| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/01/2006 12:54:44 PM · #1 |
Thought this was interesting. Someone on Fred Miranda used a Canon 12mm extension tube to put an EF-S 60mm f2.8 macro lens on a film body.
//www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/360672
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 01:26:38 PM · #2 |
Yup.. Saw that a while back. Sounds interesting.
Didn't realise, that EF-S lenses were completely compatible with older Canon cameras. Apparently it's only the mount. |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 01:51:10 PM · #3 |
so if I take my Sigma 1.4x teleconverter, and stick it on my Rebel G film camera, I could attach my 18-55 and have a 25-77 lens? It is just the mount that won't fit directly, or is it something electronic as well that prevents the usage?
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 02:41:41 PM · #4 |
Originally posted by larryslights:
so if I take my Sigma 1.4x teleconverter, and stick it on my Rebel G film camera, I could attach my 18-55 and have a 25-77 lens? It is just the mount that won't fit directly, or is it something electronic as well that prevents the usage? |
As far as I am aware, it is only that the lens protrudes too far into the camera. The mirror might hit the back of the lens on cameras other than those for which the EF-s line of lenses is intended.
|
|
|
|
03/01/2006 02:42:39 PM · #5 |
Originally posted by larryslights:
so if I take my Sigma 1.4x teleconverter, and stick it on my Rebel G film camera, I could attach my 18-55 and have a 25-77 lens? It is just the mount that won't fit directly, or is it something electronic as well that prevents the usage? |
First off, the EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 has a very portruding rear element.
The Sigma teleconverters only work on lenses with an at least (I think) 0.5cm receeded rear element.
Secondly, the Sigma teleconverters aren't compatible with the EF-S mount. Only EF.
The 12mm tube used in the 60/2.8 macro experiment is the Mark II model which accepts EF-S |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 02:47:41 PM · #6 |
There is another way...IF YOU DARE!
I wouldn't.
efs cutting |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 03:02:17 PM · #7 |
Originally posted by peecee:
There is another way...IF YOU DARE!
I wouldn't.
efs cutting |
What's there to dare? The EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 is a cheap crap lens.
Nothing to lose really.. I've done it and it's not hard at all.
Oh, and those instructions suck.
Here's a link to better ones: //metku.net/index.html?sect=view&n=1&path=mods/efs/index_eng
Message edited by author 2006-03-01 15:03:31. |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 03:05:35 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
The EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 is a cheap crap lens.
|
Cheap, yes. Crap might be a bit insulting to those who think it's okay to own one...
:) |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 03:25:41 PM · #9 |
Originally posted by nards656:
Originally posted by Uusilehto:
The EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 is a cheap crap lens.
|
Cheap, yes. Crap might be a bit insulting to those who think it's okay to own one...
:) |
Well, I might be a bit spoiled, having A set of 2.8 or faster from 16mm to 210mm :)
The EF-S 18-55/3.5-5.6 isn't total crap. It's actually pretty good. At f/8. Usually I just don't have the light for f/8. And don't get me started on the chromatic aberrations of barrel distortion. Gotta love the amount (or lack of) of distortions in primes. |
|
|
|
03/01/2006 03:59:13 PM · #10 |
Oh, my mistake, it's a Tamron converter, not Sigma. But I'm not sure why I would want to do it. I haven'e shot any film in over two years.
|
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/23/2025 06:42:03 AM EDT.
