Crop from Canon EF lenses?

Soldato
Joined
10 Feb 2010
Posts
3,248
I'm saving up for my first DSLR after using my dad's D5000 for most of my photos so far, and I was originally going to be looking at the D3100, so that I could still use his kit lenses (Nikkor 17-55 and Tamron 70-300), but I also want to do a fair bit of video editing, and a fair bit of the ideas I have in my head need twixtor, so 60fps 720p footage would be awesome, from the 550d, as supposed to the 24-30fps you can get from equivalent Nikkons.

I was originally against getting the 550d as it would mean having to buy equivalent lenses again, but my Dad still has his (broken) EOS 600, and two EF lenses with it, a Sigma 24-70 and a Sigma 70-200. On wikipedia it says that you can use the EF lens mounts on EF-S cameras /albeit with a crop/. What would the crop be, exactly?

The lenses are in fine condition afaik, but I'll check them in person on Saturday, but those two lenses could make it possible for me to justify getting a 550d, so I was wondering if any of you knew more anything, maybe some of you use EF lenses on EF-S cameras?

Thanks in advance :)
 
Crop will be 1.6 on the 550D

I use EF and EF-S lenses on my 500D with no problem so you'll be fine.
 
The crop factor of 1.6 means that the 70-200 is an effective focal length of 112 - 320, on the 24-70 the effective focal length will be 38 - 112 so you will have wide angle through to telephoto covered.

The lenses will physically fit, but occasionally, depending on the age fo the Sigma lenses in question, they do not focus properly etc with the newer Canon bodies.

These problems are rare, but they do crop up and you're basically stuffed (they can be altered but it is pricey and a faff). I suggest taking the lenses with you to a camera shop and whacking them on a body before you buy, otherwise you've shot yourself in the foot.
 
^^ Thanks for the tip, I'd be fuming if that happened :) I'll check when I get a chance

Looking at lenses for the 550d, is the 50mm f/1.8 worth it? It's not quite as popular as Nikkon's 1.8 it seems, but it is a fair bit cheaper. I don't mind too much about the bokeh as very few situations I shoot lead to bokeh, but in case they do, how exactly does bokeh like this work?

5187579528_d8d95046ec.jpg


I understand how the bokeh itself is created by the photographer, but the actual physics of it are confusing me, i.e. how does having a huge piece of card on the lens not block out most of it :D
 
I don;t understand the piuece of card comment you made; the bokeh is due to the aperture of the lens, the fact that it is f/1.8 not f/3.5 like a std kit lens. The larger aperture gives a shallower DOF (depth of field - the distance within which items are in focus) and thus what is out of focus gives you your bokeh
 
As for the 50mm f1.8 - it is what it is a cheap lense with a wide aperture that can take good photos. It is not built to last, although won't fall apart so long as you look after it.

As a large aperture lens it allows bokeh, and is at its sharpest when stopped-down. The f1.4 is a much better lens, has more aperture blades and creates a smoother bokeh. There is debate over the f1.2 L - I rented one and thought it was great but decided it's not £1000 better than f1.4 for my needs so didn't buy it.

If you've got the cash and want a 50mm then the f1.4 is worth £270 ish that it costs to buy. There is also the Sigma 50mm f1.4 which is a nice lens but swapped back again for the canon f1.4 as its lighter and in the end I actually preferred the older, lighter, smaller canon lens over the newer, bigger, heavier, more expensive sigma.
 
But other than bokeh and build quality is there much to sell the 1.4 over the 1.8? There are plenty of other things I want to be adding to my photography setup, and a £270 lens is pushing it at the moment, I'd rather improve my photography for now then invest when I can actually justify it :)
 
Yes and no

But other than bokeh and build quality is there much to sell the 1.4 over the 1.8? There are plenty of other things I want to be adding to my photography setup, and a £270 lens is pushing it at the moment, I'd rather improve my photography for now then invest when I can actually justify it :)

Yes the 1.4 is far superior to the 1.8 and gives you more lattitude and is sharper at 1.8 than the f1.8 is. But the f1.8 is a capable lens and is better than any kit as most primes are so....

If you're starting out and you've got a list, then I'd go for the 1.8 at £75 ish and upgrade later. There's no need to rush if you've got multiple wants.
 
Actually... Now that I think about it:

If I go with the custom bokeh in the same way that the link does, would that mean I could still get circular bokeh from the 1.8?
 
I love my 50mm 1.8 its just an awesome lens to own and takes awesome shots its fixed 100% to my canon at all time! Saying that i only own 2 other lens.
 
Last edited:
Mp4, could you maybe try out the custom bokeh method in the link, and see if it's possible to get circular bokeh from the 1.8?
 
You could have a play

Mp4, could you maybe try out the custom bokeh method in the link, and see if it's possible to get circular bokeh from the 1.8?

But the f1.4 is a better lens with wider aperture, better glass and built to last, so its' not just the "circular bokeh" that is different - the f1.4 lens is just better in every way.

Always fun to be creative though!
 
Yes i know that :) This isn't a case of "if the circular bokeh trick doesn't work, I'll get a 1.4", it's just something that could be interesting :)
 
Let me know how it goes :)

The lenses seem to be in fairly good nick, given their age, but I haven't been able to test them except through the viewfinder on my dad's EOS 600, will probably check them some time soon, when I'm closer to having enough money to buy the 550d. I'm really not sure about the Sigmas' weird zooming ring/push action but I'll get used to it I guess :)
 
Back
Top Bottom