| Author |
Message |
blinztree
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 1875
Location: Beats me... I'm Lost!
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:52 pm
|  |
Okay, I know these are miles apart but if you had only a choice to pick one lens, would you rather pick wildlife or landscapes for stock? |
|
geoffwnz
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 174
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:12 pm
| |
Wildlife. :-)
But can I have something bigger than 200mm? :-D |
|
blinztree
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 1875
Location: Beats me... I'm Lost!
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:25 pm
| |
On a APS-C sensor, the 200mm will be the equivalent of 300mm, that is food for thought ;-) |
|
geoffwnz
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 174
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:28 pm
| |
| blinztree wrote: | | On a APS-C sensor, the 200mm will be the equivalent of 300mm, that is food for thought ;-) |
Yep, I know. Use an 18-200 currently on a 7D.
Sometimes a 70-300 also. |
|
blinztree
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 1875
Location: Beats me... I'm Lost!
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 10:33 pm
| |
If you are using the kit lens, it would be designed for a APS-C sensor so there is no extra "gain". The gain is only when you mount a FF lens on a APS-C camera. |
|
geoffwnz
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 174
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:00 pm
| |
| blinztree wrote: | | If you are using the kit lens, it would be designed for a APS-C sensor so there is no extra "gain". The gain is only when you mount a FF lens on a APS-C camera. |
Not a kit lens as such, but it is an EF-S lens, so designed for the APS-C indeed.
That would get all kinds of confusing then. When is an 18mm actually an 18mm?
Only if it's an EF 18mm on a FF camera?
And would then an 18mm EF-S be 18mm on an APS-C camera, not 28.8?
I don't have a FF camera handy to compare against. |
|
blinztree
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 1875
Location: Beats me... I'm Lost!
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:11 pm
| |
The specs of the lens indicating that it is a full frame lens is marked by FF/ FX. If your lens does not have this specs, it means it is a APS-C lens. The cost of a FF lens is also more expensive than a APS-C lens (larger glass).
When you mount a APS-C 18mm lens on a APS-C camera, the true range is 18mm. If you mount a FF 18mm lens on a APS-C camera, the FF 18mm len's view is about 35mm (I think). You could be right on the nail about the 28.8mm gain. The additional magnification is not necessary a good thing, depending on your school of thought.
If you mount an FF/ FX 18mm lens on a FF camera, the true range is 18mm. But you can't mount a ASP-C lens on a FF camera as there will be some degree of distortion.
Don't worry about all that jazz. Your lens are sufficient good enough to make good quality stock images. Just enjoy that and not fret too much. ';-) |
|
ruxpriencdiam
Joined: 07 May 2009
Posts: 26293
Location: Third Stone from the Sun
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:38 pm
| |
And you cant use an EF-S lens on a full frame camera. |
|
jadams08
Joined: 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 33
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:46 pm
| |
What's EF-S?
Are you guys talking about canon and I'm always looking at nikon. Or it's just because I haven't gotten to that yet in my lens learning. |
|
blinztree
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 1875
Location: Beats me... I'm Lost!
|
|
Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 11:53 pm
| |
Okay, if you have tried to use a APS-C lens on a FF camera, it may turn out to be like this...
 |
|
peteklinger
Joined: 01 Aug 2007
Posts: 1030
Location: Great Place By a Great Lake
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 1:22 am
| |
Full Sensor  vs  Crop Sensor
A telephoto at 200mm, (same lens both images, only the camera is changed) is still only 200mm. All you are doing is CROPPING the image. It doesn't magically become a 300mm.
You gain nothing in magnification, the perception that it's closer because the field of view is smaller. Then people blow it up and, hey... identical to digital zoom.
Yes blinztree it's possible that a crop sensor lens, will lose the image around the edges. |
|
blinztree
Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 1875
Location: Beats me... I'm Lost!
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:44 am
| |
Agreed, Pete... what is why magnification is a "gain" |
|
geoffwnz
Joined: 10 Feb 2012
Posts: 174
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:20 pm
| |
| blinztree wrote: |
Don't worry about all that jazz. Your lens are sufficient good enough to make good quality stock images. Just enjoy that and not fret too much. ';-) |
Yep, at the end of the day you can only use what ever focal length it has on the camera. So I never worried too much about what the equivalent ratios are. Either it's wide/tele enough or it isn't. |
|
copidosoma
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 3802
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 5:34 pm
| |
I find that landscapes sell better than wildlife but I enjoy wildlife photography much more. 200mm is not really what I'd call a "wildlife" lens. I often struggle at 300mm on an aps-c. Frankly, I got some grizzly photos with it one year and didn't feel particularly safe at all. |
|
copidosoma
Joined: 17 Nov 2009
Posts: 3802
Location: Canada
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2012 5:39 pm
| |
| peteklinger wrote: | Full Sensor vs Crop Sensor
A telephoto at 200mm, (same lens both images, only the camera is changed) is still only 200mm. All you are doing is CROPPING the image. It doesn't magically become a 300mm.
You gain nothing in magnification, the perception that it's closer because the field of view is smaller. Then people blow it up and, hey... identical to digital zoom.
Yes blinztree it's possible that a crop sensor lens, will lose the image around the edges. |
Assuming the same size of pixels (microsites on the sensor) of course ;)
Comparing an image taken with a 5DII and a 7D (same distance from subject, same lens etc) will give very different results. |
|
| |
|
Log in
