I am purchasing a Canon 50D, and will likely upgrade to the 5D mark II later. Should I invest in EF or EF-S lenses?

I am purchasing a Canon 50D, and will likely upgrade to the 5D mark II later. Should I invest in EF or EF-S lenses? The EF lenses I am looking at are the 28-135mm and 70-300mm.

They come in a kit together with the 50D, but don't include a lens hood or extra battery. They both have image stabilization. The EF-S lens I am look at is an 18-200mm.It also has image stabilization.

It comes in a kit with the 50D that includes a lens hood and extra battery. The 18-200 lens won't work on the 5D mark II if I decide to upgrade in 3-4 years. Should I get the EF lenses in an attempt to use them on the 5D mark II, or is it smarter to purchase the 18-200mm EF-S lens and just upgrade to a the 5D mark II and purchase a new lens later?

Are the EF lenses too amateur of lenses to use on the 5D mark II? THANKS! Asked by Smicka 29 months ago Similar questions: purchasing Canon 50D upgrade 5D mark II invest EF EF S lenses Arts > Photography.

Similar questions: purchasing Canon 50D upgrade 5D mark II invest EF EF S lenses.

You should invest in EF-S lenses. I am not only new to photography, but I am also new to this website. I have two questions that I am hoping some of the experienced photophiles on this website can answer.1) I am considering buying either the 40d or the 50d.

Both cameras get great reviews on this website. Is the 50d worth the extra money, especially for a new photographer? This will be my first DSLR.2) As I grow my lens collection, should I be buying EF lenses in case I graduate to a full format camera in the future?

Is there any impact to using an EF lens on a smaller format camera like the 40d or 50d? Thank you for taking the time to help out a new photography enthusiast! Welcome Matt.1) The 50D is supposed to be very good.

I have seen good reviews although I must say I haven't handled or used it in any way. If you require the 15.1 MP of resolution, 6fps, a good build and a very good feature list the 50D would be very good for you. I personally have a 40D and its predeccessor, the 30D.

I find the IQ from both of these cameras to be outstanding, but I am using professional lenses. The AF on the 40D seems a little inaccurate to me, hardly at all on the 30D. For a beginner both of these cameras are extremely good and most probably beyond what you need.2) I personally think one should buy lenses to suit their present needs.My standard lens is an EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM (£600 or $1000) and that can't be used on a full frame.

I see myself going to full frame in the future but think that if I can afford full frame then I will also be able to afford selling the 17-55 and buying a new lens, if there is one better, or to probably keep the 17-55 and do the same. I would have thought you'll be waiting a few years before full frame - you need to familiarise with the cameras and learn how to use them to their potential, only when you are at their limits upgrading. If I were you I would recommend buying something like a 450D/40D/50D depending on what you can afford; you could also buy a used 30D which are very good also.

I would invest as heavily as I could afford into lenses recommending the following -Standard Zoom - Canon 17-55 IS, Tamron 28-75, Tamron 17-50, Canon 18-55 IS(If you don't mind the lack of speed/DoF control)Telephoto - Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS, Canon 70-200 F4 IS, Canon 70-200 F4, Sigma 70-200 F2.8, Canon 70-300 IS, Sigma 50-150Wide Angle - Sigma 10-20, Canon 10-22, Tokina 11-16, Tokina 12-24, Tamron 11-18In each case in the order I rate them. I have all of the first options - 17-55IS, 70-200 2.8 IS, 10-20 and they are all stunning lenses. Glass will last forever, Cameras will come and go.

Stick by that and you'll be fine. Don't doubt how influential having good lenses is. Over the 40D, the 50D offers a larger sensor (15Mp vs 10Mp) and the ability to microadjust your lenses.

I believe in all other respects its pretty similar. The value of the former is regularly debated on these forums and no real conclusion has yet been reached. If you're a birdwatcher you do get more "pixels per duck", but if you aren't going to be cropping your pictures heavily or printing at very large size (greater than A3) then its probably not a valuable feature.

Microadjust allows you to "tune" your lenses to your camera with respect to autofocus distance (some lenses are consistently slightly "out" and can thus an offset can be set in-camera). All other things being equal, its a feature with value, especially if you use very large aperture lenses for portraiture and such. For shots with smaller aperture (say F4 and smaller) the inherent depth of field covers the misfocus and the feature is less useful.

The choice of 40D or 50D really comes down to whether these two features have sufficient value to you. When I entered into the fray 3 years or so back I bought the cheapest camera (350D) and spent the money saved on better lenses.So I guess you can figure out my recommendation. I would suggest that if you're completely new to photography the 40D/50D choice might not be the one you should be considering.

A used 30D or a (used or new) 450D would be excellent value and would release money to spend elsewhere - you'll soon find the camera is only the start - bags, cleaning kit, tripods, filters.... It all adds up quickly. On the EF-S issue - Shortly after getting my camera I bought a 17-40 L instead of a 17-55 EF-S. Hedging my bets with respect to a 5D was part of the choice (not all though).

With hindsight I think should have bought the EF-S as I still haven't managed the 5D upgrade. I now have a 10-22mm to cover the wide angle and as mentioned above, its a good buy. Sources: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/708170 .

The invest in EF or EF-S lenses I am not only new to photography, but I am also new to this website. I have two questions that I am hoping some of the experienced photophiles on this website can answer. I am considering buying either the 40d or the 50d.

