Sold camera, want a new one

  • Thread starter Deleted member 88227
  • Start date
D

Deleted member 88227

Guest
So I sold my Canon T2i w/ kit lens and some accessories that only work with it. (battery grip for example)

Now I am looking into getting a newer camera. I have a couple lens already, but I am super confused on the difference in an EF-S mount and EF mount. I was under the impression that if the camera has a red dot then it's an EF mount lens. Correct? All my lens have a red dot on them, but one claims to only work with APS-C Sensors. Excuse me. It says it's "designed" for APS-C sensors.

These are the three lens that I have.
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 AT-X116 Pro DX Digital Zoom Lens (for Canon EOS Cameras)
Canon EF 28mm f/2.8 IS USM Lens
Canon EF 75-300mm f/4-5.6 III Lens

The 27mm and the 75-300mm each have EF written on them so I am really confident that they're EF mounts. Even the bhphoto link says they are. They also have red dots for lining it up to the camera.

However, the Tokina lens does not say whether or not it's an EF or EF-S mount. It just says it's designed for cameras with APS-C Sensors. It does have a red dot on it just like the other EF lens. So what will happen if I put this lens on a full frame camera? Full frame camera... Oh right. I intend to go upgrade to a full frame, Canon 5D Mark III camera though I am leaning more towards the 5DS camera on account of the higher pixel count thus allowing me to print even larger pictures on canvas. Either way, I want to know if I can or can not use my favorite lens on a full frame, 5D Mark III or 5DS camera.

My understanding is the biggest difference between a EF and EF-S lens is that the EF-S lens sits closer to the sensor. This will mean that the 11 - 16mm lens will be even wider angel on the full frame than it was on my T2i.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
The red dot is simply used to align the mount into the camera body. It has nothing to do with whether or not you're using an EF vs EF-S lens.

It doesn't seem like you understand the difference between the two types, so let me explain the difference for you.

EF-S is crop sensor only. And EF lenses are for full frame and/or crop sensors.
Why then are their two different types? Well because crop frame cameras are primarily more budget oriented, Canon wanted to create a lens type that would be budget oriented to go with these cameras. The way they did this is by actually making the size of the glass elements of the lens smaller (in circumference, not thickness. Obviously due to physics the bend of the glass is the same). Smaller chips and as a result smaller glass. EF-S lenses physically create and cover a smaller image circle. There are some other things they did to cut cost on EF-S lenses. There isn't an EF-S L-Series lens as an example. So there isn't an EF-S lens that has the same build quality (metal vs plastic as an example) or gasketing. They also used more simple lens designs requiring less lens elements and less expensive or no coatings.

EF lenses of course are designed with a larger image circle and therefore have no issue when placed onto a crop frame camera. So what about vice versa? Canon made an extension on the ends of EF-S lens mount lenses in order to make them physically uncompatible with their Full Frame bodies. If you were somehow able to force it onto the body (which obviously is a bad idea) then the lens wouldn't cover the full size of the sensor and you'd have only a circle in the middle of the sensor that would receive an image through the lens and essentially heavy vignetting (read blackout) on the rest of the sensor.

Nikon on the other hand decided to allow their crop lenses on their FF cameras. They did this via "crop frame mode" in which the sensor auto-crops in camera when a crop lens is on the body. But if your goal is to use a full fame camera, you've just defeated that purpose as... well now you're operating your FF camera like it's a crop. Nikon of course did this primarily so people transitioning up through their system from crop to FF could still use their lenses until they upgraded to FF lenses... or I guess in theory continued to use them (but most people would never choose that as a permanent solution).

======

APS-C: Means that it's for crop sensors/and or is a crop sensor. APS-C is the sensor size in comparison primarily with 35mm

To answer your direct question about the Tokina, no it is not compatible. There isn't any lens on a full frame body that goes down to 11mm, with the exception of Canon 11-24mm which is pricey, but it is the sharpest, widest, 35mm lens on any system. The good news is that 11mm on your crop camera is roughly 17.6mm on a full frame camera. So if you wanted the same field of view on a full frame camera, you'd be able to do so with the much less expensive (in comparison with the 11-24mm) 17-40mm f/4.0L or the 16-35mm f/2.8L II or the 16-35mm f/4.0L IS.

