Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
please explain simple EF-S VS EF
- Thread starter munkees
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
The term high speed crop was specific to the D2X. If you reduced the capture area to around 5Mpx, the frame rate increased from 4-5 FPS to 8 FPS. All of the Nikon FX bodies have a setting on the Image Setting menu called Image Area that governs whether the body automatically crops an image if it detects that a DX lens is mounted to the camera.
The only DX lens I had was the 17-55 and I sold it a few years ago when I replaced it with the 14-24 and 24-70.
I have not made claims on Nikon mounts. Only about the crop mode. I used to shoot Nikon gear. So I am familiar with the cameras and the lenses. I now shoot Canon gear, ok. I am also very familiar with the lenses and gear.
Every time this subject comes up, the general response is... "but if you crop"... which is what you brought into the conversation. The fact is if you want a true comparison, you cannot crop. As from the example in #27 or whatever post it was with the 5D image, yes, you could crop it and get a 1.6 FOV. BUT, that is NOT what the lens is transmitting (see the black corners). Is the actual FOV the same? Again, who gives a flying flip. What is the true definition of FOV? Again, Does it matter to the average Joe with a camera? NO. It's the resulting image that matters, and if you got those black corners in your pictures, would you be happy that in order to get a usable image you ..."just have to crop"?
At the end of the day, the debate is... is the IMAGE the same or not. Who gives a flying flip about the FOV. All that matters is do you have the same subject in the frame, and the resulting print. If your print has more subject in the frame than another, then the image is DIFFERENT (and yes, this can be achieved with the same focal length lens, different sensor sized cameras). Again, see #27.
So do this experiment for fun.... Mount your F mount lens to your Nikon body. Set your Focal length. Mount to tripod. Shoot an image. Look at your results
Now, take that same setup and simply change your setting to your DX setting (1.6 or 1.5.. I forget for Nikon). Look at your results.
Are the images different or the same? What changed? The lens is the same focal length on both images, but your sensor capture are has changed. The DX mode only records the center of the image circle.
Now, Im fairly certain the next logical argument you will bring up.... IF you change the physical dimensions of the resulting images because of the number of megapixels and file size (dimensions)...... This will bring us to another debate about the merits of up-rezzing or down-sampling an image. Again, not an Apple-to-Apple comparison.
Last edited by a moderator:
oh man.. why does this thread have 3 pages???
Easy answer in a paragraph: EF lenses are designed with a full-frame camera in mind. EF-S lenses are designed with a Crop (1.6x) camera in mind.
Differences between them? Very little. Example: I used my 11-16 EF-S on my 5DII until I got a EF UWA. Drawback? I could only use the 16mm of it if I wanted to avoid a wild vignette, because the EF-S lens was designed for a CROP camera, one that would crop the outer edges of the image, thus eliminating the vignette.
If you put a hypothetical 50mm EF-S and a 50mm EF on any given camera, assuming the mounts worked, the image would be exactly the same.
however, if you put a 50mm EF (which work on both FF and crop cameras) on a FF vs a crop camera, the images will be different. On the FF you will have a true 50mm FOv, whereas on the crop camera (1.6x) you will have essentially an 80mm FOV, because the crop camera crops the image to result at 1.6x the size of a FF cameras FOV.
something like that.
So: The lenses are not any different really.
Easy answer in a paragraph: EF lenses are designed with a full-frame camera in mind. EF-S lenses are designed with a Crop (1.6x) camera in mind.
Differences between them? Very little. Example: I used my 11-16 EF-S on my 5DII until I got a EF UWA. Drawback? I could only use the 16mm of it if I wanted to avoid a wild vignette, because the EF-S lens was designed for a CROP camera, one that would crop the outer edges of the image, thus eliminating the vignette.
If you put a hypothetical 50mm EF-S and a 50mm EF on any given camera, assuming the mounts worked, the image would be exactly the same.
however, if you put a 50mm EF (which work on both FF and crop cameras) on a FF vs a crop camera, the images will be different. On the FF you will have a true 50mm FOv, whereas on the crop camera (1.6x) you will have essentially an 80mm FOV, because the crop camera crops the image to result at 1.6x the size of a FF cameras FOV.
something like that.
