Canon film EF lens for canon DSLR + Are digi lenses of a given size the sames a film Lens sizes.

[BADGER.BRAD]

A friend has donated me an old Canon EOS300 (I think, I haven't got it yet) which I intend to use but I also intend to use its lens for a Canon EOS 10D DSLR which I have sitting in the cupboard. I have a couple of questions about this and DSLR lenses in general as I have little experience with them. I attempted to use some of my SLR lenses on the DSLR but found that they were not as wide angle. a 35mm lens would give the same angle (roughly) as a 50mm lens on an SLR. The first question is will the Canon film EF lens still have this affect on the DSLR ? and the second question is if I brought a lens designed for a DSLR of say 28mm would this have been corrected by design to be as wide angle as a 28mm on a film camera ?

Thanks for your help

 

[ancient_mariner]

I have a couple of questions about this and DSLR lenses in general as I have little experience with them. I attempted to use some of my SLR lenses on the DSLR but found that they were not as wide angle. a 35mm lens would give the same angle (roughly) as a 50mm lens on an SLR. The first question is will the Canon film EF lens still have this affect on the DSLR ?

Yes.

the second question is if I brought a lens designed for a DSLR of say 28mm would this have been corrected by design to be as wide angle as a 28mm on a film camera ?

Thanks for your help

A 28mm lens will always have the same field of view, however the DSLR will only use a small portion in the middle of the image so that 28mm lens will be effectively 44mm. 17-18mm on canon crop DSLR is about the equivalent of 28mm in full frame.

 

[Box Brownie]

The difference in angle of view is nothing in general to do with whether the body of film or digital!

It is because of the sensor size, by that I mean if you have a "full frame" Canon such a 5D you lens will show the same area as a 35mm film body.

However, a crop body as you mention above you need to multiply the Focal Length and hence to angle of view effect by x1.5 i.e. a 30mm lens will given image area approx equivalent to a 50mm lens.

Hope that makes sense

Ooops! Late to the party again because I take so long to post on my phone

 

[TheBigYin]

basically ef lenses are fine on film or digital, ef-s lenses are only any use on crop sensor digital, and will either not mount on film cameras, or, in the case of some ef-s mount lenses will mount but will either vignette to buggery or will foul the mirror on the camera - so, don't try them at home folks...

I cheerfully use my 17-40L and 75-210L on the EOS-3 and they work brilliantly - as does the 50 f1.8.

but 28mm is 28mm on whatever camera you mount it - it's just like the guys above have said - a crop sensor uses just the middle of the image circle projected by the lens. If I was to get an adaptor to mount the lovely Zenzanon 75mm f2 from my bronica on the EOS-3, it'd still look like I was using a 75mm lens - it's jsut that I'd only be using maybe half of the image circle the lens shows. And, if I then stuck it on the front of the 7D, it'd be using something like 1/4 of the image - I'm half tempted to try and make a tilt/shift mount/adaptor and see how things work out...

 

[BADGER.BRAD]

Thanks everyone much appreciated that all makes total sense but leads to another question which I probably know the answer to, Is the mirror in the DSLR set to such a degree that I will only ever see the same image in the view finder as the photo will be irregardless of lens size/type ? I take it this is the case.

 

[johnf3f]

A friend has donated me an old Canon EOS300 (I think, I haven't got it yet) which I intend to use but I also intend to use its lens for a Canon EOS 10D DSLR which I have sitting in the cupboard. I have a couple of questions about this and DSLR lenses in general as I have little experience with them. I attempted to use some of my SLR lenses on the DSLR but found that they were not as wide angle. a 35mm lens would give the same angle (roughly) as a 50mm lens on an SLR. The first question is will the Canon film EF lens still have this affect on the DSLR ? and the second question is if I brought a lens designed for a DSLR of say 28mm would this have been corrected by design to be as wide angle as a 28mm on a film camera ?

Thanks for your help

The Canon 10D has an EF mount so any lens that fits it will fit your EOS 300. The EOS 300 will appear to give a wider angle of view as the area (size) of 35mm film is quite a bit larger than the size of the sensor in the 10D.

I don't know what lenses you have but I have tried my EOS3 and 33V film cameras on modern L Series lenses - was VERY pleasantly surprised! The detail and resolution that film cameras can produce with good quality modern glass is surprisingly good. Yes it is different to digital but, for some specific circumstances, film is at least as good or possibly better?

Just my 2p but I find it difficult/impossible to reproduce the tonal quality of a good monochrome image printed by traditional methods with digital. Although I am wedded to digital I still feel that film still has it's place - especially for monochrome.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Thanks everyone much appreciated that all makes total sense but leads to another question which I probably know the answer to, Is the mirror in the DSLR set to such a degree that I will only ever see the same image in the view finder as the photo will be irregardless of lens size/type ? I take it this is the case.