If you can afford the 11-24mm just get it. If you're more budget conscious, grab the 17-40mm. From a sharpness perspective it's better than the 16-35mm f/2.8L II. And has only mild easy to correct distortion. Generally for landscape, you're stopping down anyway. If you're not doing astrophotography then f/2.8 isn't necessary.

======

As far as camera choice, the 5DS is a great camera as is the 5DS-R. I would say though that the advantage you'll gain is primarily in sharpness and gradations of color. In terms of print and print size, the 5D3 is plenty for any reasonable size. People go crazy about this stuff. The 5D3 exceeds 4k resolution as an example and people forget that when they see a movie in a theater it's "only" 4k and it's projected on a 100' screen. 12MP is more than enough. 20MP is plenty to crop into. 50MP is in the realm of highly specialized usage cases. If you have the cash to burn, absolutely get the 50MP camera. I'm not saying not to. I'm just trying to get you to understand it's not going to have the effect you think it's going to have.

Also be prepared for the other consequences that will occur when you bump up your resolution: needing a faster computer, needing much more storage space, and needing larger compact flash cards. None of those downsides can't be defeated with money. So if you got it and you want to go that direction then go for it.

======

Also as a side note, if you don't have to have your camera now, Canon is supposed to be announcing the successor to the 5D3, the 5D4 soon. Which will be a true successor to the 5D3 and won't have a massive resolution bump like the 5DS/R does. It might be worth waiting if for no other reason than to buy a 5D3 for less. Or I suppose to be on top of the tech curve if you prefer to have the latest and greatest.
 
Last edited:
UnknownSouljer said:
The red dot is simply used to align the mount into the camera body. It has nothing to do with whether or not you're using an EF vs EF-S lens.
Click to expand...

The red dot does matter with which mount the lens is using and thus where you need to line it up. According to the wiki.

An EF-S lens alignment mark is indicated by a small white rectangle, whereas the EF employs a small red dot.

Hence my confusion. The lens claims to be for APS-C sensors only, but it's got a EF mount. (Red dot)

So I guess I could technically use the lens on the camera, but I wouldn't be able to use the full frame sensor completely if I did. Plus it would be like using an even smaller focal length full frame lens. So 11mm would be 11/1.6 which would be the equivalent of roughly a 6.8mm full frame lens using a portion of the sensor? lol

With that being said. I guess I will be selling the lens and going with the 16 - 35mm lens.
 
Skillz said:
.....
So I guess I could technically use the lens on the camera, but I wouldn't be able to use the full frame sensor completely if I did. Plus it would be like using an even smaller focal length full frame lens. So 11mm would be 11/1.6 which would be the equivalent of roughly a 6.8mm full frame lens using a portion of the sensor? lol

With that being said. I guess I will be selling the lens and going with the 16 - 35mm lens.
Click to expand...

Actually it would be like 11 mm x 1.6 (Crop factor) = 17.6 mm focal length field of view. Also, I would go with the 16-35mm f4 for the weight/size saving.
 
Skillz said:
The red dot does matter with which mount the lens is using and thus where you need to line it up. According to the wiki.

An EF-S lens alignment mark is indicated by a small white rectangle, whereas the EF employs a small red dot.

Hence my confusion. The lens claims to be for APS-C sensors only, but it's got a EF mount. (Red dot)
Click to expand...

The alignment mark and its designation goes right out the window when you're talking about a third party lens. They could in theory put a red ring around it too, but it wouldn't make it an "L-Series" lens.

Also, I answered your mm width question earlier. Which Anh has repeated for you. If you're going to ask the question about whether things work or not I guess at this point you can either trust that we know what we're talking about or you can continue on and find out for yourself.

APS-C = Crop. That's the end of the story. If they could advertise their lenses as FF and sell them for FF cameras, don't you think they would?
 
So third party doesn't bother with standardization? The tokina lens physically will not fit on a 5D Mark III?
 
Skillz said:
So third party doesn't bother with standardization? The tokina lens physically will not fit on a 5D Mark III?
Click to expand...

They bother with standardization, just not necessarily Canon's standardization. Or Nikon's for that matter. These lenses are made in multiple mounts. Sigma as an example caters to Nikon more than Canon. So on their zoom lenses they are "reverse" zooms in comparison with the rest of Canon's lenses.

