Canon EOS5 equipment - digital compatibility

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by eadg, Mar 15, 2006.

  1. eadg

    eadg Guest

    Hi, I'm looking for advice/recommendations as to whether I can obtain a
    digital camera body that will accept the lenses off my EOS5 35mm film camera
    (EF 28-105 and EF 75-300).
    Many thanks.

    --
    SR
     
    eadg, Mar 15, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. eadg

    Guest

    eadg wrote:
    > Hi, I'm looking for advice/recommendations as to whether I can obtain a
    > digital camera body that will accept the lenses off my EOS5 35mm film camera
    > (EF 28-105 and EF 75-300).


    The answer is already in the newsgroup : all canon bodies will accept
    them.

    However, the less expensive bodies (350d=XT, 20d, 30d), with a smaller
    "APS-C" sensor, will make appear these lenses longer : the 28-105 will
    seem as a 45-160, speaking about field of view. No more wide angle, a
    bit more tele.
    This will not happen on the more expensive bodies (5d, 1dsMkII) with a
    "full-frame" 24x36mm sensor.
     
    , Mar 15, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. eadg

    Skip M Guest

    "eadg" <don'> wrote in message
    news:c9SRf.1477$...
    > Hi, I'm looking for advice/recommendations as to whether I can obtain a
    > digital camera body that will accept the lenses off my EOS5 35mm film
    > camera (EF 28-105 and EF 75-300).
    > Many thanks.
    >
    > --
    > SR
    >

    Any of the Canon digital SLR cameras will take those lenses. But if you use
    them on a current body, you may find the lens quality lacking. We found
    that the 28-105 to be too soft on our 20Ds, a lens that up until then
    enjoyed a reputation as a true bargain, one that gave great image quality at
    a great price.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Mar 15, 2006
    #3
  4. eadg

    piperut Guest

    Skip M wrote:
    > "eadg" <don'> wrote in message
    > news:c9SRf.1477$...
    > > Hi, I'm looking for advice/recommendations as to whether I can obtain a
    > > digital camera body that will accept the lenses off my EOS5 35mm film
    > > camera (EF 28-105 and EF 75-300).
    > > Many thanks.
    > >
    > > --
    > > SR
    > >

    > Any of the Canon digital SLR cameras will take those lenses. But if you use
    > them on a current body, you may find the lens quality lacking. We found
    > that the 28-105 to be too soft on our 20Ds, a lens that up until then
    > enjoyed a reputation as a true bargain, one that gave great image quality at
    > a great price.
    >
    > --
    > Skip Middleton
    > http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com


    As with anything else, let the buyer beware.
    Some lenses work well on one camera body, and not another.

    I had a 75-300mm F4 Canon lens that gave fairly good results on the
    35mm Canon Rebel, but when I put it on the Canon Digital Rebel I was
    not happy with the results. However, the same lens only the USM
    version give fairly good results on the Digital Rebel.

    I ended up purchasing an 8mm Peleng lens (Fisheye) for my digital
    Rebel. This lens only works in an all manual mode, but the glass is
    fairly nice, and gives good results on the camera.

    I also have a nice tamron 28-75 lens, that I get nice results with.

    The 18 - 55 that came with the kit. Some spots on it are nice, and
    some spots on it are really soft. My wife likes to use it when she
    uses the camera, I don't like to use it much, unless I am trying to
    take something on a wide angle shot. The Tamron lens is a much better
    lens.

    My father had an old 500 mm F-8 FD mount lens, that I managed to find a
    EOS mount for.
    With the help of a friend who used to work in the jewlery business, we
    managed to modify the lens so it works in an all manual mode on the
    camera. However, I really have to use two tripods with that lens, one
    on the camera, and one on the lens to keep from getting lens shake with
    it. The glass on it is nice, but lens shake is a problem. I also have
    no idea what brand of lens it is.

    Some lenses do work nicer on a 35mm camera, and some work nicer on the
    digital camera. Also, the digital media is closer to slide film, so if
    you are not right on the exposure, your image will look soft.

