focal length – Is there a difference between taking a far shot on a 50mm lens and a close shot on a 35mm lens?

Do you have a selection of lenses (or a zoom lens) now?

Shoot a table-top test with different focal lengths, repositining the camera to get tye same view of the foreground object. Then look carefully at the photos to see for yourself.

If you’re one of those peopke where this doesn’t just scream at you, it’s good to develop your eye to seeing the perspective.

For example, my wife takes still-life photos of food, and I say “too close! Back up!” and had to teach her to use the numbers (e.g. don’t use a focal length shorter than 40), as she doesn’t “see” the perspective when framing the shot. Even if she can “see” it in the final picture on a full-size screen, it’s too late.

In particular, the background (table and room beyond) becomes a sweeping expanse that dominates the composition, or even looks unnatural.

The other day, my Mom showed draft/concept of product shots she wanted, and knew that they didn’t look good but didn’t know why. I explained “because you were too close.” The bottles looked fatter on top and thinner at the base, because the distance was different and that distance was significant compared to the individual distances.

A person’s face will look bad if you shoot from closer than you would normally view a face. Percepually, you actually need a longer lens to look best because you view a photo as if seeing someone on stage or otherwise at a distance, beyond a normal personal conversation distance. So portrait lenses are longer again than the “normal” lens below which it simply looks bad.

I have an Alpha 6000 as you do, and use it for social events including getting pictures taken with people at an event, parties and gatherings, etc.

I use the 35mm f/1.8 OSS prime lens.

In real real situations, I still have a bit of a chore getting far enough away to frame a shot. The pictures look good. The 50mm would be too long, making it difficult to back up enough.

On the other hand, for portraits (close up to show just the face) the flatter perspective of the 50mm would look better, all else being equal. But I think that’s not the primary use for an ultra-portable camera. (Note that the 35mm is a normal perspective and ok enough for such shots, and great for anything that shows more than just the head. You can avoid crowding in and shoot the head-only by cropping the result, as you hace 25 megapixels to start with!)

So unless you have something completely different in mind, get the 35mm. Also lookmat renting first if you are not sure.

lens – Is there an EF version of the Canon EF-S 60mm macro?

I take a lot of photos of faces. For the last 12 years or so, I’ve been using a Canon EF-S 60mm macro lens on an EOS 7D. I just upgraded to a Canon RP full-frame. With an adapter, I can mount the EF-S on the RP and it takes photos, but it’s only using part of the sensor, so the images come out 10MP instead of the camera’s 26MP. Really, it’s good enough, but a shame not to use the whole sensor!

I thought I’d just find an EF 60mm macro for full-frame, but I can’t find one. Does it not exist? What are my options now?


lens mount – Will Canon’s EF and EF-S lenses work better for Canon’s mirrorless cameras than mirrorless cameras from other brands?

Canon has an official adapter for using EF and EF-S on their mirrorless cameras, but I have read that the focusing is slower when using this adapter than the native (EF-M) lenses.

Assuming the respective bodies are from the same marketing tier and have similar resolution sensors, you’ll never get worse performance, either optically or in terms of AF speed/accuracy, out of an EF-S or EF lens when used with a Canon EF to EF-M adapter on an EOS M body (all of them use APS-C size sensors) than when using that same lens on a comparable Rebel or x0D body.

Again, EF-S and EF lenses will perform just as well on an EF-M or RF mount Canon body as they perform on APS-C and FF bodies, respectively, in the EF mount system when the cameras being compared have the same level of sensor technology and AF technology.

I have read that the focusing is slower when using this adapter than
the native (EF-M) lenses.

Unlike when using an EF/EF-S lens on a non-Canon mirrorless camera, no EF autofocus or any other lens to camera communication has to be “translated” by the adapter when adapting any EF/EF-S lens to any EOS M or EOS R camera. The only reasons an adapter is needed at all is to account for the differing registration distances and shapes of the mounting bayonets between EF/EF-S, EF-M, and RF lenses.

