mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I must say that all the fussing about lenses that won't work on a full-frame camera leaves me somewhat bemused. If and only if you want a 5D (or 1DsMkWhaever) then go for it, I guess.
But I'm likely to stick with crop-factor Canons more-or-less forever and so am incredibly partial to my EF-S 17-55f2.8IS which is a wonderful lens. It doesn't get nearly as much use as my 100-400, but only because I tend to use my film RF cameras for non-long-lens focal-length-ranges. But when I do use my dSLR, that lens (the f2.8 EF-S) just works, solidly, with excellent image quality and without raising a fuss.
And I don't care that it will never work on a full-frame camera, 'cause I'm unlikely to buy one, yet if I do it won't be my only camera. I'll always have an APS-C sensor camera to mount the 100-400 on, simply because I often shoot wildlife. But I like to have a short-range alternative as well. The EF-S 17-55 f2.8IS is brilliant in that regard.
...Mike
But I'm likely to stick with crop-factor Canons more-or-less forever and so am incredibly partial to my EF-S 17-55f2.8IS which is a wonderful lens. It doesn't get nearly as much use as my 100-400, but only because I tend to use my film RF cameras for non-long-lens focal-length-ranges. But when I do use my dSLR, that lens (the f2.8 EF-S) just works, solidly, with excellent image quality and without raising a fuss.
And I don't care that it will never work on a full-frame camera, 'cause I'm unlikely to buy one, yet if I do it won't be my only camera. I'll always have an APS-C sensor camera to mount the 100-400 on, simply because I often shoot wildlife. But I like to have a short-range alternative as well. The EF-S 17-55 f2.8IS is brilliant in that regard.
...Mike
Avotius
Some guy
Mike I hear you on your crop factor but for me it just doesnt work. Super wide angle lenses on crop factor cameras are not wide anymore and also choosing a digital lens for the crop is no longer fast. For instance the 16-35 2.8 to the 10-22 4.5-5.6. I regard that speed as more important then sensor size and if having that speed means a larger sensor, so be it.
sienarot
Well-known
not only that, but the loss of shallow depth of field in crop sensors can be very unappealing (atleast for me, they are).
Avotius
Some guy
sienarot said:
Right, that too, f4 on a crop has just about everything in focus, on a full frame is completely different as this shot shows:
lousy out of focus rendering though
projectbluebird
Film Abuser
I'm currently in the process of expanding into digital, from being a 100% film user.
I like wide wides too, so I'll be getting the 5D (or the replacement, if the price is right) Right now I'm on the incremental upgrade path. I own a 1v (film), and a 50 1.2L I bought new (yowza!). I'm saving up for the 16-35 II, because it's cheaper than all those wonderful equivalent primes.
Eventually I'd also like the 70-200 2.8 IS.
a side note on the 16-35II, I've seen several being sold used in like-new condition. Every seller I've talked to has been trading up for the 24 1.4L.
I'm putting most of my money in lenses right now, because good glass will still be usable on later cameras (just look at Leica) And I'll always be able to upgrade the body later if I'd like.
I do keep looking at the M8, and looking, and looking. I'd love to get one, but for the same money I can get the 5D, the 16-35 II, and the 70-200 2.8.
I suppose I could always quit my job and go freelance, then I'd probably be able to afford whatever I needed. Nothing like the prospect of starving to give you the drive to succeed.
I like wide wides too, so I'll be getting the 5D (or the replacement, if the price is right) Right now I'm on the incremental upgrade path. I own a 1v (film), and a 50 1.2L I bought new (yowza!). I'm saving up for the 16-35 II, because it's cheaper than all those wonderful equivalent primes.
Eventually I'd also like the 70-200 2.8 IS.
a side note on the 16-35II, I've seen several being sold used in like-new condition. Every seller I've talked to has been trading up for the 24 1.4L.
I'm putting most of my money in lenses right now, because good glass will still be usable on later cameras (just look at Leica) And I'll always be able to upgrade the body later if I'd like.
I do keep looking at the M8, and looking, and looking. I'd love to get one, but for the same money I can get the 5D, the 16-35 II, and the 70-200 2.8.
I suppose I could always quit my job and go freelance, then I'd probably be able to afford whatever I needed. Nothing like the prospect of starving to give you the drive to succeed.
Avotius
Some guy
projectbluebird said:
Hey, thanks for the comments. How you liking the 50 1.2? I am a 50mm user mostly and have the 1.4, it sucks in build quality and I think it has cost me more shots then it has got for me when a: its focus jams or b: when it completely misses because it says its focused and it really is not. I am not so interested in the 1.2 but am interested in the step up in build quality. How you coping with it?