Buying a Digital Rebel? I need an 18-55. Can we talk?

I'm looking to get my hands on an EF-S 18-55 lens for some testing

and experimental surgery (sawing the back off and and measuring the

mirror clearance - if any - on a 10D for example). The results would

be part of a photo.net article. However it's only available with the

EOS 300D (Digital Rebel) as part of the kit and I don't really need a

Digital Rebel body! Anyone who will loan photo.net a lens (like

Canon) isn't going to be very happy getting it back in several

pieces...

 

So, if you're thinking of buying a Digital Rebel, but you already

have the wideangle range covered with a 17-40L, 16-35L, Sigma 12-24,

15-30 or similar lens so you don't need the 18-55, maybe you could

buy the kit and sell the lens to me? I sure we could work out a deal

agreeable to both parties!

 

Alternatively, if anyone knows of a new or used EF-S 18-55 for sale

(e.g. someone trading up to a 17-40/4L) please let me know. A used

lens would be fine.

 

I know they show up on ebay, but I don't like ebay and I'd rather deal with a photo.net member 1-on-1.

I sent you an email, but I'm willing.

Bob, why on earth would you need to saw the back off? Why can't you just measure how far the rear element retrudes from the flange, then measure the 10D from the flange back to where the mirror is in mid-flip just holding it up with a finger?

Yes, you could probably measure various mounting flange to mirror and mounting flange to various points on the lens, then figure out how much you had to grid or saw off - and I'd probably do that anyway - but having the lens in hand makes it easier! Plus there's no proof like actually doing it.

 

You have to saw the back off to get it on a 10D. Canon didn't want anyone putting one on a 1Ds or a film body (where it certainly WOULD colide with the mirror), so they modified the Rebel body and lens mount so you can't physically mount it on anything but a Rebel. There was no way they could make it fit a 10D, but not fit a 1Ds or film body, so they changed the mount slightly.

 

It's my understanding that people have managed to cram them on a 10D without damaging the body (though you do need to significantly "damage" the lens!). It looks like the only problem would be at the wide end, since that's when the rearmost element sticks deepest into the camera. The mirror clearance might get disturbingly small. As long as it doesn't become negative, you're OK.

 

There's not a huge advantage to doing this of course, the lens is pretty good, but it's not an "L" series IS USM for $100, however some of us just like to tinker with things! Besides I don't like Canon telling me what I can't do!

 

Ashton - got your email and replied to it.

Reminds me of grinding off the "safety tabs" on my Nikon TC14E and TC20E so I could stack them, and also use them on other lenses. I agree about not liking manufacturers to tell you what you can't do--especially when there's no reason for it other than they want you to buy something new...like the way non-CPU lenses work the evaluative(matrix) metering on a Nikon F4 but not any of the other AF bodies...or how Canon's teleconverters lock out AF with lenses slower than what they decreed are compatible, yet a piece of Scotch tape over the contacts and voila, AF!

I've located a lens now. Thanks!

 

You can see why Canon did what they did. Makes perfect sense. If they'd used a mount that allowed the 18-55 to be mounted on a 10D, but with a warning that it would cause damage on any film body, a 1D or 1Ds, some idiot would mount it on a 1Ds, smash the mirror into the rear element, then blame Canon and demand a repair.

 

So even if the lens would clear the mirror on a 10D, D60 and D30 (and I suspect it will - JUST!), there's no way Canon could make it available for those bodies without letting themselves in for law suits and repair bills. It doesn't really matter if they tell people it can't be used on a 1Ds, some people won't listen to them. If I was Canon, I'd do exactly what they did. Even an experienced photographer could forget, or reach into their bag and pull out the wrong lens by mistake, only to hear "crash - tinkle" as the mirror slams into the lens and breaks.

 

It will be an interesting experiment, but if I write it up I'll need full screen flashing red disclaimer messages in large bold fonts!

I've done a few experiments Bob .I've found a couple of things that might help you.I tried to cut the extra section off 'flush' so that i could (maybe) glue it back on afterwards.Man is that plastic tough!!I used a razor knife and could NOT make more than 1.2mm though the approx 2.5+mm thickness of the rear section.A hacksaw would work wonders though.....<BR>For my experiments i gave up on modifying the mount and just looked at my other EOS lenses for one that would fit instead.I found the 28-105/3.5-4.5 one would fit (sort of-the screw holes didn't all line up but the register distance was about the same)

<br>I didn't have a 10D to test it on but did have some fun with it on a common rebel body.I used Blue tack tm to hold the mirror up,took several hundred measurements,held my breath and tried it.

<br>Here are the results-<div></div>

A shot at the (approx) 22mm stting on a film camera.This was as wide as it would go without touching the mirror<div></div>

Oops,made a mistake there.The large photo above was taken at *18mm* with the mirror held up.<BR>The approx 22mm setting i mentioned was actually where the lens went full frame on a film camera.

<BR>Of course this was just a 'for the sake of it' experiment.While an 18-55 on a 10D makes some sense,using one on a film body would be meaningless.Even if one put a stop on it so it never went below about 22mm..the point is canon allready make a cheap 22-55mm zoom <P>In fact....i've read that the 18-55 may actually be a stretched,repackaged EF22-55...

<br>This site mentions it-http://www.swissarmyfork.com/digital_lens_faq.htm

Ron - I actually have a 22-55, so it might be interesting to compare them.

 

I hadn't though about switching mounts. I'd sort of assumed that the electrical contacts were part of the mount and that there would be some sort of flexible cable that held the mount to the lens once the screws were removed, but looking more closely I guess it's possible that the mount removes and leaves the electrical contact block in place. That would certainly make sense.

 

I'm not sure about the 18-55 being "just" a stretched version of the 22-55. The rear element of the 22-55 is fixed, i.e. it doesn't move when you zoom Though the interal elements shift around a lot. On the 18-55 the rear element moves a LOT, probably 2-3 cm. This points to at least a slightly different optical design, though I'm sure they used as many components as possible from the earlier lens to keep costs down.

Ah interesting.I've never looked hard at a 22-55.From what you say it would indeed be impossible for the 18-55 and 22-55 to be closely related.<BR>Good luck with it all...and show us all the results!

hi there,

just wondering if you have had any success with mounting the ef-s 18-55mm on a 10d once you hack off the back? i am possibly looking at upgrading to a 10d [i have a 300d that keeps fucking out on me, so they might replace it, and i'll pay a bit more and get a 10d]

 

but that 18-55mm lens is pretty damn good, i borrowed a 17-40L with the intention of buying it, and did some tests. the images had better contrast, sharpness, and saturation. but the same image, shot with the same settings with the 18-55, once graded in photoshop, was indistinguishable from the 17-40 shot! the 17-40 had less distortion, and was far nicer to hold and use, but i just couldn't justify it!

 

and the 18-55 makes a beautifull 1x - 4x macro lens when reversed.

very nearly as good as the mpe-65, check out my images!...

 

so i'd love it if the 18-55 works on the 10d, as it makes an awesome travel lens for standard and macro photography.<div></div>

Don't have the lens yet, so I can't tell you.

 

How did you reverse the 18-55? I presume you can buy some sort of 58mm filter threads to EOS adapter? How did you handle aperture control? I presume there's a commercial solution (novoflex??), though it's not cheao if I remember right - is that what you used?

hi bob, you've commented on another thread about the reversed 18-55 so i guess you know the answers now...