Please don't start an EF-S is a dead-end thread

[derek_linney]

With the announcement of the EOS 5D I predict lots of rants about Full

Frame is the future and that EF-S will be a short lived dead-end. I

welcome the announcement of the 5D and I am sure that many EOS Forum

contibutors will aspire to such a camera. BUT, 1.6 crop is not going

to go away! The Rebel XT / 350D will continue to outsell the 20D which

I predict will outsell the 5D which may well outsell the 1D/1DS.

<p>

This forum's members represent, generally, people to whom photography

is important and who are prepared to spend more money than the average

amateur photographer on equipment. We need to remember that the vast

majority of photgraphers are not going to be able / prepared to spend

the sort of money that the 5D represents. So the 1.6 crop factor

DSLR's will still represent the vast majority of camera shipments.

<p>

The great thing with the EOS range is that we have the choice:

affordable 1.6 crop DSLR or professional quality full-frame while

every other manufacturer forces digital users into cropped format.

[bobatkins]

Of course EF-S isn't dead.

 

The question is what will happen if sensor costs ever become a fairly small fraction of total camera cost. Right now FF sensors are clearly very expensive, though the price of a FF camera has now fallen by more than a factor of two ($8000 to $3300). What will happen to EF-S if a FF camera is available for $1500 or even $1000 is anyone's guess.

I suspect there may always be a market for very cheap DSLRs with 1.6x sensors, but my guess is that the price point where 1.6x and FF diverge will become ever lower. Though we won't see a FF DSLR at $1500 this year or next year, I have no doubt that we WILL see one before too long. I'd say 3 years isn't out of the question.

[andy_van_eynde]

Why are FF only equiped for EF lenses?

 

Is there a negative thing about putting the same mounting type on them like there is on a 20d or 350d (something to do with sealing or so)?

 

Then there wouldn't be any problem with this EF-S lens.

 

Andy

[panos_voudouris]

"Why are FF only equiped for EF lenses?"

 

A FF mirror will hit the back of an EF-S lens. Plus an EF-S lens has smaller coverage so that even if the mirror didn't hit it you would have a black circle on the outer part of your image.

 

On the EF-S dead discussion, even if FF sensors are cheap, EF-S will still be cheaper and I guess some people will always opt for one with the smaller and lighter EF-S lenses.

[derek_linney]

Andy, the problem is that EF-S lens are not just about the mount, its also the image circle which is smaller than full-frame so you would get extreme vignetting at the corners of the frame and maybe even just a circular image. The same is true for all lenses designed specifically for 1.5 or 1.6 factor DSLR's

[paul -]

As others have said, the image circle projected by an EF-S lens will not cover an entire Full Frame sensor, even if it could physically be mounted. See <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00DGEq">this thread</a> for a visual of an EF-S lens' coverage on a 1.3x or Full Frame sensor.

[andy_van_eynde]

Thanks guys...didn't think about the larger senor.

[andy_van_eynde]

Thanks guys...didn't think about the larger senor.

[jean_jacques_lemaire]

I also think that APS-C and EF-S aren't dead at all (anyway, it's speculation). With APS-c, you also get a smaller camera with still a very nice image quality. It's really an interesting factor if you bring your camera oudoors, when biking, trekking, or anything else.<BR>

<BR>The bad counterpart is that i'm afraid that "L" quality won't come anymore for these sensors, at least from Canon. At least, they may produce some "L-light" lens but nothing more now you get FF for any professional or (very-)enthou$ia$tic amateur.

[danield]

Yes, EF-S is not dead but it has the sword hanging over its head.

 

Canon did not just release another EF-S lens. It released 2 new full-frame EF lenses. EF-S will die slowly by not being developped and just becoming obsolete. Canon already has enough EF-S lenses for the 1.6 crop price range (i.e. wide, standard and macro).

 

Yes, you will probably be able to use an EF-S lens for many years to come but why would you do so other than for the next couple of years? For a system to survive as the EOS system has it has to be consistent over years and price ranges. The current pressure from digicam and compacts reaching 10Mp is forcing Canon to get back to sanity and build on the EF system that integrates and offers flexibility and growth potential. The EF-S contraption doesn't. EF-S cameras it will just be swamped by any other digicam on the market in about a year.

[mawz]

The only thing that's dead about EF-S is the chance of seeing L glass in EF-S. Now that Canon is committed to full-frame in it's pro line, we won't see fixed aperture or L zooms in EF-S.

[wingedrabbit]

And film isn't dead either. Doah!<br>

<br>

Sorry, couldn't resist.<br>

<br>

<br>

<i>I'll have to start saving for the 5D</i>

[jean_jacques_lemaire]

OK, no L lens in EF-S... but Canon is not the only lens maker for Canon mounts ;) Certain other produce excellent lens too, at an acceptable price for APS-C customers.

Yes, full frame will certainly be accessible to advanced amateurs in a couple of years... but meanwhile, APS-C is not cr*p.<BR>

Anybody has thoughts about cleaning an APS-C sensor vs a FF sensor ? ;)

[oak_nj]

Maybe in the future, digital SLRs will be able to change their sensor size and focusing distance, essentially having a larger one that can function as a smaller one. So, if someone buys a digital SLR, he or she can use the advantages of either the full-framed or 1.6 crop sensor, or maybe any variation in between. In fact, maybe a camera will be able to incorporate an even larger sensor size equivalent to medium format. This might necessitate a new type of medium format EOS lenses.

[Greg M]

EF-S lenses are not a dead end, but for many they are no longer viable.

 

Over the next 2-4 years my purchases are going to be geared towards the eventual purchase of a 35mm sensor sized DSLR, so the last thing I'm going to burn $800 on is a 10-22 EFS when my current 17-40 is wide enough today for me on my 10D and I'll be right back to where I was with my EOS 3 when I do get my new full frame DSLR.

 

What it DOES mean is there are now many fewer people who will be in the market for these more expensive EFS lenses.

[dogbert]

Interestingly rather than merge their 1D line Canon have chosen to use FF sensors to make the 5D and keep a crop factor with the 1D Mark II N. We have also had a few threads of recent days with people reluctant to go FF becuase of what they will lose on the tele end. Cropping FF is not quite the same it seems. My prediction is that the future holds multiple sensor sizes and Canon may stick with the 1.3 as a pro sports/pj camera despite their murmerings in the past that they would merge the 1D line.

 

Unlike film, I can't see any reason why sensors need to settle on a particular standard.

[kevin_harper]

"Please don't start an EF-S is a dead-end thread"

 

Haven't you just done so?! Ironic no?

[jon_austin]

Geoff Francis: "My prediction is that the future holds multiple sensor sizes and Canon may stick with the 1.3 as a pro sports/pj camera despite their murmerings in the past that they would merge the 1D line. Unlike film, I can't see any reason why sensors need to settle on a particular standard."

 

Eventually, the cost to manufacture FF sensors will fall to the point that it no longer makes sense for a company like Canon to continue to carry both cropped and full-frame product lines. While it's obvious that a smaller sensor will always cost less to produce than a larger one (all other factors being equal), there are substantial marketing and product management costs involved in maintaining the separate product lines. At some point (which now appears to be less than 5 years out), watch for all Canon dSLRs to be full frame.

 

Panos Voudouris "... even if FF sensors are cheap, EF-S will still be cheaper and I guess some people will always opt for one with the smaller and lighter EF-S lenses."

 

Possibly -- despite the higher prices of EF-S lenses -- so long as they are still available for sale.

 

Joe Dietz: "Maybe in the future, digital SLRs will be able to change their sensor size and focusing distance, essentially having a larger one that can function as a smaller one. So, if someone buys a digital SLR, he or she can use the advantages of either the full-framed or 1.6 crop sensor, or maybe any variation in between."

 

Anyone with a full-frame dSLR can do what you've described today (and many do), simply by cropping in post-processing.

[dogbert]

If Canon have enough sensors to put into a 5D, which is obvioulsy going to be a bigger seller than their 1D Mark II N, why didn't they put FF into the 1D Mark II N? Unless the pixel density of the FF sensors reaches that of the crop sensors, you will lose resolution by cropping FF to 1.6.

[danield]

"If Canon have enough sensors to put into a 5D, which is obvioulsy going to be a bigger seller than their 1D Mark II N, why didn't they put FF into the 1D Mark II N?"

 

The reason is price and target market. A 1D-II N with a bigger sensor would cost more than the current one. And there is a 1DsII for people that want more. Even with a FF sensor, there is still quite a jump from the 5D to a 1DII - esp. in durability and control layout, if not in price. I think lots of people used to the 1-series will still prefer the 1D-II N, even with a smaller sensor, if they can't afford a 1DsII.

[jean_jacques_lemaire]

So, let Canon split the "problem" in two:<BR>

use square sensors of 22mm for each side (so still compatible with EF-S lens), and FF (EF-range).<BR>

or as APS-C is becoming a more "amateur" standard, give us 4:3 sensors (more vertical field of view, more interesting for portrait, images directly useable as wallpaper)<BR>

no? ;)<BR>

[dogbert]

For those that are interested in the FF versus APS-C wars, it is amusing to read the Nikon threads on this as a counter point to the debate in the Canon forum. The balance of opinion in the Canon threads seems to be that FF will eventually kill off APS (admittedly I have a dissenting view at this stage), while in the Nikon forums the balance of opnion seems to be that there is no need for FF.

[kevin_harper]

It's just as well that Nikon users don't feel the need for a FF camera.

[jon_austin]

Geoff Francis: "The balance of opinion in the Canon threads seems to be that FF will eventually kill off APS (admittedly I have a dissenting view at this stage), while in the Nikon forums the balance of opnion seems to be that there is no need for FF."

 

Yes, it's an interesting (and engaging) controversy. The "need" clearly seems to me to *either* build FF dSLRs to obtain the optimum, originally intended functionality from the current line of 35mm-image-circle lenses (EF in Canon-speak; I'm not conversant in Nikonese), *or* to conversely design and produce a new line of lenses tailored to the cropped-sensor dSLR body.

[Greg M]

I wouldn't expect the Nikon Forum to be saying anything diffetent- they've never had the option. If Nikon announced one tomorrow, all that talk would change.