Digital SLR Cameras Forum

Digital SLRs Forum Discuss digital SLRs, lenses, RAW conversion, or anything else related to digital SLRs. You may also want to see the Nikon, Canon, and Sony camera forums.
Digital Camera Pro Reviews >>
Read and Write Digital SLR Reviews >>
Digital SLR Buyer's Guide >>
Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    Junior Member siberia1997's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Lawrenceville, GA
    Posts
    29

    Question digital lens vs 35 mm lens

    I'm getting ready to invest in a 20D. I have a couple of Sigmas and a Tamron for my Rebel 2000 right now, but none quite as fast as I'd like (fastest is 28-80/f3.5-5.6). I really like what I've read about the Sigma 70-200/f2.8, but it's not "made" for digital. Sigma sells an 18-125/f3.5-5.6 DC that is "made" for digital but I'd like something a little faster.

    Am I correct in that the image circle is designed to match the size of the image sensor of digital SLR cameras on Sigmas DC? What, if anything, do I lose by not going with a DC?

    Thanks.

  2. #2
    Be serious Franglais's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    3,367

    Re: digital lens vs 35 mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by siberia1997
    I'm getting ready to invest in a 20D. I have a couple of Sigmas and a Tamron for my Rebel 2000 right now, but none quite as fast as I'd like (fastest is 28-80/f3.5-5.6). I really like what I've read about the Sigma 70-200/f2.8, but it's not "made" for digital. Sigma sells an 18-125/f3.5-5.6 DC that is "made" for digital but I'd like something a little faster.

    Am I correct in that the image circle is designed to match the size of the image sensor of digital SLR cameras on Sigmas DC? What, if anything, do I lose by not going with a DC?

    Thanks.
    Its not the size of the image circle that's important. Designed-for-film lenses have a larger image circle than designed-for digital ones, so there's no problem with coverage. There are two other problems:

    1. A film image is made up of grain set out in three coloured layers on top of one another. To make a white spot, the "target" is fairly large. In digital, on the other hand, the three colour sensors that make up each pixel are set out side-by-side. In order for a white spot to come out white, the lens has to render it very precisely, with no blurring caused by chromatic aberration. Designed-for-digital lenses have high definition and low chromatic aberration..

    2. Film is flat and light hitting it at most angles will expose it correctly. Digital sensors are often in the form of pits and light hitting the sensor at an oblique angle might not reach the base of the pits. Designed-for-digital lenses are usually designed so that the light comes out of the rear of the lens so it hits the sensor squarely.

    Bear in mind that the 8Mpix 20D has small sensors and is particularly sensitive to these problems.

    Hence - the lenses that give you satisfaction on your Rebel might not be satisfactory on the 20D. To do it justice you may need high-end lenses.

    Charles

  3. #3
    Techno Junkie peted56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Canberra, ACT, Australia
    Posts
    50

    Re: digital lens vs 35 mm lens

    So really to be fair to consumers (all people that buy cameras, pro and amateur) manufacturers should abandon small sensors and only use film size sensors.

  4. #4
    Be serious Franglais's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    3,367

    Alternatively..

    Quote Originally Posted by peted56
    So really to be fair to consumers (all people that buy cameras, pro and amateur) manufacturers should abandon small sensors and only use film size sensors.
    The cost of the sensor increases exponentially with its size. The few cameras out there with film-size sensors are so expensive that only professionals can afford them.

    If you want to put everyone on the same foot then you drop film-sized sensors and only use the small ones, with lenses that are optimised for them. But personally I like the idea of having a wide choice. Small sensors, 24x36, digital backs for medium format, film - let the consumer decide.

    Charles
    BTW Put a low-end film lens on a camera with a film-sized sensor and small pixels like the Canon 1DS Mark II and it's still not going to perform. This sort of camera needs excellent lenses (not that I've got one..)
    Last edited by Franglais; 02-18-2005 at 11:39 PM. Reason: Added the bit about cheap lens not being suited

  5. #5
    jph
    jph is offline
    Junior Member jph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    4

    Re: digital lens vs 35 mm lens

    Quote Originally Posted by siberia1997
    I'm getting ready to invest in a 20D. I have a couple of Sigmas and a Tamron for my Rebel 2000 right now, but none quite as fast as I'd like (fastest is 28-80/f3.5-5.6). I really like what I've read about the Sigma 70-200/f2.8, but it's not "made" for digital. Sigma sells an 18-125/f3.5-5.6 DC that is "made" for digital but I'd like something a little faster.

    Am I correct in that the image circle is designed to match the size of the image sensor of digital SLR cameras on Sigmas DC? What, if anything, do I lose by not going with a DC?

    Thanks.
    A couple of things to consider:

    If you ever intend to buy a camera with a larger sensor, you will have to buy new lenses.

    There is a trade off in lens design with size of the image circle and resolution. In theory, the smaller image circle should make it easier to obtain higher resolution (lines/mm).

    The lenses designed for APS C sensors should be smaller and lighter.

    Jim

  6. #6
    Liz
    Liz is offline
    Moderator Emeritus Liz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    5,983

    Question Further clarification please????