Where you lose out when using EF and EF-S glass with EOS M and R Series cameras is when comparing them to the newer EF-M and RF mount lenses. The best RF mount lenses tend to be sharper and faster focusing than the best EF mount lenses with the same focal lengths and maximum apertures. They also tend to be modestly to exceedingly more expensive. As the saying goes, you usually get what you pay for.

Remember, there are more expensive and/or newer EF mount lenses that focus faster on the same EF mount bodies than cheaper and/or older EF mount lenses focus on those same EF mount bodies. Many EF/EF-S mount lenses also focus faster on higher tier and/or newer EF mount bodies than those same lenses focus when used with cheaper/older EF mount bodies, too.

The EF-M autofocus protocol is exactly the same as the latest revisions of the EF/EF-S AF protocol. If EF-M lenses focus faster on the same EOS M body than an adapted EF/EF-S lens, it’s because the EF-M lens has a faster AF motor than the EF/EF-S lens, just as there are some EF/EF-S lenses that focus faster on the same EOS bodies than other EF/EF-S lenses can focus on that same EOS body.

Incidentally, due to the very small 2mm difference in the registration distances of the EF-M an RF mounts, as well as the differences in throat diameter and the shape and depth of the bayonet lugs (which exceeds 2mm), it’s physically impossible to adapt an RF lens to an EF-M camera and have focus at any distance beyond macro distances without using additional optical elements that also act as a teleconverter.

The Canon RF autofocus protocol is an enhanced extension of the EF protocol that is fully backwards compatible with the EF AF protocol. EF and EF-S lenses will perform no worse on an EOS M camera or RF mount camera than they are capable of performing on an equivalent EF body. In some cases, second generation RF mount cameras like the R5 and R6 can focus the same EF/EF-S lens noticeably faster than the lower tiered EF mount Rebel series and older models of the x0D series of cameras can focus those same EF/EF-S lens. (Newer EF mount cameras, such as the EOS 90D, can sometimes AF faster with certain EF/EF-S lenses than an older or lower tier EOS M body can AF with the same lenses, though.)

Sure, EF-M cameras will almost certainly focus slower than Canon 1-Series cameras that use the EF mount when using the same lens, but entry level Rebel cameras that use the EF mount also focus the same lenses slower than their 1-Series counterparts, even though they are both EF mount camera bodies.

If you use an EF-S lens with a full frame EOS R body, the image will be automatically cropped to use only the center of the FF camera’s sensor that is the same size as APS-C sensors. So that 20MP FF EOS RP becomes an 8MP APS-C camera when adapting an EF-S lens to it. The 45MP EOS R5 becomes a 17MP APS-C camera when an EF-S lens is adapted to it. This is necessary because the usable image circles of EF-S lenses are only large enough to cover that smaller APS-C sized area.

I want the camera to be easier to carry around for long sightseeing/tourism trips, but still be customizable with lenses.

With regard to smaller and lighter, though, there’s not really much of a loss of total size/weight when going from the best EF lenses on EOS EF mount bodies to the best RF lenses on EOS R bodies. Much of what you lose with the body is often gained with the lens. There’s also less difference in size/weight when going from the smaller, lighter lenses with narrower maximum apertures in the EF-S system to the lenses in the EF-M system than there is when going from larger and heavier higher performing EF lenses to smaller and lighter EF-M lenses with narrower maximum apertures. There’s even less difference when using the same EF/EF-S lenses with an EOS M body plus adapter than when using the same EF/EF-S lenses with one of the smaller and lighter EF mount bodies.

This is also the case with most other manufacturers of mirrorless systems. Have you seen the size of some of the Sony GM E-mount lenses? Or the Sigma ART lenses for mirrorless mounts? They’re about as small and light as a full mayonnaise jar. Sure, most EOS M bodies are smaller and lighter than most EF bodies. The EF mount Rebel SL series might be slightly smaller than the largest EOS M cameras, though. The Rebel SL series is certainly smaller than the larger models in the EOS R series.

In the specific case of your 60D, the only EOS M camera that has comparable performance in terms of things such as Servo AF, frames per second, etc. is the EOS M6 Mark II, which also happens to be one of the larger/heavier EOS M bodies, especially if one adds the optional EVF to the M6 Mark II hot shoe. (Of course tying up the hot shoe as the only way to have an eye level viewfinder, coupled with the lack of a PC port¹ is the M6 Mark II’s Achilles heel, in my opinion, as it means one can not use an eye level viewfinder and control external flash at the same time!)

To get an RF lens that performs as well as, say the EF 24-70mm f/2.8 L II, one must use the RF 24-70mm f/2.8 L IS, which is just as large and heavy as the comparable EF lens.

¹ PC in the context of flash photography has nothing to do with a personal computer. It is an abbreviation of Prontor/Compur. Prontor has its origins in the Italian word pronto (quick) and was a brand of shutter produced by Alfred Gauthier in the 1950s. Compur, derived from the word compound, was the shutter brand of the Deckel Company. Both companies were based in Germany and both counted Zeiss as an influential stockholder when they introduced the standard 1/8″-inch coaxial connector for shutter/flash synchronization.

lens – two identical lenses with different coatings

Your privacy

By clicking “Accept all cookies”, you agree Stack Exchange can store cookies on your device and disclose information in accordance with our Cookie Policy.

astrophotography – How do I eliminate the shake I’m getting using a supertelephoto lens and tripod to shoot the moon?

I agree with @xenoid in that a system that uses Arca-Swiss style dovetail rails (they don’t need to be Arca-Swiss brand name) gives you an advantage because these rails come in various lengths and this lets you move rail forward/aft in the saddle to balance the camera’s center of mass over the tripod to reduce flexure and vibration.

A Benro GH2 is a gimbal head with a 50 lb load capacity… around $350 USD.

But it need not be a gimbal head to work well. Check the load rating for the head you are considering. A Benro B3 or above (e.g. B4, B5) would also be fairly beefy and in the $200-250 USD price range.

Regarding exposure…

Lunar exposures are fairly easy. The base rule is the “Looney 11” rule … at f/11, a good starting point for the shutter speed is the inverse of the ISO. So at ISO 100, that’s 1/100th. At ISO 200 it’s 1/200th. You need not use f/11 … but that’s the f-stop where the shutter speed is the simple inverse of the ISO. Trade f-stops for shutter speed if you prefer to use a different f-stop.

A caveat is to beware atmospheric extinction. This is the notion that while the moon is in sunlight, you are shooting through a lot of atmosphere and it absorbs (extinguishes) some of the light. That’s why it’s Looney 11 instead of Sunny 16 rules. If the moon is very low in the sky (rising or setting) then you’ll have more atmosphere to shoot through, which means more extinction … so you’d need a longer exposure. Also an atmosphere that has more dust, smog, or other particulates will absorb more light and need a longer exposure to compensate.

Here’s a sample image:

Moon exposed using Looney 11 rule

The above was shot at f/11, ISO 100, 1/100th sec.

I used a TeleVue NP101is (4″ apochromatic refractor with an f/5.4 focal ratio and 540mm focal length) combined with a TeleVue 2x PowerMate (an image-space telecentric teleconverter). This gave me an effective focal length of 1080mm at f/10.8 (f/11). The camera was a Canon 60Da (APS-C).

Telephoto Lens Advice for Canon

I use a Canon 600D and currently have three lenses:

  • EFS 18-55mm
  • A very old 50mm Pentax I use with adapter
  • A very old (1970s?) Auto Super-Paragon 200mm f/3.3 I use with an adapter

I want to get more into wildlife photography and have started exploring bird hides. I use the 200mm I have but it doesn’t really have the focal length I’m after and obviously doesn’t have IS and autofocus.

