EF or EF-S for 7D/70D

[tgara]

Future-proof your lenses.  Get EF mounts and not EF-S.

[sagittariansrock]

You get the best of EF by getting the sweet spot center, you get a wider selection, you get weather sealing more often, you get might quality build, you get lenses that work on EF and EF-s, and more.

The sweet spot center issue is mostly theoretical for the 17-55/15-85 vs 17-40 question. Both the EF-S lenses are sharper all through even compared to the "sweet spot center" of the 17-40.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=398&Camera=474&Sample=0&FLI=3&API=0&LensComp=100&CameraComp=736&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=4&APIComp=0
(Mind you, my own 17-55 is much sharper than the tested sample).

Wider selection? Not in the standard zoom for crop sensor range. I think it's only the 17-40 and the 16-35 II in the EF lineup.

Weather sealing= Agreed, if that matters to you. I am assuming you have your non-weathersealed APS-C camera in a plastic baggie or something like that.

Build quality= I am a bit curious about this one. I know people like metal-bodied lenses but I am sure plastic lenses like the 15-85 and 17-55 will stand up to a lot of abuse. In fact, synthetic polymers are often more resistant to impact damage. Of, course the 17-40 and 16-35 has better ergonomics, but then you are comparing an L to a non-L. In case of the 17-40, you are paying for ergonomics whereas you are paying for IQ in case of the 15-85.

Future proofing? That is a vague concept. Who really knows about the future? I wouldn't be surprised if 100MP 20x zoom 1 billion ISO @ 20 fps is available in cell phones in a few years! Then all your EF lenses will be pretty darn redundant!

[pj1974]

I have used both FF and APS-C DSLRs for several years.  I currently own a Canon 7D and Canon 350D... and have owned both EF and EF-S lenses since I got into DSLRs in 2005.

My current mainstay of "go-to-body" and lens combination is the Canon 7D with Canon 15-85mm. It's vastly superior than the 17-40 in IQ sharpness, focal length range at both wide and tele-end, usability, IS - and at least on-par USM. The only advantage of the 17-40 is a somewhat better build quality (also incorporating improved weather sealing).

When I was considering what lens to use as my walkaround for my 7D, I had owned a good copy of the EF 28-135mm - but it is not as good as the EF-S 15-85mm even at equivalent focal lengths. I have an EF-S 18-55mm (but a non IS version) so that's "ok" the IS version of the kit lens is better  The newer EF-S 18-135mm STM is quite good (better than the non STM one).

Macro-wise, I went with the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM, over above any 3rd party (mainly to do with AF and IQ).  I chose the EF 100mm over the EF-S 60mm, really only due to preferring a longer working  focal length when doing macro photography. I am glad I did... there was a small consideration that if can also use this lens on a FF.

I own an EF 70-300mm USM IS L - which is a truly great lens, and as photozone points out - is superior on a crop body (in terms of using the sweet spot / centre of the lens) - and gaining the 'crop factor' advantage, that is presents a 480mm equivalent image on a APS-C body. But even if this 70-300mm L would have been an EF-S... I still would have bought it!

Finally in UWA land, I own a Sigma 10-20mm HSM EX... which is a great lens. When I was considering UWAs, there was much less choice then than there is now. I went with a new Sigma 10-20 based on a much better price than I could get a new EF-S Canon 10-22mm USM for. My Sigma gives me sharp corner to corner images at the equivalent of 16mm in 35mm format.

Lens wise, I say buy what you can budget / ie what is affordable to you - and what you will use often now. That's my 2cents worth.

Paul

[greger]

Wait until the Canon announcement is out. Who knows what cameras or lenses will be announced.  Then you will have new thoughts for a new post on what to buy. I have bought 3 EF lenses since I bought my 40D in March 2008. I bought my 7D in August 2012. I'm looking at the 100-400 F4.5-5.6 for my next lens because I need the reach. I have a 17-85 F4-5.6 EFS for my landscape shots. It suits my purposes, but I do know there are better lenses. Maybe later this month
there will be even more.

 

[cszy67]

When picking up my 7D I had a similar discussion with my father, a professional photographer by trade. As he put it, "the money is in the glass." He provided several examples of camera bodies coming and going but a good lens is a good lens.

Spreading the difference in cost out over a few years and the difference is negligible.

[RS2021]

Future-proof your lenses.  Get EF mounts and not EF-S.

Indeed, always EF if budget will allow.

[insanitybeard]

Future-proof your lenses.  Get EF mounts and not EF-S.

Indeed, always EF if budget will allow.

I'm not disagreeing with this, and the point has probably been made already in this thread but.... what if you want to go ultra wide on crop, without reverting to fisheye? Much wider than 28mm full frame equivalent (approx 17mm on crop), your only EF lens option (non fisheye) is the 14mm L prime, and with respect to cost it is certainly not a value option for a crop camera! Plus it's still only giving an equivalent to approx 22mm full frame FOV. Therefore, some dedicated crop sensor lenses are unavoidable if you want to go seriously wide on crop.

[CTJohn]

I have used both FF and APS-C DSLRs for several years.  I currently own a Canon 7D and Canon 350D... and have owned both EF and EF-S lenses since I got into DSLRs in 2005.

My current mainstay of "go-to-body" and lens combination is the Canon 7D with Canon 15-85mm. It's vastly superior than the 17-40 in IQ sharpness, focal length range at both wide and tele-end, usability, IS - and at least on-par USM. The only advantage of the 17-40 is a somewhat better build quality (also incorporating improved weather sealing).

