Odds & Ends: 70D, 7D2, New Full Frame, D600 & Photoshop CS6

[neuroanatomist]

In the Canon system the EF-S stands for short back focus...

Actually, the -S in EF-S stands for small image circle.  Yes, I know Wikipedia says it stands for short back focus, and Bob Atkins and lots of other sources do, too.  But they're wrong.   

[JEAraman]

Close, but EF-S lenses will not work on FF cameras for another reason.  In the Canon system the EF-S stands for short back focus, meaning that the rear element is able to protrude further into the camera body that a 35mm lens.  This is only allowed by decreasing the size of the reflex mirror.

well that is not close.. it is exactly what i have quoted from bobatkins an written in my first reply.

no need to repeat it

That's exactly what I was thinking 

[KyleSTL]

Close, but EF-S lenses will not work on FF cameras for another reason.  In the Canon system the EF-S stands for short back focus, meaning that the rear element is able to protrude further into the camera body that a 35mm lens.  This is only allowed by decreasing the size of the reflex mirror.

well that is not close.. it is exactly what i have quoted from bobatkins an written in my first reply.

no need to repeat it

That's exactly what I was thinking 

Sorry for the repetition, I did not read the quoted text.  What astro said about lens compatiblity between Nikon and Canon has nothing to do with DX/FX or EF/EF-S compatibility, only with FBD, which is a different story entirely.

In the Canon system the EF-S stands for short back focus...

Actually, the -S in EF-S stands for small image circle.  Yes, I know Wikipedia says it stands for short back focus, and Bob Atkins and lots of other sources do, too.  But they're wrong.   

Citation?  I know incorrect information gets disseminated pretty rapidly and thoroughly on the internet, but do you have any citation for the correct abreviation?

[neuroanatomist]

In the Canon system the EF-S stands for short back focus...

Actually, the -S in EF-S stands for small image circle.  Yes, I know Wikipedia says it stands for short back focus, and Bob Atkins and lots of other sources do, too.  But they're wrong.   

Citation?  I know incorrect information gets disseminated pretty rapidly and thoroughly on the internet, but do you have any citation for the correct abreviation?

Because I said so...   

If you look at the Canon Technical Report for the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM, you'll see the notation, "*The "S" in "EF-S" comes from "Small image circle.""

Also, if you look at p. 128 of EF Lens Work III (it's in section 7, The Basics of Interchangeable Lenses...), there's a notation that, "* Some of the EF-S lenses does not employ a short back focus optical system."  (yes, that's grammatically incorrect, but correctly quoted)

[WildBill]

I edited the wiki page complete with reference.  We'll see if it stays.

[unfocused]

Really, if you have a ff camera and need more reach you probably can afford one of the TCs.

Sure...if your variable-aperture or f/5.6 lens will AF with one...

Well, if you have a full frame camera and need more reach, you should just buy a 7D. That way your variable-aperture or f/5/6 lens will AF. (Credit Neuro with pointing this out many times on previous threads. The best available extender is an APS-C body.)

[KyleSTL]

In the Canon system the EF-S stands for short back focus...

Actually, the -S in EF-S stands for small image circle.  Yes, I know Wikipedia says it stands for short back focus, and Bob Atkins and lots of other sources do, too.  But they're wrong.   

Citation?  I know incorrect information gets disseminated pretty rapidly and thoroughly on the internet, but do you have any citation for the correct abreviation?

Because I said so...   

If you look at the Canon Technical Report for the EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 USM, you'll see the notation, "*The "S" in "EF-S" comes from "Small image circle.""

Also, if you look at p. 128 of EF Lens Work III (it's in section 7, The Basics of Interchangeable Lenses...), there's a notation that, "* Some of the EF-S lenses does not employ a short back focus optical system."  (yes, that's grammatically incorrect, but correctly quoted)

Thanks for the information.  I am continually impressed with your knowledge of the Canon EOS system, and photography and optical systems in general.

[c-law]

I cannot see the 7D going FF. Forget what was said about naming problems that come from continuity of sensor size or annoying legions of 7D and EF-S owners looking for an upgrade path (which are both real concerns) but think about what a FF 7DII that retains the ethos of the 7D with good AF/fast FPS. You end up with the 5DIII but trading a worse AF (but still very good) for better FPS. How could they release this without killing the 5D line dead? It is just too similar.

If it were me, this is how I'd pitch the Canon line-up (coming from pure speculation based on nothing more then what I think makes sense).

1Dx - Top of the line Pro camera @ $6800
5DIII - High-end small form factor FF @ $3500
7DII - High-end small form factor APS-C @ $2200 (61pt AF/8-10FPS)
9D - Entry level FF @ $1600 (Build like a rebel or xxD, not highly sealed, low FPS, xxD or 7D AF)
70D - Enthusiast APS-C @ $1200 (7D AF/6FPS)
650D - Everyman's DSLR APS-C @ $850
1100D - Low-level budget APS-C @ $500


The only thing I am unsure of is where I'd place the high MP camera. Do you go 3D level @ $5000 and go for really impressive and hope that everyone who gets upset about price already got offended by the 5DIII price and jumped ship to the D800? Or do you place it competitive to the D800 at around $3000 and risk over crowding the 5DIII/7DII (and if this is the case, what will Canon leave out to make it fit the price slot)? Finally, if it does compete with the D800 price wise then what will move into the mysterious $5000 price range unless Canon goes for 2 high MP cameras?

[RLPhoto]

More evidence that the 7DII will be aps-H.

[Astro]

well that is not close.. it is exactly what i have quoted from bobatkins an written in my first reply.


Sorry for the repetition, I did not read the quoted text.  What astro said about lens compatiblity between Nikon and Canon has nothing to do with DX/FX or EF/EF-S compatibility, only with FBD, which is a different story entirely.

that is why i wrote it is different story. 
the nikon/canon example was only to show that there must be no "bi-directional" compatibility in such cases.

9D - Entry level FF @ $1600 (Build like a rebel or xxD, not highly sealed, low FPS, xxD or 7D AF)

if the D600 is in the same league that would be fine.
but i think canon could not afford that the D600 is much better feature wise.

im only guessing here but a 1600-1800$ fullframe will create a lot of interest, in my opinion.

[c-law]

9D - Entry level FF @ $1600 (Build like a rebel or xxD, not highly sealed, low FPS, xxD or 7D AF)

if the D600 is in the same league that would be fine.
but i think canon could not afford that the D600 is much better feature wise.

im only guessing here but a 1600-1800$ fullframe will create a lot of interest, in my opinion.

I believe Canon would risk that their name would carry a slightly inferior spec's camera as long as it isn't too far out. They pitted the 19pt AF of the 7D against the 51pt Af of the D300/s, although they did have the FPS advantage.

[aznable]

9D - Entry level FF @ $1600 (Build like a rebel or xxD, not highly sealed, low FPS, xxD or 7D AF)

if the D600 is in the same league that would be fine.
but i think canon could not afford that the D600 is much better feature wise.

im only guessing here but a 1600-1800$ fullframe will create a lot of interest, in my opinion.

I believe Canon would risk that their name would carry a slightly inferior spec's camera as long as it isn't too far out. They pitted the 19pt AF of the 7D against the 51pt Af of the D300/s, although they did have the FPS advantage.

i think for moving subjects the af of 7d performs better, not talking about the advantage in shutter  lag the 7d has, and the 50% more pixels on sensor.

[traveller]

The debate over whether we'll see a direct 7D (and D300s) replacement is getting even more interesting.  If the pictures of the D600 on NR are real, what does this imply for a D300s replacement? The D600 looks very similar to the D7000, both in size and control interface (e.g. the mode dial), which would confirm it's budget status compared to the Nikon semi-pro interface of the D800.  Could Nikon therefore market a 'D400' in the same position as the D300s (i.e. a high end "DX" camera in a D800 style body) alongside this D600 without sending out mixed messages, and if they did, what price point would it occupy? Perhaps the lack of a D400 with the D7000 generation indicates that the high-end 'DX' format camera is dead? Having made this suggestion, Nikon have done this before with the D100 and D70. 

[c-law]

Theres an interesting thought, could Canon possibly kill two birds with... well two well aimed stones by making the $5000 price point and the new entry level FF both high MP beasts?

You could hit the two levels of people who really care about high MP, people who don't know much about cameras other than more MP are better and those few who genuinely need lots more MP.

You'd probably still upset some people but you always will.

[Haydn1971]

...and Neuro gets quoted on "The Digital Picture"

Your famous now ;-)