    roland
     
    piperut, Mar 15, 2006
    #4
  5. eadg

    eadg Guest

    "piperut" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The worst problem I ran into was the 500mm lens. It had the old, old
    > Canon FD mount on it.
    > One of my friends is medically retired as he is now missing one leg,
    > and used to be a jewlery, amoung some other talents.
    > We found someone who sold EOS mounts for the old lenses, and managed to
    > tear the lens mount apart, and between the two of them, get the 500mm
    > lens working on the EOS (Digital Rebel) body in a full manual mode.
    >
    > Is everybody going to be able to do this, no. It is something that can
    > be done. Not everyone would want to take the time or the energy to do
    > it.
    >
    > The next to worst problem I ran into was the 300mm lens that did not
    > have a USM motor. It is an F4-F5.6 lens. or 3.5- 5.6. Something like
    > that. I was fairly happy with the results on the 35mm. I had taken
    > mostly hockey and other sports photos with it. I was over in Scotland
    > and I took some photos of the Castle across Loch Ness. I was not happy
    > with the results. The photo looked like it had camera shake.
    >
    > This could be from a number of factors.
    >
    > I am getting older, and perhaps my hands are not as steady as they used
    > to be.
    > Digital Cameras need to be held steadier than 35mm cameras do, or the
    > photos show up with what looks like camera shake
    > The fog in Scotland made the photo appear to have camera shake
    >
    > or a combination of all three factors.
    >
    > When I returned home, I went and took some photos of a hockey game, and
    > I was not really happy with the results of those either from the lens
    > that I had been taking good photos at the hockey games in the past with
    > 35mm. They weren't as bad as the photos from Scotland from the same
    > lens. I then went and bought a lens with the USM motor, and the camera
    > shake went away for the most part.
    >
    > When I purchased the 8mm Peleng lens for my digital camera, Canon had
    > not come out with a fisheye for the Digital Cameras. Canon now has an
    > 8mm Fisheye lens that is fully automatic. It is a little more than
    > twice what I paid for the Peleng lens. For fisheye and portrait photos
    > I used to use a Kiev 88 (medium format) that used all manual lenses,
    > and a light meter. So, I don't have problems putting the camera on
    > manual and using it that way. If Canon had come out with their Fisheye
    > lens before I purchased mine, I think I might have still gone with the
    > all manual one, as the money difference doesn't justify how much I
    > would use it.
    >
    > The lens that came with the kit is soft in spots, and other places it
    > is okay. I have Fixed lens that goes on the 35mm Rebel if I want a
    > fixed lens also. I mostly use it if I want a wide angle shot that is
    > not a fisheye shot.
    >
    > The lenses work, just some of them better than others. The end result
    > is you get what you want and can afford. Sometimes you can still find
    > a Digital Rebel Body, it is a little larger than the Digital Rebel XT,
    > but only 6.3 megapixal. The XT is a bit smaller, and has 8 megapixals.
    > Some men with larger hands have commented that they have trouble
    > holding onto the body of the XT. I think it is the 20D or 5D or 10D
    > that is considered the "Professional Model" That one is more money,
    > and has more functions. I couldn't afford that one.
    > I bought the Digital Rebel about three years ago now.
    >
    > I would like to get the battery grip for the Digital Rebel, but they no
    > longer make it. They do make a battery grip for the XT.
    > So, get what you can afford, and what you like. It will be obsolete in
    > about 3 years.
    >
    > roland


    Thanks for such an informed reply. Unfortunately I have no Jeweller friends
    so 'manual' adjustment of the lenses is a non starter, perish the thought!
    Obviously, apart from a Kodak digital compact I have for snapshots, I have
    no experience of comparing shots with film vs digital with regard to camera
    shake but as I'm no spring chicken myself I invariably carry a monopod
    around, cunningly disguised as a hiking pole.

    --
    SR
     
    eadg, Mar 15, 2006
    #5
  6. eadg

    Bill Funk Guest

    On Wed, 15 Mar 2006 17:32:05 GMT, "eadg" <don'> wrote:

    >
    ><> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>
    >> eadg wrote:
    >>> Hi, I'm looking for advice/recommendations as to whether I can obtain a
    >>> digital camera body that will accept the lenses off my EOS5 35mm film
    >>> camera
    >>> (EF 28-105 and EF 75-300).

    >>
    >> The answer is already in the newsgroup : all canon bodies will accept
    >> them.

    >
    >I wasn't sure what criteria to use in the search box, plus I was hoping for
    >an up to date reply with regard to any new bodies that may be available.
    >Thanks for the answer anyway.
    >
    >>
    >> However, the less expensive bodies (350d=XT, 20d, 30d), with a smaller
    >> "APS-C" sensor, will make appear these lenses longer : the 28-105 will
    >> seem as a 45-160, speaking about field of view. No more wide angle, a
    >> bit more tele.
    >> This will not happen on the more expensive bodies (5d, 1dsMkII) with a
    >> "full-frame" 24x36mm sensor.

    >
    >Will the 75-300 lens increase proportionately as well?


    Yes. A 1.6x crop factor, no matter which EF-mount lens is used.

    --
    Bill Funk
    replace "g" with "a"
     
    Bill Funk, Mar 15, 2006
    #6
  7. eadg

    SMS Guest

    eadg wrote:
    > Hi, I'm looking for advice/recommendations as to whether I can obtain a
    > digital camera body that will accept the lenses off my EOS5 35mm film camera
    > (EF 28-105 and EF 75-300).
    > Many thanks.


