Home · Register · Software · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
  

APS-C and Glass
  
 
MiRunner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · APS-C and Glass


Is the only 'good' glass an 'L' Canon Lens for APS-C? I thought I had some good glass with the 10-18mm and Sigma 30mm f1.4. I'm going to upgrading to the 80D, I have no interest in video, so it's all for stills. The camera comes with the EF-S 18-135mm USM. What are some good glass lenses that I should put on my wish list for landscapes/city/travel/wildlife/pets, no portraits or video. Thank you


Sep 02, 2017 at 09:45 AM
johnctharp
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · APS-C and Glass


Yes, but not much from Canon (or Nikon or Sony or...) in the standard zoom range.

The 18-135 STM isn't a bad lens for what it is, but it is slow.

Better would be Sigma's 17-50/2.8 OS, or the 17-70/2.8-4 OS | Contemporary. Along with the (very decent) 10-18, you're mostly set for everything except for wildlife.

For that, Canon's 55-250 IS STM is best in class.



Sep 02, 2017 at 10:16 AM
Ian.Dobinson
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · APS-C and Glass


Efs glass thats on a par with L glass

10-22 - I have no knowledge of the 10-18 but when I had my 10-22 it was a very good bit of glass.

17-55 / 2.8 - Up till I got my 24-70/4 IS on my FF loosing the 17-55 when i moved to FF was the only regret I had in the upgrade . It was a great lens that only my 24-70/4 has got on a par with (my old 24-105/4 couldn't hold a candle to it )

60/2.8 macro . great little macro lens

for Tele zooms i would still go the L route . the 70-200/4 IS works great on croppers and is a stop faster on the long end than most other options designed for crop



Sep 02, 2017 at 11:13 AM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · APS-C and Glass


I've been pleasantly surprised by how well the EF-S IS STM zooms perform, even in comparison with L-series lenses. The EF-S 10-18 IS STM isn't clear and sharp at the very edges, but it stands up very well across most of the frame. The 18-55 IS STM (3.5-5.6) and 55-250 IS STM are a bit better at the edges. In fact, my EF-S 55-250 IS STM is at least as good across the frame as my EF 70-2002/4L IS (on SL1). It'll be interesting to see how that holds up with the SL2, which I'll get tomorrow.

The EF-S 24/2.8 STM and EF 40/2.8 STM are also very well-suited for the smaller EF-S bodies. I think the biggest challenge is finding decent wide and ultra-wide lenses for EF-S, that are relatively small. I currently use the Samyang 14/2.8 UMC for a ~22mm lens on APS-C (which would fill the trunk on an old VW bug), and the Rokinon 10/2.8 is even bigger.

P.S. that's "STM" zooms for EF-S, not the earlier non-STM zooms.

P.P.S. I've found considerable variation of image quality between individual copies of "the same lens". My second EF-S 10-18 IS STM had much better edges than the first, and it took me three tries to get an EF-S 18-55 IS STM that's sharp across the frame. Given their relatively low cost (relative to L-series lenses), I don't mind flipping a few lenses to get a good one. IOW, if you get an EF-S IS STM lens that sucks, try another one.



Sep 02, 2017 at 11:22 AM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · APS-C and Glass


Here's a few of the comparison images that I've made, on which my comments above are based.



jcolwell 2017


Two EF-S 10-18 IS STM lenses, on SL1





jcolwell 2017


Three EF-S 18-55 IS STM lenses, on SL1





jcolwell 2017


22mm: (left) M5 with EF-M 11-22 (top) and EF-M 22/2 (bottom); (centre) SL1 + EF-S 18-55 IS STM (




Sep 02, 2017 at 11:41 AM
Cadaver
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · APS-C and Glass


To answer your question... "Is the only 'good' glass an 'L' Canon Lens for APS-C?". I have 5 "L" lenses and my 60mm 2.8 is sharper than all of them.


Sep 02, 2017 at 11:51 AM
technic
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · APS-C and Glass


jcolwell wrote:
I've been pleasantly surprised by how well the EF-S IS STM zooms perform, even in comparison with L-series lenses. The EF-S 10-18 IS STM isn't clear and sharp at the very edges, but it stands up very well across most of the frame. The 18-55 IS STM (3.5-5.6) and 55-250 IS STM are a bit better at the edges. In fact, my EF-S 55-250 IS STM is at least as good across the frame as my EF 70-2002/4L IS (on SL1). It'll be interesting to see how that holds up with the SL2, which I'll get tomorrow.

