newer lenses ether. So something has been improved and it has to be a combination of improvements in both the lens and the body. This was my original point and is a point the matters to all photographers.
Click to expand...
No problem with that, never questioned it. My only point is whatever improvement is evident is NOT because PD AF was open-loop prior to the 5D III, as Roger claims, he simply got it wrong. Every EOS has a closed-loop between the AF sensor and the controller.
jitteringjr said:
The how part of improvement is somethimg maybe better discussed in another thread not to derail this one too much more than we already have.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that's not why I'm here. Not knowing why something happens doesn't mean it doesn't happen. :-)
 
Last edited:
AF on my SL1 is definitely open. It does not lock focus on wrong place - if I change situation in front of the camera. I can make it even hunt for focus or oscillating long time in extreme circumstances (changing sceene/focus point).

When I put my hand in front of cam during focus going to infinity, it does not lock there, and comes back for my hand. How can that be closed loop? Maybe one iretation of focus action, but on the end it rechecks if it actually is in focus, and if it is not, it refocuses once again. Sounds like open loop to me.
 
There is no EF 10-22mm lens. Wide angle sort of plays by different rules; the full-frame equivalent costs muchore and doesn't deliver a field of view that's workable on a crop sensor camera. So if a wide angle zoom is what you want, you have to buy the EF-S 10-22 and sell it when you move to full frame.
 
WilbaW said:
jitteringjr said:
For instance, if I do a MFA on a lens, it might be a good week of use before I feel confident with the change. This has a lot to do with the consistency of the system. New lenses after 2010 and the new 5D3 have a feedback loop to help this, but I digress.
Click to expand...
Please digress some more. Details about this feedback loop? Documents?
Click to expand...
Roger Cicala at LensRentals did a lot of focus testing on his blog and he says this is true, particularly the STM lenses. The 7D, sadly, does not focus as accurately as the newer camera/lens combos. This may be why users give the STM lenses such great reviews.
 
William Woodruff said:
photonius said:
Freek07 said:
After quite a long time I'm starting to photograph again. I still have my old EOS 20D with kit lens 17-85 and two cheap EF lenses (75-300 and 50mm 1.8). I'd like to go a bit wider but the thing is...

...sooner or later I'll have to replace the camera anyway and I was always dreaming of FF, mostly because of lower noise and nicer bokeh but I'm not sure when I'll really buy it- it's like a distant dream :)
Click to expand...
bokeh is a property of the lens, not sensor size. in fact, lens selection for crop is larger than for FF. if you mean less DOF, yes that's true, but how often do you really use ultrathin DOF?
William Woodruff said:
I'm doing mostly static objects- I love long night shots, nature/landscapes and I'm learning some macro (using rings).

The thing is- if I buy 10-22 or something similar, I'd invest a substantial amount of money in lens that would be passe on FF body.
Click to expand...
well, because of the 1.6x focal length multiplier, you have to get a crop (EF-S, or similar from sigma/tokina/tamron) lens to get 10mm. No FF EF 10mm lens. the ef 16-35 is an ultrawide for FF, it will only be a normal lens on crop.
William Woodruff said:
What do you think- would you invest in EF-S? :-/
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
WilbaW said:
jitteringjr said:
It's a long but well worth it read:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-1-center-point-single-shot-accuracy

There is 5 parts to this: so google them all: 1, 2, 3a, 3b and 4
Click to expand...
Yeah, I thought that's where you would have got that. Roger makes his claim in 3b, but he has misunderstood the Ishikawa patent. Canon PD AF has always been a closed-loop control system, from the first EOS body in 1985.
Click to expand...
I think there's more to it than open loop vs closed loop. Maybe it's closed loop vs better/improved closed loop, but Roger's results show that the newer body/lenses focus more accurately.

At the end of the day, who cares why? It seems there are a lot of pointless "why" arguments on DPReview. If a given body/lens has a proven better AF mechanism, it doesn't really matter why.
 
crashpc said:
AF on my SL1 is definitely open. It does not lock focus on wrong place - if I change situation in front of the camera. I can make it even hunt for focus or oscillating long time in extreme circumstances (changing sceene/focus point).
Click to expand...
An open-loop system can't do that.
crashpc said:
When I put my hand in front of cam during focus going to infinity, it does not lock there, and comes back for my hand. How can that be closed loop?
Click to expand...
That can only happen if there is continuous feedback from the AF sensor to the AF controller. Feedback = closed-loop.
crashpc said:
Maybe one iretation of focus action, but on the end it rechecks if it actually is in focus, and if it is not, it refocuses once again. Sounds like open loop to me.
Click to expand...
See Busted! The Myth of Open-loop Phase-detection Autofocus.
 
