Personally, I
Personally, I
Nuero
Please forgive me but I
Canon EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF 24-105L, EF 50 f1.2L, EF 70-300L, 430EX.
"Criticism is something you can easily avoid, by saying nothing, doing nothing and being nothing." - Tara Moss
Originally Posted by Raid
Nope, you're both wrong (although neuro is more right).
17-55 and 70-200 leaves a 15mm gap in focal length.
.
17-55 in '35mm equivalent framing' is 27-88.
70-200 in '35mm equivalent framing' is 112-320.
so there's a '35mm equivalent framing' gap of 24mm.
.
only if it were a 55mm on FF body and 70mm on APS-C body, there'd be a '35mm equivalent framing' gap of 57mm.
(using the 17-55 on an APS-C body and 70-200 on FF, you'd have a '35mm equivalent framing' overlap of 18mm.
.
but point is, you won't miss the gap between them, using them on the same body, whether you call it 15 or 24mm.
.
Now there's a test, has anyone tried doing it? take an 85mm shot with a 15-85 lens, and a 55mm shot with the 17-55mm lens, crop it and scale it to same framing as the 85mm, which one is better?
An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
Gear Photos
Dr Croubie
The 17-55 is an EF-S lens and won
Canon EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF 24-105L, EF 50 f1.2L, EF 70-300L, 430EX.
"Criticism is something you can easily avoid, by saying nothing, doing nothing and being nothing." - Tara Moss
well yeah, but i meant any other lens at 55mm on a ff body, doesn
An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.
Gear Photos
Well, Raid, if you really want to get pedantic about it, focal length isthe physical distance which separates the rear nodal point of an infinity-focused lens from the image plane onto which the light passing through the lens is focused. Thus, focallength is an intrinsic property of a lens, and is unaffected by the mount format or the size of the sensor in the camera body to which the lens is attached. So, there is a 15mm gap in focal lengths between the 55mm long end of the 17-55mm and the 70mm wide end of the 70-200mm, because 70mm - 55mm = 15mm.
When you mount a 70-200mm lens on a crop body, photo elves do not magically transform it into a 112-320mm lens - the focal length remains 70-200mm, but you get the angles of view equivalent to a (hypothetical) 112-320mm lens on a FF camera. So, if you want to compare FF-equivalent angles of view, then Dr. Croubie is correct and there is a FF-equivalent gap of 24mm (i.e. the gap between 27-88mm and 112-320mm). It's irrelevant that the EF-S 17-55mm cannot mount on a FF camera, since when mounted on a crop body, it yields angles of view equivalent to a (hypothetical) 27-88mm lens on a FF camera.
Raid, it occurs to me that you might have a misconception about EF-S lenses (a fairly common one), that because they mount only to APS-C bodies, their focal lengths are 'corrected' for the APS-C sensor format, such that 55mm on an EF-S lens optically different from 55mm on an EF lens, so that the former gives the same angle of view on APS-C as the latter on FF. But, that's not the case - 55mm is 55mm, regardless of camera or mount format - it just results in a narrower angle of view on an APS-C camera.
So, my original statement, that the 17-55mm + 70-200mm provides coverage from 17-200mm with a 15mm gap, is technically correct. Since the OP has an APS-C camera, that statement could also be phrased as FF-equivalent coverge from 27-320mm with a 24mm gap.
Well said.
Are you sure? I was checking B&H and it seems they are out of magic photo elves. Do you realize how much money I could save on equipment with these elves.
Larry
Neuro's advice for a second lens is sound, the 17-55mm should cover you well however, I have never owned that lens so my statement is based on the lenses reputation.
I have owned these though:The 70-200mm II L that you have is an awesome lens and puts out very good quality. I am less of a fan of the 24-70mm and 24-105mm, I do not feel they match the quality of the 70-200mm, although they are very good lenses. My opinion is that the 16-35mm L II is a better lens than those two. Personally I cover the the short side of my kit with a 24mm and 35mm L andhardly everfind myself wanting a short zoom. ( I should qualify the statement, I haven't found any canon zoom that will match the 70-200mm II)
Good Luck.
Neuro & Dr. Croubie
You are correct and I apologize.
I’m so used to converting the FF lenses for a cropped body that I forget that the cropped body values are also converted.
Larry
An apology to you for pushing your post OT.
[:$]
Canon EOS 7D, EF-S 10-22, EF 24-105L, EF 50 f1.2L, EF 70-300L, 430EX.
"Criticism is something you can easily avoid, by saying nothing, doing nothing and being nothing." - Tara Moss
Yesthere hasDr, onlyI haven't seen one specificalyusing 55mm and 85mm it was other focal lengths,andtests with diffrentbodies.There was a test of the7d and 5d with different focal lengths to take the same area. There are allot of variables in this. Are you going to compare the 85mm L or the 70-200m L at 85mm compared to a cropped 17-55mm? Of course you realize that there are amultiple different ways to test this. Body vs Body, Lens vs Lens and an what seems like a long list of different combinations.
From all the other tests I have seen performed on other lenses, I would bet on the 85mm lens rather than the crop.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote