Messages

151

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Full Frame body with crop mode ( that can use EF-S lenses)

« on: February 20, 2012, 10:42:31 AM »

Ok, so going on what at least one other poster has stated- there are no actual lens parts sticking out of at least some of the EF-S lenses, then why have the protrusion?

I have read that there is a piece of plastic (or similar) that can be removed from a Canon EF-S lens that will then allow it to be installed on an EF body.

As I am understanding it, the one big thing contributing to the "cost savings" of EF-S lenses is the smaller image circle.

So, if Canon wanted to, they could essentially put an EF mount on the EF-S lenses where mirror interference is not a problem.

I'm probably not the only person that "does not understand" this.   

152

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Panoramas or Stitching + Interior Shots

« on: February 20, 2012, 08:06:29 AM »

Here is another picture.  It was taken in Vermont.  Handheld, no nodal point, no tripod.  Its 8 photos stitched together 4 across the top and 4 across the bottom.  I was maybe 100 feet away.  I know I should have a wide angle lens, but I don't...yet.  So the only way to fit all in was to take a flier on handheld.

For reference, the sunrise picture was taken with an accurate nodal point, tripod and ballhead leveled (I guess as close as I could, the horizon is hilly but it looks like it might go down and to the right).

Anyway, no processing done on the first one, but I did on this one.  You think it is sharpened a little too much?

It is a nice picture. My monitor is not calibrated, but it does look "artificial", for lack of a better term. Maybe that is from the sharpening.

If I am far enough away, some of my panoramic stitching comes out OK.

My HTC Amaze phone has a pretty cool panoramic mode. No stitching, per se. Just aim and pan slowly.

153

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Full Frame body with crop mode ( that can use EF-S lenses)

« on: February 20, 2012, 07:41:40 AM »

Long story short, its impossible because the rear of the lens is closer to the sensor. On an FF body the larger sensor would mean a larger mirror - which would then make contact with the closer lens. A bad thing.

Why is it closer to the sensor? To keep prices down. Long story short - with the back of the lens closer to the sensor, it means that it becomes easier to get wide angle/super wide angle - with less glass, a smaller size, and a larger aperture than otherwise possible.

In other words, it does help the consumer - in fact, it helps the larger consumer group - the APS-C users.

Would it keep them from moving up to FF - if they were planning on moving up in the first place? Nope - EF-S shows its quality most at super wide angles. IE: APS-C users will have one, maybe two at lenses at the most to (really) replace. 10-22/17-55 - two lenses with a big enough market for resale, so not really a problem. Maybe a third, 55-250, if you really think about it, but again, easy resale.

I believe it has been pointed out that none/very few of the EF-S lenses actually make full use of the protrusion and have glass there.

The only APS-C specific lens I own is a Tokina 11-16, and it fits on a 5DII. Nothing sticks out of the back of the lens.

I avoided purchasing any EF-S lenses because of the full frame incompatibility problem (at least with OEM lenses). I returned an EF-S 17-55 for the EF 16-35 II, and I realize that the two lenses are not the same.

And if there really is a difference in focus distance, why/how does an EF lens work on an EF-S lens body?

154

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Panoramas or Stitching + Interior Shots

« on: February 19, 2012, 04:30:43 PM »

Wow. Lots of stuff here.

Looks like some really specialized stuff is needed to pull it off correctly... plus the talent to use it.

What about using one of the TS lenses and shifting? I realize you may only get 2 frames to stitch together without moving the camera.

155

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Panoramas or Stitching + Interior Shots

« on: February 19, 2012, 02:47:48 PM »

Here is an exterior shot.  Go easy on me, I'm a rookie at photography.  There are mistakes in the stitching if you know where to look!!  Didn't really do much to the picture except stitch it together.

I found interior shots difficult, even with a correct nodal point, because I was too close to the subject.  I was shooting a built in wall cabinet (it was one I built, my real job) and I think the problem was that the center of the cabinet was 15 feet away and the corner was 20 to 25 feet away.  I couldn't move backwards any further because there was a wall in back of me.  If that description makes sense...

It looks good from here.

156

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Panoramas or Stitching + Interior Shots

« on: February 19, 2012, 02:46:01 PM »

By the way, the picture above is 4 Portrait Orientation shots from a 5DMkII and 17-40 lens.

That shot looks pretty darn good.

How much work was done in processing?

Do you use the RSS products?

157

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Re: Panoramas or Stitching + Interior Shots

« on: February 19, 2012, 01:59:49 PM »

Interesting.

Looks like some pricey accessories... and why it didn't work very well with just a plain tripod.

158

EOS Bodies - For Stills / Panoramas or Stitching + Interior Shots

« on: February 19, 2012, 12:33:30 PM »

Over in the lens suggestions for Grand Canyon thread, I was reminded about how an ultra wide angle lens can make things seem really far away.

