User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  0
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: 28mm to 24mm ?

  1. #1
    Today may be the day, Or not ! Roosta's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Jul 2010
    Location
    Perth Northern Suburbs
    Posts
    3,712
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    28mm to 24mm ?

    Does anybody know why Canon went from 28 - xx mm and 28 - xxx mm to 24 - xx mm and 24 - xxx mm with the current EF lenses?

    There used to be a largish range of 28 mm + zooms, what has come over to the new range are 24mm - +++ and the rest discontinued.

    I understand they're wider, but 4mm isn't a great deal given the zoom range.

    There must have been a solid reason behind -redesigning and re-engineering.

    Just curious I guess..
    They call me "Blue" it's a red head thing.
    "My Flickr Site"
    Canon Bodies - 1DMk2N + 50D - Lenses - 17-35mm F2.8 L - 24-70mm F2.8 L - 70-200mm F2.8 L - 300mm F4 IS L - Sigma 18-50mm F2.8 - Sigma 10-20mm
    " I Never get tired of looking at our diverse country, even if its through the lens of someone else".
    CC is always appreciated.


  2. #2
    Ausphotography Irregular Warbler's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2012
    Location
    Rockyview
    Posts
    2,027
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    APS-C perhaps? Digital I think had a lot to do with it. 4mm is noticeable at the wide end.

  3. #3
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,759
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I think the tendency is to go as wide as they dare too, and conversely as long as they can afford too within the budget constraints of the marketing plan!

    So taking the popular and common 24-70mm focal length range:
    You'll probably notice that over the years, zoom lenses have dwindled from 35-70mm zooms down to 28-70mm zooms, and finally settled(ATM) at mainly 24-70mm ranges.
    I dunno if Canon have these focal length ranges in any of their zoom lenses, but Nikon have had over the years, and the lenses have got better with each incarnation.

    Optics technology drives the numbers game, and if were reasonably)possible, I think manufacturers would ideally love to make for us a nice well rounded all purpose 10-1000mm f/2.8 lenses we all seem to dream of.

    I guess in the years to come, those 24-xx lenses will look more like 22-xx mm or 20-xx mm lenses.
    Nikon D800E, D300, D70s
    {Nikon} -> 50/1.2 : 500/8(CPU'd) : 105/2.8VR Micro : 180/2.8ais : 105mm f/1.8ais : 24mm/2ais
    {Sigma}; ->10-20/4-5.6 : 50/1.4 : 12-24/4.5-5.6II : 150-600mm|S
    {Tamron}; -> 17-50/2.8 : 28-75/2.8 : 70-200/2.8 : 300/2.8 SP MF : 24-70/2.8VC


  4. #4
    Today may be the day, Or not !
    Threadstarter
    Roosta's Avatar
    Join Date
    31 Jul 2010
    Location
    Perth Northern Suburbs
    Posts
    3,712
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Warbler View Post
    APS-C perhaps? Digital I think had a lot to do with it. 4mm is noticeable at the wide end.
    There all EF lenses mate, so designed for FF not APS-C. The APS-C will effect the EFOV not some much a need to re-design the EF lens range, I'd guess.

    My guess is Glass technology, but that's a guess.

    Quote Originally Posted by arthurking83 View Post
    I think the tendency is to go as wide as they dare too, and conversely as long as they can afford too within the budget constraints of the marketing plan!

    So taking the popular and common 24-70mm focal length range:
    You'll probably notice that over the years, zoom lenses have dwindled from 35-70mm zooms down to 28-70mm zooms, and finally settled(ATM) at mainly 24-70mm ranges.
    I dunno if Canon have these focal length ranges in any of their zoom lenses, but Nikon have had over the years, and the lenses have got better with each incarnation.

    Optics technology drives the numbers game, and if were reasonably)possible, I think manufacturers would ideally love to make for us a nice well rounded all purpose 10-1000mm f/2.8 lenses we all seem to dream of.

    I guess in the years to come, those 24-xx lenses will look more like 22-xx mm or 20-xx mm lenses.
    Maybe it was to come into line with Nikon - Not sure which came first AK, Nikon/Nikkor or Canon with the 24 - XX ?

    Sign me up for the 10 - 1000 mm F 2.8 though.

