# Happy New Owner of a 70d & Lenses



## CuriosityHouse (Jun 29, 2014)

Haven't had a quality camera the last year or so.  Last night, the SO and I went and splurged at BestBuy.

We are the happy new owners of a Canon 70D w/ 18-135 STM lense, 18-200 EF/S ISM lense, nifty fifty, EF IS USM 70-300 lense.

I'll probobly only keep one of the 18-200 and 70-300 due to the overlap, however the guy at BestBuy didn't do the best job explaining the difference between the EF/S, EF and ISM vs USM, so figured I'd see which one I like best.   

I plan on doing alot of family portraits, product photography(I run an antique shop), and my passion is cityscapes at night.

Any recommendations on a lense that might suit me that I don't possess?  I can't afford L lenses unfortunately.


----------



## robbins.photo (Jun 29, 2014)

Ok, well not a Canon guy myself but as I understand it EF-S is the designation Canon uses for lenses that are designed to work on crop sensor bodies, EF is what they use for lenses that will work on their full frame models.  The EF lenses will also work on crop sensors just fine, but the EF-S will not work properly on a full frame body.  So if you think at some point you'll be going full frame you'll probably want to hang onto the EF lenses if possible.

USM stands for Ultrasonic Motor - it's the motor that drives the autofocus of the lens.  Canon introduced the STM - a step motor, that will most likely eventually replace the older USM models.   The STM is quieter so it doesn't make as much noise when it autofocuses.  From what I understand the STM supposedly works better for video than the older USM models did.

For now my recommendation would be to shoot with the lenses you have - and when you get used to them sit down and decide what capabilities you don't have that you would like to have, and determine what lenses you need to fill those roles.


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 29, 2014)

Congrats! great Camera enjoy it. personally I would keep the 18-135 STM and the 70-300.The 18-135 IQ is very good through out its range.My buddy has one and its very sharp.Fast focus and very quiet.


----------



## JustJazzie (Jun 29, 2014)

Congratulations on your new gear!!


----------



## a_auger (Jun 29, 2014)

Edit: Misread your 70-300 for the awful 7*5*-300. Please disregard! Congrats on the gear!


----------



## DarkShadow (Jun 29, 2014)

OP has the 70-300 which is a excellent lens not the same as the 75-300


----------



## CuriosityHouse (Jun 29, 2014)

Thanks alot.  Plan to use it alot today at the shop, and return with crappy images and lots of questions!


----------



## TCampbell (Jun 29, 2014)

In Canon-speak...

EF lenses work with ALL Canon EOS bodies.  Regardless of when they were made or whether they're film vs. digital or crop-frame sensor vs. full-frame sensor.

EF-S lenses are "short back-focus" lenses designed specifically for use with Canon EOS APS-C crop-frame camera bodies (with the only exception being the Canon 10D ... a camera that has not been made in many many years).  Canon realized that since the sensor is physically smaller, they could make slightly smaller lenses to go along with it, reducing weight, but maintaining the image quality.  These lenses cannot be used with Canon film camera or Canon digital cameras that have larger sensors (like the 6D, 5D and 1D series bodies.)

USM are Canon's "UltraSonic Motors".  These are their fastest focusing motors.  They're also pretty quiet.  Lenses with USM focusing also allow full-time manual focus (even when in auto-focus mode) because the focus ring is really a clutch which allows slippage.  If the internal motor wants to turn one way and you try to turn the other way you won't damage anything... it'll just slip.

STM are Canon's "STepper Motors".  These focusing motors are fairly fast but not quite as fast as the USM motors.  The focus is designed to be a bit smoother (for video) and not quite as snappy (the USM motors tend to be fairly snappy).  They are, however, almost totally silent.  They were designed to be so quiet that the internal microphone cannot pickup the sound of the focus motors when shooting video.  They are "focus by wire" lenses in that there is technically no mechanical linkage from the focus collar on the lens barrel to the movement of the focus elements.  It's all electronic.  But they do allow full-time manual focus as long as the focus system is awake (it goes to sleep after about 6 seconds when you release the shutter button.)

