PatM Loc: Rocky Mount Mo.

Morning
Since I purchased the 80D I have learned a lot. I learned that the photography community is highly intelligent and at times very technical. Also learned a bit about photography and will continue education. I like taking photos and intend to improve.
Additionally I have learned that L series and art lenses, even used or refurbs are, with the exception of a few almost all out of depth of my pocketbook.
I have discovered the quality of the efs lenses I do have is far above the best photos I have ever before created. That is when I get things set right or use auto features. I will have to run across "Good Glass" at places like garage sales where they might Not know worth. But then I would feel guilty taking advantage of someone's lack of knowledge.
Anyway I know that full frame units and better lenses are the cats meow but this 80D is a marvelous piece of photography equipment at my level and I have come to accept the limitations of our budget. It is easy to read some of these comments or other groups and think i made a huge mistake buying an APS-C Machine.
Please don't be insulted by any of my comments. It isn't intended. This is a fine group to learn from. I have yet to post any photos. I'm a little self conscious.

OddJobber Loc: Portland, OR

Morning.

Marionsho Loc: Kansas

Good morning Pat,
Is there anything like a L series, or Art lens?

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

Is there some point to this??

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Better "Morning," than "Mourning."

Smudgey Loc: Ohio, Calif, Now Arizona

Well ok so be it!

ricardo7 Loc: Washington, DC - Santiago, Chile

I us a FF camera and L-series lenses and can attest to the quality
of that combination of gear, expecially when I make large prints
for gallery exhibition. HOWEVER, if you are only going to view
your pictures on a computer screen or make small (8x10 or less)
prints, the camera you are using is perfectly fine. FF and L-series
lenses might even be considered overkill.

rmorrison1116 Loc: Near Valley Forge, Pennsylvania

I'm not sure if you said you made a mistake by buying an APS-C body but if you feel that way from what you have read here, you are quite mistaken. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a crop sensor body and in some aspects, they perform better than a full frame. Your 80D is a technologically advanced camera compared to DSLR'S that were made just a few years ago. The DIGIC 6 processor does an excellent job handling electric noise. The concept that you can't make prints larger than letter size from a newer generation APS-C sensor image is nonsense.
I own both full frame and crop frame cameras. One of my 1.6 crop bodies is the 80D. One of my full frame cameras is the 5DSR, with more than twice the resolution of the 80D. Guess which one I use more often?!
There are several EF-S lenses that are well built and have excellent optics. They may not be built to L series standards, but they are very good lenses none the less. There are also good buys on eBay for older discontinued L series lenses. Also, Tamron is replacing many of their original SP series lenses with G2 versions, driving down the price on good used Tamron lenses. A good lens to have is the EF 24-105 f/4L IS, and with the growing popularity of the version II lens, you should be able to find a decent used one for around $500. That may sound like a lot but, it's a very versatile lens and it's less than your 80D cost.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

There are plenty of lenses in the Canon and Sony line-up that are just as good optically, but not in the same heavy-duty, weather-resistant body, even in the EF-S line-up. Don't buy into the top-line gear lust pushed especially hard on this site ...

dpullum Loc: Tampa Florida

Even very small sensor cameras like the Canon SX50 take excellent photos. Do not worry about the APS-C sensor. Composition is the key to photography. Grain off color and other such problems are ignored if the composition is telling a story well. Set your camera to 1/125 ... auto focus Read for DOF, depth of field... what is in focus :
https://www.nikonians.org/reviews/dof-and-hyperfocal-distance-tables-and-calculator

for composition:
http://truecenterpublishing.com/photopsy/article_index.htm

williejoha

If you are happy with your pictures, then what you are using is the right stuff. More expensive does not mean better if the new tool is way over your head. Be happy and keep on shooting.
WJH

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

There are several Canon EF-S lenses that rival the image quality of any L-Series or "Art" or "Sport" lens.

For example....

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM is one of the best ultrawides made by anyone. It's very well corrected, sharp from corner to corner and edge to edge, and highly flare resistant. Further, it uses one Ultra Low Dispersion element and three aspherical.... exotic elements such as you might find in advance Canon L-series wide angle lenses. For the money (under $300), the more plasticky EF-S 10-18mm IS STM is a bargain, too. Also capable of high image quality, it's one of the smallest, lightest and most affordable of the ultrawides... and it was the first and is still one of the few UWA zooms with stabilization (Nikon has since introduced one with VR and Tamron just recently updated their 12-24mm with VC, among other things).

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM is another high performance "crop only" lens that rivals and beats some L-series. For example, I'm always a fit sad to see folks buying an EF 17-40mm f/4L USM for use on their APS-C Canon.... That L not only doesn't have as good image quality as the EF-S 17-55mm, it also lacks IS, doesn't have as wide a range of focal lengths, and it's a stop slower! It strikes me as an opportunity missed, buying a 17-40L instead of an EF-S 17-55mm to use on any of the Canon APS-C models. In fact, with two aspherical and two UD elements the EF-S 17-55mm even out-performs all but the latest version of EF 16-35mm f/2.8L's. The full frame L-series have less corner and edge sharpness, as well as more vignetting. The EF 16-35mm f/2.8L III finally is comparable in image quality... but is considerably bigger and heavier, as well as a whole lot more expensive... and it doesn't have IS.

Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM is yet another excellent crop-only lens. It's image quality is very high, especially considering the range of focal lengths it covers while still managing to be reasonably compact. On an APS-C camera is gives roughly equivalent to 24mm to 135mm on full frame (which doesn't exist.... the closest are EF 24-105mm, EF 28-135mm, and much larger EF 28-200mm and EF 28-300mm lenses).

Finally, the EF-S 60mm f/2.8 USM Macro lens has image quality equal to all other Canon EF macro lenses, as well as macro lenses made by anyone else. Yes, a shorter focal length such as this puts you very close to a subject at full 1:1 magnification. But that's the case regardless of sensor format and may be a reasonable trade-off in order to have a lightweight macro lens compact enough to slip in a pocket or tuck into the corner of a camera bag.

FYI: Even if they rival or better the performance and image quality of L-series.... there will never be an EF-S L-series lens. Canon requires all L-series meet three criteria: To get a rest stripe painted on it a lens must 1. Be "built to the highest standards using advanced, cutting edge design and materials" (which is a bit subjective), 2. Must utilize "exotic" glass in it's optical formula and 3. Be fully compatible with all EOS cameras past, present and future. While some EF-S lenses meet the first and second criteria very well, none of them meet the third because they're limited to only fit and work on APS-C EOS cameras (beginning w/Digital Rebel/300D in 2003).

The great thing about an APS-C camera such as your 80D is that you can use both EF-S and EF lenses on it. You can literally select from any of the 125 million + lenses Canon has made the last 30 years and they will work fine on your camera. It's not the same with the so-called "full frame" models... those are limited to using only the EF lenses. Canon has a very good selection of those... around 65 models, in fact. But there are around 25 EF-S lenses that a full frame camera user can't take advantage of.... lenses that are often smaller, lighter and less expensive than the full-frame capable lenses they need to buy for their cameras.

Most people don't really need full frame cameras, anyway. They just think they do because they tend to judge their images at ridiculously high magnifications on their computer monitors. Displaying an image from a 24MP "at 100%" is like making a 40 inch by 60 inch print and then viewing it from 18 or 20" away, giving the image far closer scrutiny than they or anyone else is likely to ever do with a finished print, let alone online uses. Computer monitors often aren't that sharp and don't display the full dynamic range of images.... quality prints done on smooth, matte paper are always much sharper and show more detail both in shadows and in highlights. Not to mention, few people print as large as 16x24, let alone five feet wide... the way they're viewing the image on their computer screen! At more reasonable magnifications, close to how the image will actually be used, image made with the last few generations of crop sensor cameras are hard to distinguish from those out of full frame. So, IMO, a lot of FF users are just wasting their money, carrying around bigger/heavier gear that doesn't actually benefit them in any way, and have unnecessarily limited their lens choices and, in some cases, camera performance capabilities.

Where it probably makes the most sense to "step up" to L-series on an APS-C camera is with telephotos. The four EF 70-200mm L-series, 300mm f/4L, 100-400mm L II, 400mm f/5.6L and other telephoto Ls all have very, very good to excellent image quality, as well as high performance autofocus and, in most cases, helpful image stabilization. They also often have extra sealing for dust/weather resistance and durable builds for long, useful life even with hard use. These are a big step up from EF-S 55-250mm IS STM, although for what it costs that EF-S lens is actually quite good. (The EF 75-300mm III, non-IS, non-USM that's often bundled in kits by bargain retailers IS NOT very good... It's Canon's cheapest and worst telephoto zoom, with marginal image quality, slow/noisy AF and lacks image stabilization. The EF-S 55-250mm IS STM costs a little more but is well worth it. Or, any of the EF 70-300mm models can be better choices.)

So, have fun with your camera! You've made a good choice that should serve you well for some time to come.

P.S. I've sold 16x20" prints made from images taken with 8MP APS-C cameras (in some cases made with L-series lenses... but in other cases not). They're framed and hanging on customers' walls. The images out of my 20MP 7D Mark II APS-C cameras EASILY rival the quality of those out of my older 21MP 5D Mark II full frame camera.... unless you enlarge to insanely ridiculous sizes.

randygwatkins

I recently bought an 80D also, and have just purchased a Canon printer which will print 13X19 prints. Even though I'm still fine-tuning the post-processing and printing routines, the results are amazingly sharp, even with one of my EF-S Tamron lenses. I could afford a full frame camera but to be honest I don't think I need one to make incredibly sharp prints!

jmikulas Loc: Czech Rep./USA

Thank You "AMFOTO1" for the best article about Canon EF-S lenses. You have saved me a lots of $$$. I have 7DMark2, 10-22 EF-S, 50 f2.8, and 24-70L f4 - dreaming about full frame - You have cured my G.A.S. instantly!!! I will get 60 EF-S macro and more likely 70-200 L and one of those "pocket" toy cameras. Money saved will be used for the gas in my truck, taking pictures in AZ and Utah deserts. Thank You again, You have made my day!

PatM Loc: Rocky Mount Mo.

I as well am somewhat relieved by the assurances and information provided by AMFOTO1. I was happy and did not know it.
I might even post a photo in the future.