  5. #5
    Sir Rattus79 - The Proclaimant
    Join Date
    15 Jul 2010
    Location
    Forest Lake
    Posts
    1,948
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    10 - 1000 mm F 2.8
    Hmmmn....

    I might even be swayed to the dark side for one of those except for 2 little things I can think of.

    1) Price - my arms are long and my pockets are not so deep
    2) weight - My arms may be long, but they have little to no discernable strength, hell Shooting a 2 hr play with the 70-200 2.8 on damn near wore me out!
    Greg Bartle,
    I have a Pentax and I'm not afraid to use it.
    Pentax K5
    Sigma 10-20 | Tamron 17-50 F:2.8 | Sigma 50 F:1.4 | Sigma 70-200 F:2.8 Plus a bunch of Ye Olde lenses


    Would you like to see more?
    http://flickr.com/photosbygreg

  6. #6
    Ausphotography Irregular Warbler's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 2012
    Location
    Rockyview
    Posts
    2,027
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Roosta View Post
    There all EF lenses mate, so designed for FF not APS-C. The APS-C will effect the EFOV not some much a need to re-design the EF lens range, I'd guess.

    My guess is Glass technology, but that's a guess.
    EF and EF-S refer to the mount Roosta, not the sensor size that I was referring to. There were no full frame sensors when Canon sold its first DSLRs. They were APS-C size. Digital and sensor size may have had nothing to do with the move to wider short ends on lenses, but it was an advantage for all those APS-C users who could not buy any EF-s "L" lenses.

    Yes, there are Canon APS-C cameras that will only take EF lenses. There are ever more wider wides out there on the market now. Sure it may just be coincidence that we're all digital now, but I suspect that these companies spend their research dollars filling a need rather than just for the halibutt (one for AM there ).

    - - - Updated - - -

    Nothing to do with the above, but here is some history for you Roosta. The Original EOS1D was the model just before the one you have (excluding the non "n").

    Original 1D - http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos1d APS-H
    Original D30 - http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canond30 APS-C
    EF24-70F2.8L - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF_24%E2%80%9370mm_lens Released well after the 1D and D30 began Canon's exclusively digital journey to the present day.
    EF-S mount, first released in 2003. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EF-S_lens_mount First EF-S camera was the 20D.
    Last edited by Warbler; 06-03-2013 at 2:06pm.

  7. #7
    A royal pain in the bum! arthurking83's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 Jun 2006
    Location
    the worst house, in the best street
    Posts
    7,759
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Warbler View Post
    ...... They were APS-C size. Digital and sensor size may have had nothing to do with the move to wider short ends on lenses, but it was an advantage for all those APS-C users who could not buy any EF-s "L" lenses.

    ......
    I'm pretty sure that the onslaught of digital DSLR's in the APS-C format wouldn't have made any difference in the move from 28-xxmm lenses to 24-xxxmm lenses.
    (all the well known manufacturers have their 17(16)mm to 50(55)mm lenses for the APS-C format to cover this FOV).

    The reason is that on an APS-C sensor camera the difference between 28mm FOV and 24mm FOV is less significant(in percentage terms).
    The difference between those two focal lengths on a larger format imaging sensor is more significant.

    Whether it was Nikon, Canon or even Sigma that first went the 24-xx focal length range is not really relevant .. although I'm sure it was Sigma that first introduced the 24-xx f/2.8 lens type ... once one manufacturer goes this way, the others are bound to follow.

    Now that Tamron has introduced the first optically stabilised 24-70/2.8 lens, there's a good bet that Sigma are finishing the final engineering modifications on their OS version too now .. marketing is everything with these guys.
    Nikon and Canon will also follow suit in the foreseeable future.

    As long as IQ is maintained at a high level, the larger the focal length range, the greater the marketing position for that manufacturer.

    The difference between 24 and 28mm's(on full frame) is significant enough to warrant me (still in procrastination mode) spending money to augment my 28-75mm f/2.8 with a 24-70/2.8 as well.


    Tell 'ya what tho, I'd prefer to see a nicely engineered 24-70/2.0 lens before they look into the feasibility of widening the wide end, at least on those types of lenses.

    the 24-105(120) f/4 type lenses seem appealing in some ways, but I don't think I'd use that sort of lens much.

Posting Permissions

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