EOS 70D Lens needed

[deeej]

Hello,

I have a Canon 70D, and everything works just fine, but I've read the pinned thread about "choosing the right DSLR" in the Photography section here, and I was wondering if anyone here could help me out with a few tips on what lens(es) to buy. Currently I've got the standart kit 18-135mm lens, but it's giving me red & green edges in Photoshop when zooming in.

 

Also, do EF lenses work well with the ASP-C sensor, and what's the lowest aperture I can make use of with the crop sensor?

 

Fredi

[AkiraDaarkst]

13 minutes ago, fredihaberg said:

Hello,

I have a Canon 70D, and everything works just fine, but I've read the pinned thread about "choosing the right DSLR" in the Photography section here, and I was wondering if anyone here could help me out with a few tips on what lens(es) to buy. Currently I've got the standart kit 18-135mm lens, but it's giving me red & green edges in Photoshop when zooming in.

 

Also, do EF lenses work well with the ASP-C sensor, and what's the lowest aperture I can make use of with the crop sensor?

 

Fredi

The general rule for Canon lenses is I believe:

• All lenses, EF and EF-S will mount on APS-C bodies
• Not all EF-S lenses will mount on Full Frame bodies, additionally EF-S lenses will cause vignetting on Full Frame bodies as the image circle they produce are smaller

Aperture has nothing to do with sensor size.  A lens that can go from f/1.4 to f/22 will retain that aperture range no matter the camera it is mounted on (full frame, APS-C, MFT, etc.)

 

The issue you see with Red and Green edges, are you talking about chromatic aberration?  Can you post an example photo or file that we can check?

[.spider.]

7 minutes ago, fredihaberg said:

 

Also, do EF lenses work well with the ASP-C sensor, and what's the lowest aperture I can make use of with the crop sensor?

 

The crop sensor doesn't limit the aperture 

[deeej]

13 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

The general rule for Canon lenses is I believe:

• All lenses, EF and EF-S will mount on APS-C bodies
• Not all EF-S lenses will mount on Full Frame bodies, additionally EF-S lenses will cause vignetting on Full Frame bodies as the image circle they produce are smaller

Aperture has nothing to do with sensor size.  A lens that can go from f/1.4 to f/22 will retain that aperture range no matter the camera it is mounted on (full frame, APS-C, MFT, etc.)

 

The issue you see with Red and Green edges, are you talking about chromatic aberration?  Can you post an example photo or file that we can check?

Sorry couldn't find any pictures so far, must be on one of the SD cards at home. And yes, it is exactly what you meant, "chromatic aberration". I know that it can be dealt with in Photoshop very easily, but it's just a pain in the ass.

[deeej]

13 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

- All lenses, EF and EF-S will mount on APS-C bodies

 

Aperture has nothing to do with sensor size.  A lens that can go from f/1.4 to f/22 will retain that aperture range no matter the camera it is mounted on (full frame, APS-C, MFT, etc.)

 

So what lenses could you reccomend to me? I was thinking about the "nifty 50", but with the 1.6x factor, that'd be more like 80mm, so I can scratch that..

[AkiraDaarkst]

1 hour ago, fredihaberg said:

So what lenses could you reccomend to me? I was thinking about the "nifty 50", but with the 1.6x factor, that'd be more like 80mm, so I can scratch that..

What do you want to do?  You choose a lens based on the things you want to do.

 

1 hour ago, fredihaberg said:

Sorry couldn't find any pictures so far, must be on one of the SD cards at home. And yes, it is exactly what you meant, "chromatic aberration". I know that it can be dealt with in Photoshop very easily, but it's just a pain in the ass.

Do you use Lightroom?  Or DxO Optics Pro?  Both have lens correction profiles you can apply, ACR in Photoshop should also have it.

[xQubeZx]

What lens you want heavily relies on what type of photography you want to do. For landacapes a lot of people will chose a wide angle lens. For portraits people usally have a slightly longer lens with a low aparture. For sports a good tele zoom can be nice but a wide angle can work too. To get something in between all a normal zoom can be great. (As a 24-70). 

 

 

But if you want a lens for portraits or "street photography" like a 35 1.8 or 35 1.4 could be nice as you are on a cropped body. 

 

For landscapes or astrophotography something along the lines of a 12 or 14mm 2.8 could be sweet. 