The EF-S 24/2.8 STM
...Show more

I have the 80D and the 10-18STM, 55-250STM and 15-85IS to name a few. The STM zooms are pretty sharp for their price/size, but a bit lackluster in rendering (color/contrast/detail contrast, difficult to say exactly what) compared to e.g. the 15-85IS, a simple 1.8/50 lens let alone a good L prime. You can compensate for the rendering to some extent by using a bit more USM/contrast because detail is OK but still, it's sad that nothing better is available in the WA range from Canon (the Samyang/Rokinon are too big/heavy for my taste, really niche lenses also because of MF but I guess they do provide nicer images).

On my 10-18 the loss in corner/border sharpness is so obvious that I discard quite a few images (cityscapes, where there often are buildings or other fine detail at the botoom) just because of this, fine detail really isn't there and things look too much 'stretched' towards the corners (lots of software magic going on, probably). I tried another copy which was very similar; I'm focusing with Liveview, usually outside the image center to compensate for mild field curvature. And closeup IQ is really terrible outside the image center. But if you don't need sharp corners e.g. for wide action shots it is a nice lens.

The 55-250STM is amazing for the size and money, but the IS at tele end and for closeups is almost ineffective; this is probably a difference with the much bigger L zooms (certainly with the 100-400II, I don't have experience with the 70-200L IS zooms). It has the same lack of punch compared to more expensive zooms/primes as the wider STM zooms, but maybe in this case that is also because I don't use a hood on this zoom (I do use a hood on my other lenses in the same range).

If you don't have a problem with the weight/size, the 15-85IS is probably the best standard zoom option on 80D (but I think it's too big/heavy for SL1/2).


Edited on Sep 02, 2017 at 12:09 PM · View previous versions



Sep 02, 2017 at 11:56 AM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · APS-C and Glass


The main driver for my EF-S exploration was my disappointement with EF-M lenses on the M5 (and M3). I had planned to migrate to EF-M for my light travel kit, and for hosting some Alt LM/LTM lenses, but my experience showed me that the EF-M lens image quality is consistently poor compared to EF-S, and wide/ultra-wide LM/LTM lenses perform poorly on the M5 (and on the Fuji X-E2, and on just about any unmodified, modern mirrorless camera).


Sep 02, 2017 at 12:03 PM
GC5
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · APS-C and Glass


jcolwell, my experience has been the opposite. the Ef-m 11-22 is a gem. The 22mm is a gem. The 18-55 and 18-150 are equal to or better than their ef-s equivalents. The 35 macro is excellent. The only one I didn't really like was the 55-200.

That said, the ef-s lenses are all pretty nice. The 55-250STM is excellent and an incredible bargain. The 60 macro (as mentioned above) is fabulous. The pancake primes are pretty good, but I found them to be a little slow in focusing.



Sep 02, 2017 at 07:48 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · APS-C and Glass


Go figure. I would explore the EF-M lenses a bit further, if not for the fact that all three of my EF-M zooms and my EF-M 22/2 are noticeably inferior to the comparable EF-S lenses (and XF lenses, and X100S...). Plus, the same EF-S lenses work just fine on the same M5. I much prefer the size of a three-zoom EF-M kit, but I much prefer the handling of the SL1 (which has to be better again, with the SL2).


Sep 02, 2017 at 08:19 PM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



CW100
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · APS-C and Glass


jcolwell wrote:
Go figure. I would explore the EF-M lenses a bit further, if not for the fact that all three of my EF-M zooms and my EF-M 22/2 are noticeably inferior to the comparable EF-S lenses (and XF lenses, and X100S...). Plus, the same EF-S lenses work just fine on the same M5. I much prefer the size of a three-zoom EF-M kit, but I much prefer the handling of the SL1 (which has to be better again, with the SL2).



actually the EF-M lens like the 22mm f/2 pancake lens has noticeably superior image quality compared to EF-S and "XF" lens (and they're cheaper!)
but yes, the M5 and EF-S lens work just fine ... and also EF telephoto lens

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless



Sep 02, 2017 at 10:36 PM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · APS-C and Glass


CW100 wrote:
actually the EF-M lens like the 22mm f/2 pancake lens has noticeably superior image quality compared to EF-S and "XF" lens (and they're cheaper!)