    You really should buy the EOS-5D, as it's the natural successor to the
    EOS-5QD.

    For those unfamiliar with the EOS-5QD, it's an A2E with a dateback
    (never available on the A2E), and without the de-featured firmware of
    the U.S. A2E version.
     
    SMS, Mar 15, 2006
    #7
  8. eadg

    Skip M Guest

    "eadg" <don'> wrote in message
    news:RlYRf.1752$...
    >
    > "Skip M" <> wrote in message
    > news:1eVRf.683$5F1.544@fed1read08...
    >> "eadg" <don'> wrote in message
    >> news:c9SRf.1477$...
    >>> Hi, I'm looking for advice/recommendations as to whether I can obtain a
    >>> digital camera body that will accept the lenses off my EOS5 35mm film
    >>> camera (EF 28-105 and EF 75-300).
    >>> Many thanks.
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> SR
    >>>

    >> Any of the Canon digital SLR cameras will take those lenses. But if you
    >> use them on a current body, you may find the lens quality lacking. We
    >> found that the 28-105 to be too soft on our 20Ds, a lens that up until
    >> then enjoyed a reputation as a true bargain, one that gave great image
    >> quality at a great price.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Skip Middleton
    >> http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com

    >
    > Thanks. Is this disparity between film/digital lenses a common factor
    > among other well known makes?
    >
    > --
    > SR
    >

    Well, yes and no. I'm not hearing as much about it from, for instance,
    Nikon, but Nikon has a line of specifically digital lenses that is more
    extensive than Canon's, so that might be a factor. But as cameras get past
    the 6mp range, older lenses, especially less than top notch ones, tend to
    suffer. I was surprised at the 28-105, it was so good on film, but we
    thought there was something wrong with our 20Ds when we tried it on one of
    them. Too, we found out later, that lower grade filters affect the image
    more on digital than on film, and that may have been a factor. But our
    100-300 doesn't work that well, either, and it's similar, if a slightly
    better, optically, to the 75-300.

    --
    Skip Middleton
    http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
     
    Skip M, Mar 16, 2006
    #8
  9. eadg

    eadg Guest

    "SMS" <> wrote in message
    news:44188b74$0$95929$...
    > eadg wrote:
    >> Hi, I'm looking for advice/recommendations as to whether I can obtain a
    >> digital camera body that will accept the lenses off my EOS5 35mm film
    >> camera (EF 28-105 and EF 75-300).
    >> Many thanks.

    >
    > You really should buy the EOS-5D, as it's the natural successor to the
    > EOS-5QD.
    >
    > For those unfamiliar with the EOS-5QD, it's an A2E with a dateback (never
    > available on the A2E), and without the de-featured firmware of the U.S.
    > A2E version.


    Thanks for your input, I'm now starting the long trawl through available
    models in search of what will suit best.

