Old vs New Lens..

I recently purchased a Digital Rebel XTi w/out the lens. I am currently using my non-digital Rebel SLR lens and am too green to tell the difference between a lens made for digital vs non-digital.
What are the benefits to getting a made for digital lens and what can I expect to pay?

The benefits of a made for digital lens?
Not a lot, apart from cost.
It won't fit on the film camera, so you can't share it between bodies.

The rebel has a sensor smaller than the size of a 35mm film frame, so you won't be using the edges of the lens' field which means what you get will be often sharper at the edges with a made for film lens than a digital lens.

L series lenses are better sealed against the elements than the digital lenses.

And that cropping of the centre of the frame on the XTi means with the 1.6 crop factor you get an effective 600mm from a 400mm lens.

Thanks for your help, Wombat!:thumbsup:

Forgot to say I bought the EF-S 10-22 and now regret it.
Because it's the EF-S for the 1.6 crop bodies, I can't use it on my new 1D.
But it's a pretty good lens for the 20D (and the XTi)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Welby4404

I recently purchased a Digital Rebel XTi w/out the lens. I am currently using my non-digital Rebel SLR lens and am too green to tell the difference between a lens made for digital vs non-digital.
What are the benefits to getting a made for digital lens and what can I expect to pay?

---

Let's be precise - when people say "made for digital" they mean made for the APS-C sensor size, like you have on your digital rebel. They do not cover the larger frame format of your film Rebel. So "made for digital" has two advantages:

1. The lens is optimised for use on a digital sensor. This means that the light tends to hit the sensor head-on and not at an angle, especially in the corners. Film is sensitive to light coming from any direction but digital sensors have micro-lenses that can only cope with light up to a certain angle. The lens usually has minimum chomatic aberration and maximum sharpness to make the most of the digital sensor layout.
2. The lens is designed to cover a smaller format so it can be made smaller and the lens designer can do some more daring things than with a film format lens, without sacrificing quality. Look at the Nikon 18-70 and 18-200 VR as examples.

Charles

Merci, Charles..

One important made for digital difference is that the at least the rear element of the lens is coated to prevent internal reflection. Sensors are much more reflective than film and some older lens have a rear element that can bounce enough light back to the sensor to cause problems. There are more and more lens types appearing that are optimized with a variety of elements that work better isna DSLR than some of the units they are superseding.

If you have a question on a specific lens, post a question!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Franglais

Let's be precise - when people say "made for digital" they mean made for the APS-C sensor size, like you have on your digital rebel.

Charles

---

Canon doesn't produce an APS-C sensor. They have an APS-H size and one other besides full-frame.

APS-C is a 1.5 crop factor, the Canon sensors are 1.6 crop factor.

But the gist of the above post is correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by danag42

Canon doesn't produce an APS-C sensor. They have an APS-H size and one other besides full-frame.

APS-C is a 1.5 crop factor, the Canon sensors are 1.6 crop factor.

But the gist of the above post is correct.

---

Canon does refer to their 1.6x as an APS-C. Their 1.3x as an APS-H and their full frame as full frame :)

I may be wrong, but I don't think there is a standardized definition of what is an APS-C. Just a smaller sensor to Brand-X's larger (but still less than full frame) sensor.

I stumbled on your site and boards, and I'm glad I did. I have a question along the lines of the current topic. I have owned an OM10 and an OM2 for many years, and I am very happy with their pictures. I have accumulated quite a variety of lenses, filters, etc, for them, and am now considering a digital SLR. My first choice would be the Rebel, but I was wondering if it would be worth my while to consider an Olympus? Will my OM series Zuiko lenses and filters work on the Olympus digitals, like the Evolt 500? That could be a major factor in my choice of DSLRs, as I have invested quite a lot over the last 20 years in assessories.

Thanks All, and happy holidays!

Doug

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Doug Knight[/b

I was wondering if it would be worth my while to consider an Olympus? Will my OM series Zuiko lenses and filters work on the Olympus digitals, like the Evolt 500?

---

NO

Quote:

---

That could be a major factor in my choice of DSLRs, as I have invested quite a lot over the last 20 years in assessories.

---

Consider the Nikon D40, th Pentax K100D (in-body image stabilization) and the Sony as well as the Canon.