Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Why are there no long EF-S lenses?

  1. #1
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    118
    Threads
    48
    Thank You Posts

    Default Why are there no long EF-S lenses?

    Consider an EF lens such as a Canon 400mm f/4 DO on an crop factor camera such as a Rebel or a 7D. My understanding is that the lens produces an image circle substantially larger than the sensor. (99% sure of that.) The extra light is effectively blocked somewhere in the camera. Not deliberately, but it just doesn't hit the sensor at all.

    Is the light path such that one could place black tape around the edges of the lens aperture without effecting the final image? I.e. could we block off the light that won't be used anyway on the lens aperture? (and if not, why not?)

    And if that is true, why does nobody make a long lens for EF-S cameras that produces the same light with a smaller size and aperture? I.e. why is there extra glass and weight we don't need? Is it simply that there's not a market for long lenses only for crop factor cameras? Or is there some part of the physics or lens design I'm misunderstanding?

    There are EF-S lenses with smaller image circles in the under 100mm range. Why is there nothing in the 100mm+ range?

  2. #2
    BPN Viewer
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Thailand
    Posts
    110
    Threads
    8
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    I'm pretty you got it right - market forces (or at least perceived market forces).
    There's actually a lot of movement in lens design and production now as far as I can tell, so companies need to prioritise, I reckon.

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,949
    Threads
    254
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elliotte Rusty Harold View Post
    Consider an EF lens such as a Canon 400mm f/4 DO on an crop factor camera such as a Rebel or a 7D. My understanding is that the lens produces an image circle substantially larger than the sensor. (99% sure of that.) The extra light is effectively blocked somewhere in the camera. Not deliberately, but it just doesn't hit the sensor at all.

    Is the light path such that one could place black tape around the edges of the lens aperture without effecting the final image? I.e. could we block off the light that won't be used anyway on the lens aperture? (and if not, why not?)
    Hi Elliot,
    You are correct that the EF lenses have a larger image circle. One can not block light near the lens because that is the out of focus light. It would be more like the effect of closing the aperture: you are blocking light from the edges of the lens so reducing light to the center of the field of view as well as the edge.

    Quote Originally Posted by Elliotte Rusty Harold View Post
    And if that is true, why does nobody make a long lens for EF-S cameras that produces the same light with a smaller size and aperture? I.e. why is there extra glass and weight we don't need? Is it simply that there's not a market for long lenses only for crop factor cameras? Or is there some part of the physics or lens design I'm misunderstanding?

    There are EF-S lenses with smaller image circles in the under 100mm range. Why is there nothing in the 100mm+ range?
    At longer focal lengths, it is easier to design lenses that cover the full 35 mm frame. Thus, it would actually cost more to produce two separate lines of lenses. And a cropped sensor uses the central part of the image circle where image quality is better. Producing an EFS lens to be better than that of the EF lens would be diminishing returns, especially to make it cheaper (which is the general idea of EFS lenses).

    At shorter focal lengths it is more difficult to make a lens with a large image circle, so a simpler design can be used for EFS and the smaller image circle, reducing cost and weight.

    Roger

  4. #4
    BPN Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Northern Rockies
    Posts
    1,273
    Threads
    106
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Wikipedia has a good discussion of EF-S lens.
    Andrew

  5. #5
    BPN Member Don Lacy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    SE Florida
    Posts
    3,566
    Threads
    348
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Hi Roger, Just curious isn't the aperture of the lens determine by the size of the front element the larger the element the faster the lens, in simple terms layman terms that is
    RThanks, Don
    Don Lacy
    You don't take a photograph, you make it - Ansel Adams
    There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs - Ansel Adams
    http://www.witnessnature.net/
    https://500px.com/lacy

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    3,949
    Threads
    254
    Thank You Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Don Lacy View Post
    Hi Roger, Just curious isn't the aperture of the lens determine by the size of the front element the larger the element the faster the lens, in simple terms layman terms that is
    RThanks, Don
    Hi Don,

    For a simple lens what you say is true, but camera lenses are anything but simple, especially wide angle lenses. The front element must field the light from many degrees off-axis, so must be much larger than the aperture. The iris diaphragm best defines the real aperture. More technically, the aperture is defined by the entrance pupil, which might be inside a piece of glass, or even outside the lens. In those cases, the iris diaphragm is placed at the next best location. For telephoto lenses, the front element is very close to describing the true aperture.

    Roger

Posting Permissions

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