    First let me say, that I don't always perfectly comprehend the technical aspects - so in layman's terms. ;)

    I'm planning on purchasing the new Rebel 300 XT. It has a new kind of sensor. I have 3 Canon lenses: 17-40mm/f4L - 50mm/f1.4 - 85mm/f1.8. Will they do as well with this camera?

    Thanks.

    Liz

    Quote Originally Posted by Franglais
    The cost of the sensor increases exponentially with its size. The few cameras out there with film-size sensors are so expensive that only professionals can afford them.

    If you want to put everyone on the same foot then you drop film-sized sensors and only use the small ones, with lenses that are optimised for them. But personally I like the idea of having a wide choice. Small sensors, 24x36, digital backs for medium format, film - let the consumer decide.

    Charles
    BTW Put a low-end film lens on a camera with a film-sized sensor and small pixels like the Canon 1DS Mark II and it's still not going to perform. This sort of camera needs excellent lenses (not that I've got one..)

  7. #7
    jph
    jph is offline
    Junior Member jph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    CA
    Posts
    4

    Re: Further clarification please????

    [QUOTE=Liz]First let me say, that I don't always perfectly comprehend the technical aspects - so in layman's terms. ;)

    I'm planning on purchasing the new Rebel 300 XT. It has a new kind of sensor. I have 3 Canon lenses: 17-40mm/f4L - 50mm/f1.4 - 85mm/f1.8. Will they do as well with this camera?

    Thanks.

    Liz[/QUOTE

    Yes. Good choices. I have the 17-40. Worked great on my 10D and my 1ds.

  8. #8
    Liz
    Liz is offline
    Moderator Emeritus Liz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    5,983

    Cool Thank you!

    Thank you for your quick reply. The 17-40 is my favorite lens. Actually it's my all time favorite lenses - and I've had a few others. ;)

    Liz

    [/QUOTE Yes. Good choices. I have the 17-40. Worked great on my 10D and my 1ds.[/QUOTE]

  9. #9
    Be serious Franglais's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    3,367

    Re: Further clarification please????

    Quote Originally Posted by Liz
    First let me say, that I don't always perfectly comprehend the technical aspects - so in layman's terms. ;)

    I'm planning on purchasing the new Rebel 300 XT. It has a new kind of sensor. I have 3 Canon lenses: 17-40mm/f4L - 50mm/f1.4 - 85mm/f1.8. Will they do as well with this camera?

    Thanks.

    Liz
    It looks like the Rebel XT sensor is very similar to the 20D sensor and I haven't seen any tests indicating these lenses are not suited to the 20D. The 17-40 does about as well as the designed-for-digital 18-55 and 17-85 EF-S lenses.

    Sorry I took so long in replying. I'm travelling a lot at the moment.

    Charles

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Apple Valley, Ca - USA
    Posts
    588

    Re: Further clarification please????

    Quote Originally Posted by Franglais
    It looks like the Rebel XT sensor is very similar to the 20D sensor and I haven't seen any tests indicating these lenses are not suited to the 20D. The 17-40 does about as well as the designed-for-digital 18-55 and 17-85 EF-S lenses.

    Sorry I took so long in replying. I'm travelling a lot at the moment.

    Charles
    I was wondering about these digital specific lenses too. I am also looking at the 20D, but in the future would like to get a new film SLR too, so not being able to use the same lens back a forth is a drag.

    Do these digital specific lenses still have the 1.5x focal length multiplier or are the focal lenths already corrected for 35mm equivlents?

    Edit: Also, how good or bad is the kit lens that comes with the 20D?
    Last edited by Ultra Magnus; 03-08-2005 at 08:08 AM.

  11. #11
    Panarus biarmicus Moderator (Sports) SmartWombat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    11,750

    Re: Further clarification please????

    I'm using only one of the short focus EFS lenses, the 10-22.
    All the others are EF L series and work pretty well.

    I'm surprised at the image quality of the kit lens, given that it felt rubbish in my hand.
    Manual focussing on the front element it slopped up and down so much I could move the focus point from below to above someone's eye at 15 feet.

    But a friend of mine bought the kit and no other lenses and it's working out fine.

    Your existing Canon lenses should serve you well, if you like really wide angle thouugh you might want to consider the EFS 10-22 because of the 1.5x multiplier.
    PAul

    Scroll down to the Sports Forum and post your sports pictures !

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Canon EOS 20D
    By Hightree in forum Camera News & Rumors
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 02-17-2005, 06:30 PM
  2. Lens for digital slr vs. 35 mm slr
    By siberia1997 in forum Digital Cameras - General
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-14-2005, 07:58 PM
  3. digital lens vs 35 mm lens
    By siberia1997 in forum Help Files
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-14-2005, 04:12 PM
  4. digital lens vs. 35 mm lens
    By siberia1997 in forum Digital SLRs
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-14-2005, 01:17 PM
  5. Press Release: 8 Megapixel Canon PowerShot Pro1
    By Photo-John in forum Camera News & Rumors
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-09-2004, 02:55 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •