Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
Experience with prime lens on Crop Bodies
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
Jun 25, 2021 19:46:43   #
bigguytf
 
Thanks all for your answers.

Reply
Jun 25, 2021 21:11:02   #
BebuLamar
 
User ID wrote:
Amen.

Try explaining that around here. All the bozos will deny it, and your supporters will post so much technobabble and math that the bozos will be all the more certain that you and your supporters must be toadally wrong.

I stand with you on this one. But then, I’m just here for the entertainment ....


Yes SIR I make no money with photography. Fun is all that counts.

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 06:52:02   #
uhaas2009
 
By Nikon it’s smarter to have FF lenses what can be used on crop and FF. Would be this not the same for canon????

Reply
 
 
Jun 26, 2021 08:35:01   #
larryepage Loc: North Texas area
 
uhaas2009 wrote:
By Nikon it’s smarter to have FF lenses what can be used on crop and FF. Would be this not the same for canon????


I have watched, read, and studied the argument claiming that for some inherent reason, crop lenses perform better on crop cameras that full-time lenses just by virtue of being crop lenses. It is specious, vacuous, and stupid, and either ignores or misapplies basic principles of physics. Anyone who wants to believe that drivel is certainly free to do so, but that does not make it true.

The only possible disadvantage is if some light from the larger image struck an area that for some reason was unpainted and reflected around and hit the sensor in a random spot. The lens makes the image that the lens makes. Same image on any camera or sensor.

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 08:58:55   #
joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois
 
bigguytf wrote:
Does anyone have experience with using either a 20mm 2.8 or 24mm 2.8 canon lens on a Canon 1.6 camera.
Is it worth getting a wide angle prime lens to use on a crop body or just use a wide angel zoom? I know from experience that usually a prime lens gives you a better capture but with wide angle does it also work out that way?
I have a Canon 10-18 but I was thinking about investing in a 20mm or 24mm 2.8 prime. But if I would not see a significant difference in picture quality it might not be worth the money.
Any thoughts appreciated.
Does anyone have experience with using either a 20... (show quote)


The notion that full frame lenses perform better on crop bodies is a myth.


(Download)


(Download)

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 09:09:17   #
ELNikkor
 
What CHG said. You'd be paying out a lot for very marginal, if at all noticeable, improvement in image quality, and that only at the edges.

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 09:27:23   #
MountainDave
 
I do have some hands on experience. My 2nd camera is a 77D which I use mainly for hiking and climbing. I no longer have any EF-S lenses. Mostly I use my 24-70 2.8L II with it which works great and has an equivalent FOV of 38-112. If I think I'm going to need a wider lens, I'll choose the 16-35 4L IS. However, sometimes I'll want to bring a 70-200 or 100 2.8 and team it with a small, wider prime to save weight. I have used the 24 2.8 IS which produces terrific images, but at 38mm equivalent, they can't be called wide. I also like the 40mm pancake and the 35 2.0 IS. I have read that the 24 EF-S pancake is very good and the 38mm FOV is highly useful. I went with the EF version because I could use it on both my cameras. It looks like Canon has been eliminating a number of EF primes lately including the 24 IS, 28 IS and 40 2.8. You might still be able to find one in dealer's stock or a gray market example. O/w, it's the used marketplace where they seem to sell for pretty high prices.

Reply
 
 
Jun 26, 2021 09:38:02   #
reguli Loc: Uruguay
 
I have a Canon 24mm f2.8 IS that I have used for several years with a Canon 7D and it is spectacular. I love prime lenses because they behave better than zomm lenses although they have not the versatile as zoom lenses. But one very important feature is the vigneting is much lower than full frame. The question is if you need a prime lens when you have a magnific 10-18mm. If you want to have a prime lens 50mm or 85mm for portrait I would say yes, but a 20 or 24mm to increase very little your focal and loose the zoom I would say no

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 10:00:28   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
joer wrote:
The notion that full frame lenses perform better on crop bodies is a myth.


Regardless of whether it is or it isn’t a myth, it depends on the lens and this “demonstration” misses a critical point. The sharpness figures that DXO publishes are in equivalent MP. Since the D800 is 36MP and the D500 is 20, of course the lens provides higher sharpness IN MP on a higher resolution body.

The arguments for using a FF lens on a crop body are:
1) since you are using the center of the lens, you “miss” the corner aberrations and light fall off that is typical of most lenses when used wide open
2) the higher end lenses from manufacturers that produce both APSC and FF lenses (sturdier build quality, fluorite elements, faster max aperture, long, fast teles and special purpose lenses such as T/S) are almost always FF lenses
3) they provide a path to FF (if that’s your ultimate goal) without having to replace all your lenses

The arguments for crop lenses on crop bodies are:
1) lighter weight and smaller size
2) potentially lower cost (but not always).

In the end, it depends on the individual lens (and it’s quality), manufacturer and the application (including speed, FL and special features). In the Canon world, if you want very fast lenses, long fast teles, rugged pro grade build quality, fluorite elements or special purpose lenses, they will be FF. Now whether you prefer primes or zooms depends not so much on IQ as the best zooms are excellent (although the very best lenses in that respect do tend to be primes), it’s more a question of max aperture (the fastest lenses are almost always primes) and size/weight vs versatility. As I progress farther into photography over the decades, more and more I’m buying just primes (for the speed and weight) and “zooming with my feet” (where possible).

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 11:10:47   #
gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast
 
I have a Sigma 10-20 on my Nikon D7200. Gives me a 15-30 range. You should be able to find it in a Canon mount or another brand with similar range.

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 11:57:28   #
User ID
 
BebuLamar wrote:
Yes SIR I make no money with photography. Fun is all that counts.

It’s one thing to enjoy your photography as fun in cases where it’s always been that way. It’s even greater fun ( personal guesstimate) when one formerly did it for pay and now no longer answer to anyone else about what to do photographically.

It’s one thing to enjoy freedom, and it’s yet another thing to enjoy freedom AFTER decades of “shackles”. Laissez les bon temps rouler !

When reading about competitions with rules etc I laff a bit inside. To me, rules are shackles and judges are clients and why would I go back there, or why would anyone ever go there voluntarily without getting paid ?!?!? Try taking your blue ribbons to the bank :-/

Reply
 
 
Jun 26, 2021 12:25:50   #
joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois
 
TriX wrote:
Regardless of whether it is or it isn’t a myth, it depends on the lens and this “demonstration” misses a critical point. The sharpness figures that DXO publishes are in equivalent MP. Since the D800 is 36MP and the D500 is 20, of course the lens provides higher sharpness IN MP on a higher resolution body.

The arguments for using a FF lens on a crop body are:
1) since you are using the center of the lens, you “miss” the corner aberrations and light fall off that is typical of most lenses when used wide open
2) the higher end lenses from manufacturers that produce both APSC and FF lenses (sturdier build quality, fluorite elements, faster max aperture, long, fast teles and special purpose lenses such as T/S) are almost always FF lenses
3) they provide a path to FF (if that’s your ultimate goal) without having to replace all your lenses

The arguments for crop lenses on crop bodies are:
1) lighter weight and smaller size
2) potentially lower cost (but not always).

In the end, it depends on the individual lens (and it’s quality), manufacturer and the application (including speed, FL and special features). In the Canon world, if you want very fast lenses, long fast teles, rugged pro grade build quality, fluorite elements or special purpose lenses, they will be FF. Now whether you prefer primes or zooms depends not so much on IQ as the best zooms are excellent (although the very best lenses in that respect do tend to be primes), it’s more a question of max aperture (the fastest lenses are almost always primes) and size/weight vs versatility. As I progress farther into photography over the decades, more and more I’m buying just primes (for the speed and weight) and “zooming with my feet” (where possible).
Regardless of whether it is or it isn’t a myth, it... (show quote)


Where is your data? Everything else is opinion.

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 12:35:59   #
User ID
 
joer wrote:
Where is your data? Everything else is opinion.

Nope. No data required. You are wrong to polarize opinion vs data. The great middle ground, whose value you seem to deny, is occupied by common sense.

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 13:01:16   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
joer wrote:
Where is your data? Everything else is opinion.


With all due respect, I believe you are misunderstanding the specification and the principle. Read the DXO testing methodology and understand their “sharpness” measurement (and the resolution specs for the D500 and the D800) and all will hopefully become clear. You can pick almost any FF lens you like and it will be capable of producing a higher resolution final result in DXO’s sharpness testing on a higher resolution body (FF or crop) unless the lens is so poor that it is the limiting factor.

Reply
Jun 26, 2021 13:06:42   #
User ID
 
larryepage wrote:
I have watched, read, and studied the argument claiming that for some inherent reason, crop lenses perform better on crop cameras that full-time lenses just by virtue of being crop lenses. It is specious, vacuous, and stupid, and either ignores or misapplies basic principles of physics. Anyone who wants to believe that drivel is certainly free to do so, but that does not make it true.

The only possible disadvantage is if some light from the larger image struck an area that for some reason was unpainted and reflected around and hit the sensor in a random spot. The lens makes the image that the lens makes. Same image on any camera or sensor.
I have watched, read, and studied the argument cla... (show quote)

Easy fix. Use an “undersized” hood.

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 4 next> last>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.