To definitively answer your question, you'd have to try it, but it either way it won't have the result that you want. Which I explained at length in my first response.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_lens_mount
Wikipedia Canon EF-S Lens mount said:
Although not all Canon EF-S lenses use this short back focus, they cannot be mounted on DSLRs with sensors larger than APS-C. However, some lenses produced by third-party manufacturers may feature the standard EF mount if they do not require the shorter back focus but only have a small image circle. Such lenses will give noticeable vignetting if used on a 35mm film or full frame sensor cameras. To a lesser degree, vignetting also occurs with APS-H sensor sizes, such as several (now discontinued) cameras of the 1D series.
Click to expand...


So, if it doesn't have short focus lens elements it's possible that it would mount. But you'd have the problem that I said before, which is heavy vignetting to black. And I don't mean it will be gradual. I mean it will be an image circle surrounded by black. You will not get "11mm" out of it on FF. You'll be at less than 16mm, and it will only be in the center of the sensor (as in, you will not be utilizing the entire sensor).

And all of those caveats are only IF, IF it mounts.
 
Thanks for the information man. Just noticed your edits up top, also.

I've got a fast computer already. :p Also I have over 20TB worth of storage. Over 50% free. So ~10TB of storage left and still room to add more to my NAS.

I am glad you mentioned they are coming out with a new, true successor though. I would much, much rather wait to see than to use a ~4 year old design.

I did some more research on the Tokina lens and it will fit a full frame, but I don't think I'm gonna bother with it just to use it at 16mm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISFzKI_uDz8
 
Skillz said:
Thanks for the information man. Just noticed your edits up top, also.

I've got a fast computer already. :p Also I have over 20TB worth of storage. Over 50% free. So ~10TB of storage left and still room to add more to my NAS.
Click to expand...

Sounds good. I'm a bit jealous of that right now. I am definitely storage strapped. Buying two 5TB drives for photo storage is probably next up in line in terms of gear I need for the business. Should last at least a year.


Skillz said:
I am glad you mentioned they are coming out with a new, true successor though. I would much, much rather wait to see than to use a ~4 year old design.
Click to expand...

From a tech perspective, it's great to have the latest and greatest. But being 100% serious, the 5D3 takes better pictures than any photographer will be ever to do. Honestly the technology in cameras is already so absurd. The greatest gains that can be had in new tech is primarily in the realms of ISO. But for a landscaper that doesn't even matter. Less light means longer exposures, not higher ISO.

So, expect that. An MP bump. USB 3. Faster processing. Probably 4k video. Maybe GPS. All nice stuff, but not even remotely required to make excellent images. No one will be able to tell the difference between a 5D2/5D3/5D4 in a print ad. Or on Facebook. Or even a large movie poster sized print.


Skillz said:
I did some more research on the Tokina lens and it will fit a full frame, but I don't think I'm gonna bother with it just to use it at 16mm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISFzKI_uDz8
Click to expand...

I wouldn't either. It will not yield you the result you want. An FF 16mm is going to be what you want.
 
Right, I agree. It depends on the price of the new camera. If it's similar to what a 5D3 is right now then I'll bit. If it's as much as the 5DS or 5DSR then I might not.

I take a lot of long exposure pictures though at night. I love lightning.

Glad to hear that the 5D3 is a lot of camera. I might buy one by the end of this month. Haha.

Any idea when the new one is supposed to come out? Guess I can go research it myself.
 
Anh N. said:
Actually it would be like 11 mm x 1.6 (Crop factor) = 17.6 mm focal length field of view. Also, I would go with the 16-35mm f4 for the weight/size saving.
Click to expand...

No, no, no.. When you go to full frame, the field of view will be wider when using the same focal length when compared to a crop sensor camera.

You are thinking about it backwards.

An 11mm lens on a crop frame would cover the same field of view that a 17.6mm lens would cover on a full frame Canon camera.

So the OP is correct in thinking that the field of view will be wider with the same lens.

Think about it this way? What happens when you crop a picture? That's right, you reduce the field of view from what the original picture was. The same goes for crop sensor cameras. They reduce the field of view.. or increase the effective focal length in other words of the lenses they use.

Focal length is always measured the same.. and will be exactly the same no matter what camera it is used on. The size of the sensor is what will control how much of the field of view at that focal length is visible.

Also, if the lens will mount on the full frame camera, even if it is designed for a crop frame camera, it might still cover the full frame sensor.

At least this is the way some Pentax lenses and third party lenses for Pentax work.

And for some cameras (micro 4/3 mainly) you can get what is called a focal reducer or telecompressor to mount larger camera lenses and at the same time make the camera use the full or close to the full field of view as the camera the lens was meant for AND also decrease the effective f-stop of the lens.

EDIT: Looks like the Tokina 11-16 has no vignetting on a full frame when set to 16mm.
http://jbipix.com/?s=11-16+full+frame
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISFzKI_uDz8
 
Last edited:
cyclone3d said:
No, no, no.. When you go to full frame, the field of view will be wider when using the same focal length when compared to a crop sensor camera.

You are thinking about it backwards.

An 11mm lens on a crop frame would cover the same field of view that a 17.6mm lens would cover on a full frame Canon camera.

So the OP is correct in thinking that the field of view will be wider with the same lens.
Click to expand...

No, we're thinking about it correctly. The entire discussion revolves around Skillz trying to use a crop frame lens on a full frame camera. Which with this particular lens is technically viable, but for most crop frame lenses isn't.

11mm isn't possible with this lens. We list the "crop factor" because that crop factor would continue to exist when you place it on the FF camera. Instead of just being cut off like it is on a crop frame camera, it would take place in the form of vignetting.

In summary, the field of view is when using it at 11mm on a FF when accounting for vignetting is 17.6mm. Because it isn't capable of equivalent full frame focal length. If you were doing this on a Nikon camera in DX mode, this function would be 100% the same. It would just simply enter "crop mode" for you. Still meaning that the camera would be operating at a "crop equivalent" focal length.
 
Last edited:
UnknownSouljer said:
No, we're thinking about it correctly. The entire discussion revolves around Skillz trying to use a crop frame lens on a full frame camera. Which with this particular lens is technically viable, but for most crop frame lenses isn't.

11mm isn't possible with it's lens. We list the "crop factor" because that crop factor would continue to exist when you place it on the FF camera. Instead of just being cut off like it is on a crop frame camera, it would take place in the form of vignetting.

In summary, the field of view is when using it at 11mm on a FF when accounting for vignetting is 17.6mm. Because it isn't capable of equivalent full frame focal length. If you were doing this on a Nikon camera in DX mode, this function would be 100% the same. It would just simply enter "crop mode" for you. Still meaning that the camera would be operating at a "crop equivalent" focal length.
Click to expand...

I was about to type up a response, but UnknownSoulier words it so much better. :D

I actually converted the back of my Canon EFS 10-22mm to use on my 6D, when money was tight. It works, but heavy vignette that limits effective use to around 16-19mm only, and had to put in a physical limiter to stop the lens from protruding in the back and possibly hit the sensor. Too much risk imo. In Skillz case, the Tokina would work, but limit it to 16mm focal length only. He might as well get a prime for better IQ.
 
Last edited:
I wish the 5D Mark IV would hurry up and come out already. Really missing a good camera right now. :(
 
Skillz said:
I wish the 5D Mark IV would hurry up and come out already. Really missing a good camera right now. :(
Click to expand...

Upgrades are nice, won't lie, but honestly there isn't anything new that will make the 5D3 and/or 5DS/R not viable solutions.

What the 5D4 will bring to the table for pros is a slight bump in resolution (over the 5D3), probably in the range of 28-36MP and 4K video.
There may be an accompanying bump in DR (mostly due to resolution increase), a bump in ISO (primarily less noisy and higher maximum), and a bump in AF (new algorithm, more points, new controller).

All of these improvement will be "nice". But they won't make anything that any pro is doing right now with current cameras noticeably better in a print (this is especially considering that the 5D4 will not have greater resolution than the 5DS/R. If you want the megapixel king, that is available today). The 4K video is probably a bigger game changer than anything else, mostly for people doing dSLR cinema and need a cam that doesn't cost $10k-$25k.
If you want a still camera now, the 5DS/R is probably it. If you don't need the resolution (and very FEW people do) the 5D3 is more than adequate. Hell there are some amazing photographers I follow still on a 5D2... that I wish I could match their output on. Video is the only thing worth waiting for.
 
Yeah, but I prefer to have the latest and greatest if I'm buying from that tier. So I will wait for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top