I notice this effect using the 16-35 II at 16. While I can get the subject into the frame, the results are not always what I want.

I have tried handheld stitching and panoramas, and for close work the results have been bad.

I did a small stitched panorama (handheld) when I went to the Grand Canyon as a whim (panorama, not the trip), and it turned out nice once it was put together by Photoshop. I wish I had done that a couple of times.

If I wanted to stitch together an interior shot of a room and not try to fit it all in using a (ultra) wide angle lens, what is the best approach for someone that isn't well versed in Photoshop?

159

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Full Frame body with crop mode ( that can use EF-S lenses)

« on: February 18, 2012, 10:18:55 AM »

This is all the more irksome, because  Canon is not even utilizing the potential advantage of EF-S (rear element closer to sensor) in most of the EF-S lenses: to my knowledge only the rear glass element in the 10-22 uses the extra space provided by the protrusion at the mount end. All other EF-S lenses could have just as well been fitted with an EF mount.

Has anyone chucked an EF-S lens into a lathe and cut off the protrusion?

 

160

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Full Frame body with crop mode ( that can use EF-S lenses)

« on: February 18, 2012, 08:51:49 AM »

I think that it is actually bad marketting to allow crop lenses to be used on full frame.

Why?

Well, for starters, it means that your X-MP camera is no longer an X-MP camera but a camera with about 1/3 of the number of MP. There's enormous potential for confusion there, both in the shooter and the market of people receiving such images.

I will admit to not knowing the technical end of why or why not, but if all that happens is essentially less than 100% coverage of the FF sensor when using EF-S lenses, what's the big deal?

This could be cropped out later, right?

While it may not be an ideal application, it makes no sense to me why EF-S on EF isn't allowed.

Does the short back focus really save that much money in the lens and camera manufacturing process?

161

EOS Bodies / Re: Canon Full Frame body with crop mode ( that can use EF-S lenses)

« on: February 18, 2012, 06:40:54 AM »

I also do not understand why Canon decided to make it physically impossible to mount EF-S lenses onto an EF body.

It doesn't "help" the consumer.

It may keep consumers from "moving up" to full frame.

It *does* create more sales, though.

162

EOS Bodies / Re: Announcement Soon [CR3]

« on: February 17, 2012, 08:28:23 PM »

February 28, 2012 is still shaping up as the day of an announcement, though it could be a week later.

Sounds wishy-washy to me...


 

163

Lenses / Re: Grand Canyon Lens suggestions

« on: February 17, 2012, 06:51:01 AM »

I went and brought a 7D, 16-35 II, Tokina 11-16 and a 70-200.

I found the Tokina to be a little too wide and the 16-35 to not be wide enough. It doesn't make much sense writing it, but the pictures look different. Probably because the Tokina is made for a crop frame and the 16-35 is not.

I do not have a 14mm.

There were times when the 200 was not enough on the 7D, but the 16-35 stayed on the camera the most.

164

Lenses / Re: Macro Lens recommendation

« on: February 12, 2012, 09:09:43 AM »

I appreciate all of the shared knowledge and insights exchanged here. I’ve learned a lot from reading many of your posts.

First, I Recently bought a 7D to replace my Rebel T1i.  I thought it might be the best “all around” camera for me at this time. (Looking forward to FF in the future.) 

Now, I’m looking to add two more lenses to my gear before budget restraints prevail. I’ve decided on the Tokina 11-16 2.8 for my widest angle shots, but does anyone have any recommendations for an “all around” Macro lens which could be used in conjunction with a Kenko 1.4x Teleplus pro 300, if needed? Any thoughts would be appreciated.

You know, with the increasing cost of lenses, and as I gradually pursue better ones, eventually I can see myself going to “L” in a hand basket. 

I'm no expert, but the EF-s 60mm macro seems to work pretty nicely and you can use it for other stuff.

60mm x 1.6 = 96mm full frame equivalent.

100mm x 1.6 = 160mm full frame equivalent.

You do not indicate *what* you want to take macro shots of, but if your budget only allows for 2 lenses right now *and* you need "all around", then I suggest the EF-s 60mm.

The EF-s 60 is also optimized for the APS-C sensor and the 100mm macro is not.

I will add that I think 96mm is a little long for lots of indoor stuff.

You will need a Speedlite (or two) for that Tokina 11-16. The on camera flash will cause lens shadow. The 7D can control a 430EXII (or two) and you do need lots of light at the wide end of that lens unless you are outdoors and it is sunny.

I would strongly suggest the EF-s 17-55 f2.8 as the go to "all around" lens on a 7D.

165

Lenses / Re: 24-70mm 2.8L V1 or V2

« on: February 08, 2012, 06:24:51 PM »

I hear that the III version will be even better.