Physical size of (EF-S) lenses

[paul_loader]

<p>I'm one of those people thinking about an EOS 60D, Pentax K5 and Nikon D7000 and I expect all meet or exceed my ability. I used to shoot film Nikon, sold it all and in recent years have used a mix of Panasonic LX2, Olympus E510 with twin lens kit and now a Samsung WB2000 as my pocket camera. Shooting is all amateur, family, outings, birds in the garden, nothing special and nothing sensational.</p>

<p>Against this context I have picked up all 3 of the potential bodies and the thing which has surprised me has been that whichever Canon is attached to an EOS body seems huge. I would like to find this isn't true as it is enough to steer me away from Canon.</p>

<p>The 50mm 1.8AF (non EF-S I recall) is okay but I would like to get a better understanding of how other lenses compare between the brands physically. If they are generally similar I won't discount the 60D, I like that equally in the hand to the K5, I like the D7000 less for some reason.</p>

[danield]

<p>Compared like-for-like, the Canon EF-S lenses are very similar in size with their counterparts from Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Sigma, Tamron, etc.</p>

<p>The EF-S lenses would be bigger than their equivalent lenses for the Olympus E510 because of the larger (APS-C) sensor area covered, the 4/3rds sensor used in the Olympus is about 60% of an APS-C sensor.</p>

<p>In the same way some of the EF-S lenses are smaller than their Canon EF (full frame) equivalents, these tend to be larger and heavier, again due to having to cover a larger image circle.</p>

<p>It would be helpful to indicate which lenses you are looking at specifically to give a more precise response</p>

[matthias_meixner2]

<blockquote>

<p>I would like to get a better understanding of how other lenses compare between the brands physically</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You can find this information easily in the specs of the different manufacturers. Normally they list physical dimensions and weight.</p>

[bkpix]

<p>The size of my Canon lenses was one reason I switched to Pentax two years ago.<br>

The Limited primes are especially nice in that regard. Canon and Nikon have no equivalent.</p>

 

[paul_loader]

<p>Thanks Gents, I meant to add I would be likely to look at the focal range of 28mm, 50mm, 80mm 105m, 135mm, 180mm and maybe 300mm. Of those, the 28mm for when I need it, such as indoors. 50mm to 135mm for casual portraits and capturing family in action whether head and shoulders, full length, family in the garden or out and about, 180mm to 300mm for more distance and less awareness of having their photo taken plus for the garden birds etc.</p>

<p>In focal length my Olympus E510 14-42mm and 40-150mm have been perfect (given their x 2 crop factor) but the image quality has not wowed me as I hoped (I tried other lenses too) and I intend to update the body rather than just a better lens. Alas the new and perhaps last E5 is very expensive and crossed off my list.</p>

<p>As mentioned, I can (and will) pore over the manufacturer's info and I'm not being lazy by asking. I have been surprised in store when handling EOS kit is all and thought Canon users might have some interesting perspectives. We are spoilt now with the range of formats and lens forms coming from 4/3, Samsung, Pentax primes and so on alongside FX&DX, EF&EF-S. Since I'm starting again and wanting more than just a pocket camera (good as the WB2000) then I'm trying to explore carefully.</p>

<p>That in itself is difficult given the poor level of reviews on the web. In the film era we got to understand our film preferences. Now I want to know how good the 18mp Canon, 16mp Nikon and 16mp Pentax sensors are, the metering, colour rendition and also the processing. The reviews are obsessed with noise and pixel peeping at the expense of it. When I read that someone is pleased with their new 60D compared with their D80 or D90 (or D7000 over D40, D50) it's not easy getting to understand by how much the latest generation of bodies are improving.</p>

<p>That's next week's homework though!</p>

[photos of hans koot]

<p>Hi Paul, I think as you well understand, the basics are very simple. Sensor size and having fast lens or not. These natural laws dictate the designs the builders can achieve. As good customers we would of course like to have a small but fast lens with a big sensor in a handy body....good luck with deciding<br>

cheers Hans</p>

[chip_degrace]

<p>the more i shoot, the more i appreciate the heft of a good lens. shoot daily with 70-200 2.8L is, and EFS 17-55 2.8 IS......i work out, just so I can lug around the big white one.</p>