 

And for sports any fast tele zoom or if you can, get a used 70-200 f/4 as I have seen those for really good prices used. 

[xQubeZx]

Also want to add that Chromatic abberation are as you said annoying but incredible easy to fix in Lightroom with either a premade lens profile or making some manual adjustments. (I find the manual adjustments usally are better as the amount of CA can differ if you shoot straight into the sun or not for example.) 

 

However I can see you wanting a sharper and more specialized lens in some photography field wether it be portrait, landscape or sports. 

[.spider.]

5 hours ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

 Both have lens correction profiles you can apply, ACR in Photoshop should also have it.

Can't remove purple and green fringing. 

This has to be done manually. 

[deeej]

2 minutes ago, xQubeZx said:

What lens you want heavily relies on what type of photography you want to do. For landacapes a lot of people will chose a wide angle lens. For portraits people usally have a slightly longer lens with a low aparture. For sports a good tele zoom can be nice but a wide angle can work too. To get something in between all a normal zoom can be great. (As a 24-70). 

 

 

But if you want a lens for portraits or "street photography" like a 35 1.8 or 35 1.4 could be nice as you are on a cropped body. 

 

For landscapes or astrophotography something along the lines of a 12 or 14mm 2.8 could be sweet. 

 

And for sports any fast tele zoom or if you can, get a used 70-200 f/4 as I have seen those for really good prices used. 

Ok thanks, I probably won't need a telezoom in the near future, so you'd go with the EF 24-70mm lens and the 35mm one? For Landscape, etc..

[xQubeZx]

6 minutes ago, fredihaberg said:

Ok thanks, I probably won't need a telezoom in the near future, so you'd go with the EF 24-70mm lens and the 35mm one? For Landscape, etc..

This really depends. If you want a nice prime I would get the 35 1.8 or 1.4 but for a more allround lens I would get a 24-70 equivilent for the aps-c body, something like a 16-50 f/4 or 2.8 if you can shell out that amount of money. 

 

If I only was to use it for landscape I would get a really wide like a 14 or 12mm and some ND filters. (Not nessecary but I found out personally that I loved to use ND filters to create smooth clouds and water) 

[xQubeZx]

Something like the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 seems to be a great all round lens if you can pay that amount. It has a relativly wide angle of a 27 equivelent on a fullframe and a nice range to 55 (equivelent to something like 82mm) which will be nice for portraits. Along with a relative low aparture of 2.8 you will get a nice possibility for blurred out background. 

[xQubeZx]

Something like the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 seems to be a great all round lens if you can pay that amount. It has a relativly wide angle of a 27 equivelent on a fullframe and a nice range to 55 (equivelent to something like 82mm) which will be nice for portraits. Along with a relative low aparture of 2.8 you will get a nice possibility for blurred out background. 

[AkiraDaarkst]

18 minutes ago, fredihaberg said:

EF 24-70mm lens

I'd be reluctant to get this lens on a cropped sensor body.

 

1 minute ago, xQubeZx said:

Something like the Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 seems to be a great all round lens if you can pay that amount.

This kind of lens would be a better option for cropped cameras, know that Sigma also makes a similar focal range lens for cropped bodies.

[cc143]

20 minutes ago, fredihaberg said:

Ok thanks, I probably won't need a telezoom in the near future, so you'd go with the EF 24-70mm lens and the 35mm one? For Landscape, etc..

24-70s are in general not that cheap, but are great walk around lenses, they cover the most used focal lengths and come at a pretty fast f2.8 aperture, although you are looking at a price tag well into 4 figures for a new Canon one, with 3rd party lenses not being what i'd call affordable. 

 

A 35mm is basically a 50mm equivalent on an APS-C body, hence its like buying a nifty fifty, which is the focal roughly length equivalent to the framing of the human eye, i.e. what you see with your eyes is approximately what is in the frame. That's why it's used for street photography etc. I personally think a 50mm lens should be the first lens one buys, apart from their kit lens of course. 

 

But if you are looking to buy a lens for landscape photography on the canon side you are looking at a range between 16-40mm ish, i.e. wideangle lenses. I went with the 17-40mm f4.0L (bought it used for £300). Keep in mind that when shooting landscapes, aperture will be over f8, unless you are shooting skys at night etc. 