When I was considering what lens to use as my walkaround for my 7D, I had owned a good copy of the EF 28-135mm - but it is not as good as the EF-S 15-85mm even at equivalent focal lengths. I have an EF-S 18-55mm (but a non IS version) so that's "ok" the IS version of the kit lens is better  The newer EF-S 18-135mm STM is quite good (better than the non STM one).

Macro-wise, I went with the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM, over above any 3rd party (mainly to do with AF and IQ).  I chose the EF 100mm over the EF-S 60mm, really only due to preferring a longer working  focal length when doing macro photography. I am glad I did... there was a small consideration that if can also use this lens on a FF.

I own an EF 70-300mm USM IS L - which is a truly great lens, and as photozone points out - is superior on a crop body (in terms of using the sweet spot / centre of the lens) - and gaining the 'crop factor' advantage, that is presents a 480mm equivalent image on a APS-C body. But even if this 70-300mm L would have been an EF-S... I still would have bought it!

Finally in UWA land, I own a Sigma 10-20mm HSM EX... which is a great lens. When I was considering UWAs, there was much less choice then than there is now. I went with a new Sigma 10-20 based on a much better price than I could get a new EF-S Canon 10-22mm USM for. My Sigma gives me sharp corner to corner images at the equivalent of 16mm in 35mm format.

Lens wise, I say buy what you can budget / ie what is affordable to you - and what you will use often now. That's my 2cents worth.

Paul

+1 on  the Sigma 10-20 on my 7D.  I don't use it often, but am always very pleasantly surprised when I see the quality of the images.  My other glass is Canon L, and to me, the Sigma is just as sharp.

[pdirestajr]

One of the few benefits of an APS-c canon is that it CAN use EF-S lenses. Why not take advantage of this option if there is a lens offered that is useful to capture your vision NOW.

If you have a different camera in the future, well then make the changes to your kit in the future. You can always sell gear.

[neuroanatomist]

One of the few benefits of an APS-c canon is that it CAN use EF-S lenses. Why not take advantage of this option if there is a lens offered that is useful to capture your vision NOW.

If you have a different camera in the future, well then make the changes to your kit in the future. You can always sell gear.

+1. 

Future-proof your lenses.  Get EF mounts and not EF-S.

Indeed, always EF if budget will allow.

Future-proofing is not beneficial if the sacrifices you need to make today are substantial. 

A general purpose zoom is typically defined as a lens that covers wide angle to short telephoto.  For a FF sensor, that includes lenses like the 28-135, 24-105 and 24-70.  What EF lens would you recommend for an APS-C sensor that covers wide angle to short tele?  Can I get one with a constant f/2.8 aperture or with IS?  The only Canon option would appear to be the 17-40/4...and that lens is optically outperformed by the 17-55 and 15-85 on APS-C.

[J.R.]

I want to start upgrading my lens kit, so that one day when I can afford a 5D Mark III (a few years from now) all I will need to do is get the body. In the meantime I want to drop my EF-S kit lens for a quality replacement.

Would the Canon 17-40mm f/4 L EF be a good option for replacing a 18-55 EF-S kit lens for a crop body? When I eventually go full frame I will want a wide lens, so I thought this one may serve that purpose while also being a good replacement for the kit lens on a crop body.

I was going to upgrade my Rebel XT to a 7D about a week ago, but then the rumors of the 70D announcement started coming. So for now I'm holding off and waiting to see what this new camera will entail by the end of the month before deciding which camera body to get.

I did the exact same thing when I got the 17-40 for my 7D - I had sold the 18-135 kit lens - all in the hope of going FF someday.

TBH, I hated the lack of focal length on the 7D as the focal length was neither here nor there. I cursed myself for not having purchased the excellent 17-55 f/2.8 IS which would have given me a full stop of light and a couple more stops in IS which could give me shots at ISO 800 which were possible with the 17-40 only at ISO 3200+ (useless on the 7D).

Subsequently, I did go FF last October and had an equally frustrating time with the 17-40 on the FF. the constant f/4 aperture on the FF was useless because the IQ isn't something to rave about unless you stopped the lens down all the way to f/8 or more.

Frustrated with the 17-40, i finally sold it today.

Cutting the chase ... Do consider whether the 17-40 is that great a deal on the FF and worth ignoring the excellent EFS 17-55 IS. Don't get entangled in this whole business of going FF someday. You can only shoot with the equipment you have in your hands ... Not with what you expect to buy someday.

BTW, the 17-55 is one lens which retains its value. You can easily sell the lens on eBay for a very nice price when you do go FF.

[mdmphoto]

My ef-s 17-55 f/2.8 IS is on my 7D always as my walkaround lens.  The aperture is wide, the iq is fabulous, and while the lens is not weatherproof, it is pretty well-built and has taken quite a bit of banging around in my walking around.  It's not inexpensive; like several of my lenses, I got a deal on ebay, but it is worth it.  The only other lens made for crop-sensors I would seriously consider is the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8; but part of its allure beyond the wide, wide angle and great iq is that it can be used as a 16mm prime on FF.  I am not thus far convinced that I will ever not have a crop-sensor body once I move to FF.

[fosterscape]

Are EF-S lenses weather sealed? or is it only the EF L lenses?

[wickidwombat]

Are EF-S lenses weather sealed? or is it only the EF L lenses?

no only SOME EF  L lenses are weather sealed and usually only if a filter is in place too

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The issue with future proofing by getting a lens now to match a FF camera a few years from now is that the lenses are going to be updated or replaced, and you will have compromised now and then want a updated one that matches that 50mp sensor of your 2015 FF body.
Unless you plan to get a FF model this year, get a refurb ef-s lens, or a good used one.  When you go to FF, there will be little if any depreciation.