So: The lenses are not any different really.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-is-lens-review.aspx
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image"
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image"
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
This is getting WAY off topic, but...
There is no need to speculate when the manuals are freely available for download. The D3/D3S has additional crop options, but those options reside on the same menu I mentioned in my previous post. I replaced my D2X with a D700 a little over 2 years ago and so I am very familiar with both cameras.
There is no need to speculate when the manuals are freely available for download. The D3/D3S has additional crop options, but those options reside on the same menu I mentioned in my previous post. I replaced my D2X with a D700 a little over 2 years ago and so I am very familiar with both cameras.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/reviews/canon-ef-s-55-250mm-f-4-5.6-is-lens-review.aspx
go down to COMPARED ..
now roll over the images.. if you tell me that that 55-250 shot is a 1.6 crop and the 70-X shots are very different you DO live on another plant (the 55-250 shot was manualy zoomed to match the 70-X shot hence the SLIGHT difference in focal length).. I am assuming same camera..as the review is about the lens and the FoV is too close to be recreated beteen full frame and crop.
you are twisting things nicely around now..
@Cliff, my bad I remember seen the high speed crop also on the D3 series but I might be wrong. The D700 however does have a crop but also allows you to shoot your DX lens on full frame (which will vignette) but has no speed increase over the full frame mode.
Thatisme:
It is kind of funny how you try to wiggle yourself out of this though...
We (a buddy and me here, pro photographer but you would dismiss this anyway as him not knowing either, are having a great time with your "knowledge" and your way of going from the 200mm debacle to IMAGE... and no, the image will still not be different between an EF-s and an EF lens at the same focal length on the same body.
End of story..if you are so sure.. why don't YOU prove ME wrong? you posted 1 picture of a modified 5d, which wasnt even yours. there is no 10mm on full frame (hence the vigneting) so you would have to shoot that 52 with the 10-22 at 22mm and then use a full frame 22 milimeter lens and compare it, because you ARE arguing, at least now, that the image will be different. It won't except for the vignetting.. re-read your own statements from before and watch how you ended up now on the "image"
Don't worry, by Monday I will prove it to you but why don't you prove me wrong before?.. I dare you.
EF-s lens and EF (or DX and FX for me) at the same focal length on the same camera, same f stop, same shutter speed... Exif data intact.
To the OP: I have to apologize for this and this is the last post related to Thats me from my side:
To answer your question: EF-s is cheaper as stated before the mess and is targeted specifically for the crop sensor bodies. You CAN fit both EF-s and EF on a crop sensor body and you will get the same image. EF lenses are just made for full frame as also stated before.
sorry for the mess.
With your link provided, I agree there is a slight difference there, but as you said, you ASSUME that it was with the same camera.... That would be my assumption as well, however, that example hardly makes your case, as the 70mm had to be manually dialed in... a small change has a big effect at long distances.... just saying... Show it using a prime (can't) or at the long end of the lens where there is no room for error or adjustment (200mm example). Eliminate all variables.
So, quit your arguing and prove it with a real world example with your gear. I don't own any EF-S lenses anymore, so let's get that in the great wide open, so I can't run this comparison for you. There is a fundamental reason for that, which gets more to the point of the OP... Image quality is flat out crap as compared with Canon's L glass, which just so happens to be only in the EF mount. Right, wrong or somewhere in-between, this discussion has no bearing for me, since I will never own another EF-S lens anyway. To that point, I won't ever own a 1.6 crop camera again either, for what it's worth.
I have no further interest in this discussion, so have fun. Enjoy.
It is funny HOW NO ONE clicked on these links. It has all the info here, and you can see what the differences are... or people can just keep arguing.
An image like the ones linked are just about the best way to illustrate the difference.
having attempted to read the entire thread, I cannot for the life of me understand what thatisme and flosseR are arguing about!
It is SO SIMPLE. Take lens "X", assuming it functions on both Crop and FF cameras.
Shoot a scene with "X" on a FF camera. If you crop it down to .625 of it's original size from the center, you will have the EXACT same image as the crop sensor camera produces with "X", noise/details/crap like that aside.
There is no argument here.
- Status