Your question isn't entirely clear, but the image you see through the viewfinder of a DSLR should be effectively the same as the image you capture (give or take a bit when the VF offers <100% coverage).

 

[BADGER.BRAD]

I received the camera today unfortunately the lens is damaged and the internals jam the focusing ! So is unusable for the DSLR. I must say the camera in comparison to my other film cameras seems really naff being very plasticy (is that a word ?) the lens it's self seems the same compared to my Penticon stuff are they all made of plastic now ?

 

[dmb]

Note EF lenses will fit canon crop sensor DSLRs and Full Frame DSLRs and Film SLRs. EF-S lenses will not fit full frame DSLRs or Film SLRs as the fitting is different to prevent you putting them on as the larger mirrors on those cameras would hit the lens, crunch.

 

[PhilH04]

Note EF lenses will fit canon crop sensor DSLRs and Full Frame DSLRs and Film SLRs. EF-S lenses will not fit full frame DSLRs or Film SLRs as the fitting is different to prevent you putting them on as the larger mirrors on those cameras would hit the lens, crunch.

Also the 10D isn't compatible with EF-S lenses (or is it the other way round ), I believe EF-S lenses will need a modification to remove a tab or similar. (10D was introduced before EF-S)

 

[dmb]

Also the 10D isn't compatible with EF-S lenses (or is it the other way round ), I believe EF-S lenses will need a modification to remove a tab or similar. (10D was introduced before EF-S)

I'd forgotten that - Found an article suggests taking a hacksaw to the back of the EF-S lens - Nope! So 10D has to use EF lenses.

 

[ancient_mariner]

I received the camera today unfortunately the lens is damaged and the internals jam the focusing ! So is unusable for the DSLR. I must say the camera in comparison to my other film cameras seems really naff being very plasticy (is that a word ?) the lens it's self seems the same compared to my Penticon stuff are they all made of plastic now ?

Most lenses are plastic now, although in varying degrees of quality.

 

[johnf3f]

I received the camera today unfortunately the lens is damaged and the internals jam the focusing ! So is unusable for the DSLR. I must say the camera in comparison to my other film cameras seems really naff being very plasticy (is that a word ?) the lens it's self seems the same compared to my Penticon stuff are they all made of plastic now ?

The EOS 300 series are certainly very plasticky! There is a reason for that - they are made of plastic! That doesn't mean that they are not good cameras - they are! Remember that your 10D was a semi Pro camera the few could afford.

Pity about the the lens though.

 

[Phil V]

I received the camera today unfortunately the lens is damaged and the internals jam the focusing ! So is unusable for the DSLR. I must say the camera in comparison to my other film cameras seems really naff being very plasticy (is that a word ?) the lens it's self seems the same compared to my Penticon stuff are they all made of plastic now ?

The EOS300 was entry level, very cheaply built, and the kit lenses were a bit woeful (as were the early digital kit lenses).plenty of modern lenses are also fairly cheaply built, but perfectly serviceable.

 

[BADGER.BRAD]

The EOS 300 series are certainly very plasticky! There is a reason for that - they are made of plastic! That doesn't mean that they are not good cameras - they are! Remember that your 10D was a semi Pro camera the few could afford.

I didn't know the 10d was of that level John, I must admit it seems a nicely built bit of kit,very sturdy. Its a shame the lens is Kaput as I would have liked to give the film camera a go. As a point of interest does anyone know would the Praktica cameras and lenses have been costly at the time ? The reason I ask is my dad (that I inherited the cameras from) had a large collection of Praktica/Jenaflex cameras and Pentecon/Carl Zeiss lenses and a collection of Russian cameras Zenits and others, at the time I thought nothing of it really but I'm guessing now it must have been enough of a hobby to have spent a fair bit on !

 

[Phil V]

I didn't know the 10d was of that level John, I must admit it seems a nicely built bit of kit,very sturdy. Its a shame the lens is Kaput as I would have liked to give the film camera a go. As a point of interest does anyone know would the Praktica cameras and lenses have been costly at the time ? The reason I ask is my dad (that I inherited the cameras from) had a large collection of Praktica/Jenaflex cameras and Pentecon/Carl Zeiss lenses and a collection of Russian cameras Zenits and others, at the time I thought nothing of it really but I'm guessing now it must have been enough of a hobby to have spent a fair bit on !

Compared to modern cameras they were quite expensive. But they were entry level, cost considerably less than the Japanese alternatives. My first camera (1985) was a Praktica from Argos and was about £25 IIRC. To put that into context my next was a Chinon from Dixon’s at £180, but that was instead of the Canon T70 I really wanted but couldn’t afford.

 

[GreenNinja67]

My first proper camera was a present from my dad when I was 14, a Practica B200................... until the lens mount came loose after a week. He took it back and bought me a Canon TX, brass bodied and fully manual so I would have to learn how to take a correctly exposed photo.

Best thing he ever did. May have to look out for another one for old time's sake.