Based on my own experience, with my own EF-M and EF-S and XF lenses, that's not the case.



Sep 03, 2017 at 12:04 AM
MiRunner
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · APS-C and Glass


Thank you everyone.

Those of you with the EF-S 60mm what do,you use this for? Is the 40mm better suited on a crop then the 50mm f1.8?



Sep 03, 2017 at 12:40 AM
TeamSpeed
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · APS-C and Glass


The 60 is a 1:1 macro lens, so it can do things the 40mm and 50mm cannot.


Sep 03, 2017 at 12:49 AM
Jeff Nolten
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · APS-C and Glass


I have and like the 60 macro. Its about 100 mm FOV on APS-C which I find a useful reach. It has as good an image quality at both macro and infinity focus. It makes a nice portrait lens. Its a good useable physical size on both my 80D and my SL1. Its only drawbacks are that it doesn't have IS and doesn't have a focus limiter so it can hunt through its full range (macro to infinity) which can take some time. I generally grab the 100L because it has both but the 60 remains a useful part of my kit. As others have said above, IS is not as effective at true macro distances so some other form of stabilization may be required anyway. Did I mention it takes wonderful images?

I'll add that both it and the 24 mm STM have 52 mm filter sizes so these two primes might make a good primes only kit if you are into such things. Sort of equivalent to a 35 + 100 mm kit FF.



Sep 03, 2017 at 01:22 AM
Ernie Aubert
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · APS-C and Glass


I'll add another enthusiastic endorsement of the EF-S 60mm f2.8 macro.


Sep 03, 2017 at 03:20 AM
dhphoto
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · APS-C and Glass


Yes the Luxury (L) line of lenses are nicely made and some are water resistant (some require filters to complete this some not)

But they are not all inherently better than their non-L equivalents, in fact some L lenses (24-105, 17-40 and a few others) really aren't that spectacularly good.

They are all designed with full frame in mind though so may not be your best option. For general purpose shooting on an APS-C camera those often recognized as the best would be:

17-55mm 2.8 IS
10-22mm
60mm macro

Personally my holiday crop camera kit comprises:

10-18mm STM, 18-55mm STM, 55-250 STM, 24mm STM

And I'm generally satisfied with the IQ from those.



Sep 03, 2017 at 07:29 AM
technic
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · APS-C and Glass


CW100 wrote:
actually the EF-M lens like the 22mm f/2 pancake lens has noticeably superior image quality compared to EF-S and "XF" lens (and they're cheaper!)
but yes, the M5 and EF-S lens work just fine ... and also EF telephoto lens

www.flickr.com/photos/mmirrorless


Interesting topic ... theoretically the mirrorless ones could be optically superior because there is more design freedom; whether that better quality is realized in practice is the question, with mirrorless there might be more incentive to keep the lens small because that was supposedly the main attraction of those cameras. Opinions about optical quality compared to DSLR lenses certainly vary strongly.

Will be interesting to see what optical quality the rumored G1X III offers in a probably similar form factor. Recent examples of premium fixed lens cameras shows that the lenses are often superior to ILC lenses (if any comparison exists at all, because fixed lenses are often 1-2 steps brighter than ILC versions; one would have to compare with e.g. an SL2 with the 15-85IS).



Sep 03, 2017 at 07:59 AM
Gochugogi
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · APS-C and Glass


The only EF-M lens I owned that was a bit weak in the IQ department was the 15-45 IS STM. The EF-M 22 was a real gem albeit I'm not fond of using the M series cameras and greatly prefer the SL1 as a wee camera. SL1 handling is much better and I seem to prefer OVF over EVF. I should sell my M stuff and get a SL2...


Sep 03, 2017 at 09:09 AM
jcolwell
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · APS-C and Glass


Gochugogi wrote:
... I should sell my M stuff and get a SL2...


That's what I'm doing. Although, I'm doing it in the reverse order, and I've only got half the job done.



Sep 03, 2017 at 09:51 AM
1
       2       3       4       end






FM Forums | Canon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       3       4       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username     Reset password