I think I’ve narrowed down the choice to the following two but I’m very open to suggestions:

  • Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 IS II USM – new
  • Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM Lens – second hand (note this is the original not the update)

A second hand 100-400 is a bit more expensive than a new 70-300. I’m leaning toward the 70-300 because:

  • the max 300mm focal length equates to 480mm given it’s an APS-C sensor camera, which should be more than enough and significantly more than my current 200 (equivalent to 320mm)

  • the push-pull feature on the 100-400 I’ve heard has issues sucking dust and moisture in

  • it’s cheaper than the second-hand 100-400

  • it’s generally better to have a new lens if possible than risk issues with second-hand

However, I’m aware that the L series is superior and has weather sealing. I can no way afford the 100-400 IS II, even second hand, so it would have to be the original second hand. But I’m not sure it’s worth it given I’m still very much an amateur.

Is there anything I’m missing or is 70-300 probably sufficient? Are there any others to consider? Any advice appreciated!

manual focus – What are these numbers below the distance scale of my lens?

On my Canon EF35mm F2 IS USM (my first prime lens ever which I just bought used) there are the numbers 22, 11, (line with red dot), 11, 22 written below the distance scale.

From the manual of the lense I learned that they are seemingly called “distance index”, but the manual doesn’t mention what they are. Even googling this word, and also several other related search terms like “lens numbers below distance scale”, doesn’t find me anything.

What do the numbers and the red dot mean, and what are they used for?

enter image description here

How do I disassemble my Canon 18-55mm lens to repair water damage inside it?

Given that you’re talking water damage, and that the lens is probably already trashed, I’m not sure you can do any more harm to the lens if it’s not working at all. An 18-55 kit is cheap enough that nearly anything totals it. Just be sure that you’ve made peace with the fact that you’re just as likely, (or more, if you’re inexperienced with electronics and lens repair) to destroy your lens as fix it, before trying to crack it open. Have an alternate plan in place (maybe replacing with a used one?) if you destroy the lens. The odds are against you successfully repairing it.

You may also probably have to expend some money on appropriate tools. Most folks tend not to have spudgers, 00 screwdrivers, plastic tweezers, and spanning wrenches lying around, although among this SE crowd, maybe not. 🙂

Here’s a youtube video that demonstrates full disassembly. Hopefully your version of the 18-55 is similar.

It looks like after removing all the screws from the rear assembly (there are a couple on the sides), the back should just lift out, but will be connected by a cable that you have to unplug from the board, so be gentle.

Further screws hold down all the other boards, and there are a number of cables that have to disconnected. And you will also have to go in through the front of the lens, which will require prying up the trim ring with a spudger to access the three screws holding the front element in place, and removing the rubber grip ring to get to the focus helicoid screws.

Good luck on getting it all together again in working order!

lens – How do I fix my Tamron 18-200’s autofocus issues with my Nikon D3100?

I’m using a Nikon D3100 with a Tamron 18-200. I purchased this lens from eBay, it is brand new. The owner says he never used it and kept if for almost 2 years without using it.

At 18mm the lens won’t focus, the image is blurry. The centre and right focus points have the same problem; the image is not in focus. When I try to focus from the left focus points it is fine. Using manual focus resolves the issue. And at other focal lengths, the focus seems to be sharp.

My 18-55mm kit lens works fine with my camera.

I have tried,

  • Turning the camera off, removing the battery and restarting.
  • Removing any filters from the lens.
  • Checked the lens’s front and back elements are crystal clean.
  • Removed and remounted the lens to make sure it’s properly seated.
  • Turned auto/manual focus on/off.
  • Resetting the camera settings.
  • Cleaned AF contact points, both on body and lens.

What do you think is the issue here? Can a lens calibration be done? Is my camera body not working with the lens?

Removing Google Lens – Android Enthusiasts Stack Exchange

So, Google had its option “Search with Google” till very recently (aka a few mins ago). “Search with Google Lens.” Seriously? First of all, the button doesn’t even do anything while clicked. Second of all, all the answers here consists of “look at your system apps” or “watch this video” which does NOT work so do not bother giving me those two choices. There is no Lens/Qlens, and chrome://flags/ doesnt give me the option to disable it. I can’t uninstall the Google app or Chrome (doesnt work). Is there an actual way to get rid of this feature? Thanks.