WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

I realize that gear is irrelevant and that a real photographer can take Net Geo quality pictures with a disposable camera but. (For those who don't get it right off this statement is made in jest, tongue in cheek, sarcastically)
I'm not nearly that talented so I need a " gear edge", when I choose to afford it.

Having cleared that up

Lately I find myself thinking of a new to me lens to fill the gap between my 18-55 ef-s (kit lens) and my 150-600 Tamron G2 for use on my Canon 7dii.

First question, or clarification. The 18-55 ef-s 3.5-5.6 II is a kit lens that was supplied with a crop sensor Canon Rebel T3i.
It is my understanding that the stated focal range of 18-55 has already been "adjusted" to account for the 1.6 crop factor.
Am I correct in understanding that this 18-55, IF mounted on a ff body, would produce results similar to a 12- 35mm lens?

My 150-500 Tamron lens mounted on my 7dii has an effective focal length of 240-960mm due to the 1.6 crop factor.

I'm leaning towards filling the void between 55mm and 240 mm.
My first thought is that I shop for a 70-200 but that actually would only partly fill the gap because the 70-200 ends up a 112-320mm

The 70-200 or a 28-300 would probibly be a good step in the right direction, especially for close work with hummingbirds or action shooting of dolphins.

Yes it's my money and my decision.

However I thought it would be interesting to ask the UHH group for thoughts and suggestions to fill my gap.

BebuLamar

I take that you mean National Geographic, I don't know of any photo published in NG magazine shot with a disposable camera.

BebuLamar

No your 18-55mm won't become the 12-35mm lens on a FF body but then you don't consider to switch to a FF body then it's not relevant.

The 70-200 would not completely fill the gap. The gap is small between 55 and 70 and I don't think it's that important.

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

Are you saying that the 18-55 is a true 18-55 and not already "adjusted" for the crop factor?

BebuLamar

All of your lenses the 18-55 focal length are from 18-55mm. Your 150-600 focal length are 150-600mm.
When you put them on your APS-C camera the angle of view of your 18-55 is equivalent a 28-88mm lens on the full frame camera. If you put your 18-55 on the full frame camera you might get the angle of view of the 18-55mm but very likely you won't because the corner is likely to be vignetted especially toward the wide angle end.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The 18-55 is roughly 24-70 as a full-frame lens after the crop factor. That's why all the major cropped-sensor vendors have these 18-55 models in their kits. The lens you want for your EOS 7DII is the EF-S 18-135 IS. There's a few versions, all discontinued now I believe. I'd go with the final version, but any with IS is fine for they need you're looking to fill.

PHRubin Loc: Nashville TN USA

It is a true 18-55 and is a crop lens, meaning it will not fully cover a ff sensor. That is the meaning of the EF-S designation.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Moreover, the EF-S lenses do not physically mount to any full-frame EOS DSLRs.

BebuLamar

The 4mm from 24mm to 28mm is quite significant and I found the 18-55 is only equivalent to 28-88 when mounted on the crop sensor camera. So it's not quite wide enough.

WDCash Loc: Milford, Delaware, USA

Thanks all for clearing that up for me.

User ID

I would prefer 75-300 rather than 70-210 cuz reaching to 300 means less frequent need to deploy the behemoth just to reach past 200. Resserve the monster for its long end.

FWIW, I speak only in actual FLs. There is no reason to EVER discuss the bogus so-called equivalent FLs. Forget that. Avoid that. The actual FLs are the FLs that are marked on all interchangeable lenses.

---------------------------------------------

Some bridge cameras and other silly devices are marked in bogus FLs. Never buy one and youll never need to decipher its marked FLs. But if physical disability forces you to use a bridge camera, realize that there no need to care what its real FLs are. Just iignore them.

BebuLamar

Yeah the crop factor and 35mm equivalent focal length is the thing we should get rid off. Back in the old days we do have a lot of formats from Disc, 110 to 8x10, 11x14 but nobody back then talked about crop factor or 35mm equivalent.
Both the crop factor and 35mm equivalent are based on the assumption that most people know what kind of view they would get with certain FL on a 35mm camera. Well people get old and many people that are buying camera now never used the 35mm camera before.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Here is what you should be wanting : Sigma 17-70 f2.8-4 and the Canon 70-300 IS II nano. - Fantastic image quality at the most reasonably cost ! - and they dovetail together perfectly ! Ditch the kit lens you now have.
.

DaveyDitzer Loc: Western PA

I would guess that the kit lenses have almost no market value, so by "ditch" you really mean trash can?

User ID

If you may sometimes need a light weight lens AND if you can stick to favorable f/stops, then the kit lens remains useful and the results can be excellent.