MarshallG said:
MarshallG said:
jitteringjr said:
For instance, if I do a MFA on a lens, it might be a good week of use before I feel confident with the change. This has a lot to do with the consistency of the system. New lenses after 2010 and the new 5D3 have a feedback loop to help this, but I digress.
Click to expand...
Please digress some more. Details about this feedback loop? Documents?
Click to expand...
Roger Cicala at LensRentals did a lot of focus testing on his blog and he says this is true, particularly the STM lenses. The 7D, sadly, does not focus as accurately as the newer camera/lens combos. This may be why users give the STM lenses such great reviews.
Click to expand...
He is mistaken about why.

EOS has always been a closed-loop control system. That's a fact, not a guess. :-)
 
MarshallG said:
MarshallG said:
jitteringjr said:
It's a long but well worth it read:

http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2012/07/autofocus-reality-part-1-center-point-single-shot-accuracy

There is 5 parts to this: so google them all: 1, 2, 3a, 3b and 4
Click to expand...
Yeah, I thought that's where you would have got that. Roger makes his claim in 3b, but he has misunderstood the Ishikawa patent. Canon PD AF has always been a closed-loop control system, from the first EOS body in 1985.
Click to expand...
I think there's more to it than open loop vs closed loop.
Click to expand...
Yes, there is, see Busted! The Myth of Open-loop Phase-detection Autofocus.
MarshallG said:
Maybe it's closed loop vs better/improved closed loop,
Click to expand...
We don't have to guess, everyone can prove it for themselves.
MarshallG said:
but Roger's results show that the newer body/lenses focus more accurately.
Click to expand...
No problem with that, only his untested speculation about why, which is based on his misinterpretation of a distantly related patent.
MarshallG said:
At the end of the day, who cares why? It seems there are a lot of pointless "why" arguments on DPReview. If a given body/lens has a proven better AF mechanism, it doesn't really matter why.
Click to expand...
The truth matters for it's own sake. :-)

In this case the truth is quite simple and straight-forward (focus is confirmed when the AF sensor sees an in-focus subject), and anyone can prove that for themselves in a couple of minutes.
 
It looks like my poor technical english or somebody else does not have a clue about stuff, regulation systems etc. Will propably only keep reading. Thx for response.
--
Why does he do it?
 
carlk said:
..but for a different reason. I said a few year ao that I will not buy a new Canon dslr lens because I saw mirroless comoing and Canon likely will not be in the game. Boy am I right about that. I would sell my 10-22 now if I need the money. Nice lens but it's not in my future.
Click to expand...
Your're not buying EF-S lenses because Canon's mirrorless efforts aren't doing that well?
 
The FF cameras are much more affordable now in the past, this causes two things:

1. There are less and less advanced photographers that use crop factor cameras. In other words - there are less and less people that might be interested to pay for quality EF-S lenses.

2. There are more and more people who are moving to FF cameras and flooding the 2nd hand market with quality EF-S lenses.

I am buying and selling a lot in the 2nd hand market and I have witnessed this during the last few years.
 
WilbaW said:
MarshallG said:
WilbaW said:
jitteringjr said:
For instance, if I do a MFA on a lens, it might be a good week of use before I feel confident with the change. This has a lot to do with the consistency of the system. New lenses after 2010 and the new 5D3 have a feedback loop to help this, but I digress.
Click to expand...
Please digress some more. Details about this feedback loop? Documents?
Click to expand...
Roger Cicala at LensRentals did a lot of focus testing on his blog and he says this is true, particularly the STM lenses. The 7D, sadly, does not focus as accurately as the newer camera/lens combos. This may be why users give the STM lenses such great reviews.
Click to expand...
He is mistaken about why.

EOS has always been a closed-loop control system. That's a fact, not a guess. :-)
Click to expand...
Fine. As I said, to me, it does not matter why. What matters is that the newer EOS cameras and lenses, particularly the STM lenses, have proven to have more accurate autofocusing, at least, they're more accurate based on the test results Roger provided... which is a lot more useful to me than a DxOMark score.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top