 

Just to confirm what has been mentioned above:

• Canon has a x1.6 crop factor, so the stated focal length and aperture should be multiplied by 1.6 to get the actual focal length and aperture. 
• EF and EF-S lenses work on all Canon bodies. 
• Full Frame Canon Camera's DO NOT (in general) support the use of EF-S lenses. (I believe you could theoretically damage the mirror assembly with some EF-S lenses on FF bodies, i.e. the kit 18-55, where the wide end actually extends the lens inwards). 

I kept away from EF-S lenses, in the beginning involuntarily, (i.e. it just happened) and afterwards knowingly, in case I ever upgraded to a Full Frame body. but there are several good EF-S lenses out there. 

[AkiraDaarkst]

5 minutes ago, cc143 said:

I kept away from EF-S lenses, in the beginning involuntarily, (i.e. it just happened) and afterwards knowingly, in case I ever upgraded to a Full Frame body. but there are several good EF-S lenses out there. 

@OP, only follow this plan of avoiding EF-S lenses if you actually have a plan to upgrade to Full Frame in the future.  If it is uncertain, I would advise avoiding this plan.  And Sigma is making fantastic lenses for cropped sensor bodies.

[cc143]

5 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

@OP, only follow this plan of avoiding EF-S lenses if you actually have a plan to upgrade to Full Frame in the future.  If it is uncertain, I would advise avoiding this plan.  And Sigma is making fantastic lenses for cropped sensor bodies.

I would avoid buying a large number of EF-S lenses,I would probably just get one 24-70mm f2.8 equivalent and buy EF for anything else. Although, at least for 1st party lenses, you actually do that anyway since most primes are EF and so are most "useful" tele lenses. In fact the only other lens I can think of that would be worth buying is the EF-S 24mm STM, which is a pancake lens. 

 

Sigma I know make a great 18-35mm f1.8, although I believe that to NOT be FF compatible, although I have not found specific mention of it in store websites.

 

Also, if you do go for a 24-70mm, prefer the Tamron over the sigma, its more expensive but said to be of much higher quality and has VR. 

[AkiraDaarkst]

1 minute ago, cc143 said:

Sigma I know make a great 18-35mm f1.8, although I believe that to NOT be FF compatible, although I have not found specific mention of it in store websites.

If the lens is labeled DC, it's not.  DC is to Nikon DX or Canon EF-S, while Sigma DG is to Nikon FX or Canon EF.

 

The vignetting of cropped sensor lenses tend to disappear on full frame cameras on the wide angle side of their zoom.  Or use the full frame camera in cropped sensor mode.  However, anyone who has a definite intention to invest in full frame in the future or already has full frame should always avoid cropped lenses of course.

 

Sigma makes two nice medium zoom lenses for APS-C bodies, the 18-35 f/1.8 and a 17-50 f/2.8.  Both are cheaper than a full frame medium zoom from a first party brand and both are good lenses.

[xQubeZx]

29 minutes ago, AkiraDaarkst said:

I'd be reluctant to get this lens on a cropped sensor body.

 

This kind of lens would be a better option for cropped cameras, know that Sigma also makes a similar focal range lens for cropped bodies.

I realised after that I didn't make it super clear that I meant a 24-70 equivilent on the aps-c body as I said below as you saw with the 17-55mm. 

[.spider.]

34 minutes ago, cc143 said:

 

• Canon has a x1.6 crop factor, so the stated focal length and aperture should be multiplied by 1.6 to get the actual focal length and aperture. 

The sensor size doesn't change the focal length. Just the field of view. 

And since the focal length is a property of the lens and not of the sensor size it should not be multiplied by 1.6

[cc143]

1 minute ago, .spider. said:

The sensor size doesn't change the focal length. Just the field of view. 

And since the focal length is a property of the lens and not of the sensor size it should not be multiplied by 1.6

What I mean is that the frame you look at on an FF camera at 24mm is equivalent to that of an APS-C camera at ~17mm. So yes, you still have to be at say .5m away from your object to focus, but the framing will be different. Thus, for the sake of simplicity, APS-C 17mm is equivalent to 24mm on a FF sensor. It's an easier way to understand why the framing of FF cameras is wider than that of APS-C cameras, regardless of the fact that the same lens is used.