    --
    SR
     
    eadg, Mar 16, 2006
    #9
  10. eadg

    piperut Guest

    eadg wrote:
    > "piperut" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > The worst problem I ran into was the 500mm lens. It had the old, old
    > > Canon FD mount on it.
    > > One of my friends is medically retired as he is now missing one leg,
    > > and used to be a jewlery, amoung some other talents.
    > > We found someone who sold EOS mounts for the old lenses, and managed to
    > > tear the lens mount apart, and between the two of them, get the 500mm
    > > lens working on the EOS (Digital Rebel) body in a full manual mode.
    > >
    > > Is everybody going to be able to do this, no. It is something that can
    > > be done. Not everyone would want to take the time or the energy to do
    > > it.
    > >
    > > The next to worst problem I ran into was the 300mm lens that did not
    > > have a USM motor. It is an F4-F5.6 lens. or 3.5- 5.6. Something like
    > > that. I was fairly happy with the results on the 35mm. I had taken
    > > mostly hockey and other sports photos with it. I was over in Scotland
    > > and I took some photos of the Castle across Loch Ness. I was not happy
    > > with the results. The photo looked like it had camera shake.
    > >
    > > This could be from a number of factors.
    > >
    > > I am getting older, and perhaps my hands are not as steady as they used
    > > to be.
    > > Digital Cameras need to be held steadier than 35mm cameras do, or the
    > > photos show up with what looks like camera shake
    > > The fog in Scotland made the photo appear to have camera shake
    > >
    > > or a combination of all three factors.
    > >
    > > When I returned home, I went and took some photos of a hockey game, and
    > > I was not really happy with the results of those either from the lens
    > > that I had been taking good photos at the hockey games in the past with
    > > 35mm. They weren't as bad as the photos from Scotland from the same
    > > lens. I then went and bought a lens with the USM motor, and the camera
    > > shake went away for the most part.
    > >
    > > When I purchased the 8mm Peleng lens for my digital camera, Canon had
    > > not come out with a fisheye for the Digital Cameras. Canon now has an
    > > 8mm Fisheye lens that is fully automatic. It is a little more than
    > > twice what I paid for the Peleng lens. For fisheye and portrait photos
    > > I used to use a Kiev 88 (medium format) that used all manual lenses,
    > > and a light meter. So, I don't have problems putting the camera on
    > > manual and using it that way. If Canon had come out with their Fisheye
    > > lens before I purchased mine, I think I might have still gone with the
    > > all manual one, as the money difference doesn't justify how much I
    > > would use it.
    > >
    > > The lens that came with the kit is soft in spots, and other places it
    > > is okay. I have Fixed lens that goes on the 35mm Rebel if I want a
    > > fixed lens also. I mostly use it if I want a wide angle shot that is
    > > not a fisheye shot.
    > >
    > > The lenses work, just some of them better than others. The end result
    > > is you get what you want and can afford. Sometimes you can still find
    > > a Digital Rebel Body, it is a little larger than the Digital Rebel XT,
    > > but only 6.3 megapixal. The XT is a bit smaller, and has 8 megapixals.
    > > Some men with larger hands have commented that they have trouble
    > > holding onto the body of the XT. I think it is the 20D or 5D or 10D
    > > that is considered the "Professional Model" That one is more money,
    > > and has more functions. I couldn't afford that one.
    > > I bought the Digital Rebel about three years ago now.
    > >
    > > I would like to get the battery grip for the Digital Rebel, but they no
    > > longer make it. They do make a battery grip for the XT.
    > > So, get what you can afford, and what you like. It will be obsolete in
    > > about 3 years.
    > >
    > > roland

    >
    > Thanks for such an informed reply. Unfortunately I have no Jeweller friends
    > so 'manual' adjustment of the lenses is a non starter, perish the thought!
    > Obviously, apart from a Kodak digital compact I have for snapshots, I have
    > no experience of comparing shots with film vs digital with regard to camera
    > shake but as I'm no spring chicken myself I invariably carry a monopod
    > around, cunningly disguised as a hiking pole.
    >


    The EOS lens work fine for the most part. Some of them better then
    others. I did run into trouble at the longer focal length on a
    mechinical motor driven 75-300 lens. The USM 75-300 seems to work
    okay.

    It is possible to modify the old, old FD mount lens if you are a bit
    nuts, and can find an EOS mount without a lens attached. Okay, it was
    a challenge to prove it could be done.
    (With a 1.6 factor... I have nothing I really want to shoot with a
    500mm lens.)

    hmm, monopod as a walking stick... that is a thought.

    roland
     
    piperut, Mar 16, 2006
    #10
  11. eadg

    eadg Guest

    eadg, Mar 16, 2006
    #11
  12. eadg

    piperut Guest

    eadg wrote:
    > "piperut" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    > > hmm, monopod as a walking stick... that is a thought.
    > >
    > > roland

    >
    > I have a Leki Sierra http://www.stewardsons.co.uk/shop/product.php?xProd=779
    > Reviewed here http://photonotes.org/reviews/leki-sierra/
    > They are easily extended for use when standing, mine came in handy recently
    > on a sightseeing trip to Barcelona for some night shots of some spectacular
    > buildings.
    > I'm sure they are easy to obtain Stateside.
    >
    > --
    > SR


    I actually have a monopod in the closest somewhere.
    The last time I used it... I mounted the Peleng 8mm lens on the camera,
    and we had a party in the living room. The room has a vaulted ceiling,
    and from the floor above, I put the camera on the monopod, and put it
    out above the living room and took and shot downward of all the people
    in the living room. My wife looked at this photo, it made her dizzy.
    I have been told not to do this again... :)

    I just had not thought about using the monopod as a walking stick while
    out hiking. I will have to give that some thought. The main problem I
    can see is the levers might get broke off by the brush. However, a
    little bit of creative work here.... I think I can rig up something up
    that is durable enough for the backcountry around here. (Wastach
    Mountains in Utah... some of the trails I hike on are .... fairly
    remote...and well, just plain crazy to be on in the first place. I do
    need to get out this summer. I actually had intended to get out skiing
    this winter, but have not made it yet.)

    roland
     
    piperut, Mar 16, 2006
    #12
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. BPO
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    6,220
  2. Tom Gordon
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    278
    Tom Gordon
    Sep 22, 2004
  3. Mark
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    355
    Joseph Meehan
    Nov 4, 2004
  4. leo
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    295
    Larry
    Nov 4, 2004
  5. olson4107
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    1,956
    Digital Photography Now
    Oct 22, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page