ef-s?

[jsbn]

It seems that u're like feeling in the dark with all ur 1-question, 1-answer thing.

Read, digest and understand on EF-S lens mount:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_lens_mount

Read, digest and understand on EF lens mount:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_lens_mount

 

[boen]

:sweat: thanks thanks...

 

[repusez]

just found this on a chinese based forum showing the effect of using a Digital lens eg. Canon EF-S, Sigma DC lens, Tamron Di-II (non full frame lens ) being used on a full frame body.

http://www.avbuzz.com/yesun/list.htm

http://www.avbuzz.com/new_home/w/200412/photo/yesun1224/yesun1224.php#1

 

[NE clicks clicks]

For its incompatibilty with FF camera, be it SLR or DSLR, is why I stay clear of them even though I own a 20D and are truly convinced that EFS10-22mm is indeed a great lens

I still harbours the though of one day is gonna be FF DSLR (but not likely to be the 1 series, cos $ not enough)for me. Even so,will not be parting with the 20D.

 

[mpenza]

EF-S is NOT cheaper.

EF-S 10-22 SGD 1,200
EF-S 17-85 SGD 1,050
EF-S 17-55 2.8 Expected to be between 1,500-2,000 - it is MORE expensive than the EF 17-40 4.0L

Only the EF-S 18-55 kit lens is cheap.
There are also cheap EF lenses e.g. 28-105 4.0-5.6.

You need the right comparisons (either with FF equivalent, 1.6x crop equivalent and similar aperture). You can also compare across brands for similar ranges/performance on whether EF-S or DX/DC has greater cost savings.

EF-S 17-55 F2.8 is better compared to EF 24-70 F2.8L (17-55 has similar range on 1.6x crop DSLR vs 24-70 on FF) or EF 16-35 F2.8L (both cover similar range on 1.6x crop DSLR at the same aperture) but it has IS in addition and has more tele than 16-35.

EF 28-80 f/3.5-5.6 is pretty cheap too... abt the same as EF-S 18-55.

 

[Russ]

You need the right comparisons (either with FF equivalent, 1.6x crop equivalent and similar aperture). You can also compare across brands for similar ranges/performance on whether EF-S or DX/DC has greater cost savings.

EF-S 17-55 F2.8 is better compared to EF 24-70 F2.8L (17-55 has similar range on 1.6x crop DSLR vs 24-70 on FF) or EF 16-35 F2.8L (both cover similar range on 1.6x crop DSLR at the same aperture) but it has IS in addition and has more tele than 16-35.

EF 28-80 f/3.5-5.6 is pretty cheap too... abt the same as EF-S 18-55.

I don't disagree - just don't want people to get the impression EF-S are cheap lenses.

But the EF-S 17-85 IS is slightly more expensive than the EF 28-135 IS. I think these 2 lenses make the closest comparison. Unless we are saying 17-85 is L quality whereas 28-135 is not ....