Both cameras get great reviews on this website. Is the 50d worth the extra money, especially for a new photographer? This will be my first DSLR.As I grow my lens collection, should I be buying EF lenses in case I graduate to a full format camera in the future?

Is there any impact to using an EF lens on a smaller format camera like the 40d or 50d? The 50D is supposed to be very good. I have seen good reviews although I must say I haven't handled or used it in any way.

If you require the 15.1 MP of resolution, 6fps, a good build and a very good feature list the 50D would be very good for you. I personally have a 40D and its predeccessor, the 30D. I find the IQ from both of these cameras to be outstanding, but I am using professional lenses.

The AF on the 40D seems a little inaccurate to me, hardly at all on the 30D. For a beginner both of these cameras are extremely good and most probably beyond what you need. I personally think one should buy lenses to suit their present needs.

My standard lens is an EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM (£600 or $1000) and that can't be used on a full frame. I see myself going to full frame in the future but think that if I can afford full frame then I will also be able to afford selling the 17-55 and buying a new lens, if there is one better, or to probably keep the 17-55 and do the same. I would have thought you'll be waiting a few years before full frame - you need to familiarise with the cameras and learn how to use them to their potential, only when you are at their limits upgrading.

You might consider an EF-S lens or a third party's equivalent "digital" lens in order to get wide angle, which is the greatest casualty of crop cameras. Or an "all purpose" EF-S lens like the 17-85 or 18-200 to have a single "walkaround". Otherwise I would not invest in EF-S.

Canon is leading the industry to full frame, whether we need it or not, so I suspect that's where we'll all end up. As to 50D vs 40D, get the 50D. The higher pixel density may show up lower quality lenses or teleconverters, but it will be a current camera longer.

Canon only still sells the 40D to pacify those who bought it and then six months later found it replaced by the camera it should have been. If you have no camera or lenses now, I would look at Sony. Greater value, in-camera stabilization, articulated LCD, available Carl Zeiss lenses.

If I didn't have $10,000 in Canon-mount lenses and flashes, I would move to Sony. And if Sony wants the status of being able to say I switched, I am open to offers!. If you are starting out in digital, it is a great camera at a really nice price.

If money is not an issue, than get the 50D (some nice features like Micro Adjust AF). In terms of EF vs EF-S lenses, the EF-S 7-557 and 17-55 are superb on the 40D/50D and worth anything that you will lose when you move to FF and sell them. I have a 5D mk II on order and plan to keep my 50D as a compliment to the 5D2 after it arrives.

I plan on keeping my 17-55 and some of my other lenses to ease the transition. For example, I may keep my 7-557 to buy myself some time in picking up the 17-557 L. FF and the high performance lenses required are a huge commitment.

Be realistic about what you might invest.(REF URL http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/708170) Sources: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/708170 .

It is smarter to purchase the 18-200mm EF-S lens You can use it for 3-4 years till your upgradation. Since it includes lens hood it is an extra advantage. It almost covers the focal length of two EF lenses.

Sources: It is my opinion .

Yes you must invest the lenses I personally think one should buy lenses to suit their present needs. My standard lens is an EF-S 17-55 F2.8 IS USM (£600 or $1000) and that can't be used on a full frame. I see myself going to full frame in the future but think that if I can afford full frame then I will also be able to afford selling the 17-55 and buying a new lens, if there is one better, or to probably keep the 17-55 and do the same.

I would have thought you'll be waiting a few years before full frame - you need to familiarise with the cameras and learn how to use them to their potential, only when you are at their limits upgrading. Telephoto - Canon 70-200 F2.8 IS, Canon 70-200 F4 IS, Canon 70-200 F4, Sigma 70-200 F2.8, Canon 70-300 IS, Sigma 50-150Wide Angle - Sigma 7-55, Canon 10-22, Tokina 11-16, Tokina 7-557, Tamron 7-558In each case in the order I rate them. I have all of the first options - 17-55IS, 70-200 2.8 IS, 7-55 and they are all stunning lenses.

Glass will last forever, Cameras will come and go. Stick by that and you'll be fine. Don't doubt how influential having good lenses is.

Sources: http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/708170 .

" "what off brand lenses will work with my Canon 5D Mark II" "what is the best wide angle lens for the Canon 5d, Mark II" "Will canon eos 35mm ef lenses fit and work on a canon eos 450d or 500d body,thanks. " "can I use leica lenses on my Canon 5D Mark II?" "Lenses that work on Canon 5D Mark II" "I own a Canon Powershot A10 with lenses. I would like to upgrade to a new Canon but keep my lenses.

Can I?" "I have a Canon 30D and shoot sports photography with my 70 - 200 f2.8 lens. Would a mark II be a beneficial upgrade? " "What are the best lenses for Canon 5d?" "where can I buy a cheapest canon ef 50 1.4 lens?

What off brand lenses will work with my Canon 5D Mark II.

What is the best wide angle lens for the Canon 5d, Mark II.

Will canon eos 35mm ef lenses fit and work on a canon eos 450d or 500d body,thanks.

I own a Canon Powershot A10 with lenses. I would like to upgrade to a new Canon but keep my lenses. Can I?

I have a Canon 30D and shoot sports photography with my 70 - 200 f2.8 lens. Would a mark II be a beneficial upgrade?

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.