They also have autofocus lenses which are not labeled as USM or STM and those use the slowest motors, mechanically linked focus rings (with gears) and no clutch.  Those lenses do not allow for full-time manual focus and you should not attempt to focus them when the AF/MF switch is engaged in the "AF" position.

As for the lenses...

The 18-135mm STM is a very good lens.
The 18-200mm is designed for those in search of "convenience" of not having to change lenses however this lens sacrifices optical quality in order to achieve it's more than 11x change in magnification.  
The EF 70-300mm USM lens is actually pretty good (the 75-300... not so good, but you said you have the 70-300).

If you were to return a lens, then I'd return the 18-200mm. 

In terms of lenses you don't own, but may want...

The EF-S 60mm f/2.8 Macro USM is extremely good for close-up work if you plan to photograph small items.  However you can also do this using close-up diopters that thread onto the end of existing lenses and/or use "extension tubes".  A true macro lens will provide the best results.  I used to own the EF-S 60mm and can vouch for the fact that it is staggeringly sharp (most true macro lenses are... they provide significantly higher detail resolving capability than most other lenses.)  It would easily have an "L" designation by it's optical quality except Canon has a rule that to get the "L" designation the lens must be capable of working on EVERY Canon EOS body ever produced... past, present, or future.  Since this lens only works on APS-C crop-frame bodies, it doesn't qualify for the "L" designation. 

You may enjoy a lens with a low focal ratio... such as the EF 50mm f/1.4.  Low focal ratio lenses produce a stronger background blur and they also collect more light (when using a low f-stop).   This is a "prime" lens (meaning it does not "zoom").

Enjoy!


----------



## CuriosityHouse (Jun 29, 2014)

TCampbell said:


> In Canon-speak...
> 
> Enjoy!



TCambell, I absolutely love when you drop by a thread.  Thanks for your detailed explanations! 

On the topic of prime lenses...I've been toying around in the shop today and I'm noticing that on my smaller items I absolutely love the nifty fifty because of the ability to blur the background.

However on my larger items I'm wondering what lense would produce the same effect?  Such as an armoire, or large desk, couch, bed frame...Is there anything that can focus on something so large, from far away yet blur the background?  Not sure if I'm getting my issue across, I'll post pictures tonight if nobody gets what I'm trying to say.


----------



## TCampbell (Jun 29, 2014)

CuriosityHouse said:


> TCampbell said:
> 
> 
> > In Canon-speak...
> ...



The contrast in focus (sharp vs. soft) is based on the "depth of field" produced in that particular image.  Depth of field is the range of distances at which the focus will appear to be more or less acceptable to our eyes.

The depth of field is controlled by three factors:

1)  The focal ratio used for that image.  High f-stops (smaller size aperture openings) produce broader depth of field.  Smaller f-stops produce shallower depth of field.
2)  The focal length of the lens used for that image.   Shorter focal length lenses produce broader depth of field.  Longer lenses produce shallower depth of field.  I have a 14mm wide angle (which is VERY wide on a full-frame body) and I practically don't need to focus it (almost regardless of f-stop used.)
3)  Subject focus distance.  More distant subjects have broader depth of field.  Closer subjects produce shallow depth of field.

You have to combine all three of these to get the final result.  Using a "long" focal length lens at an extremely shallow depth of field with a VERY close focus distance produces "paper thin" depth of field.  Using a very wide lens to take a landscape (high focal ratio and vast distances) produces a very very broad depth of field.

A desk or armor are going to be a challenge to produce a soft background because those items are large and framing them requires that you stand at a greater distance.  As you do this... the extent to which the background blurs will decrease (it'll be blurred... only mildly so).  If the focusing distance is close, then the background blur will be stronger.

So let's suppose you want a photograph of a chair ... and suppose this chair is about 3' wide, 3' deep, and 4' high.  Perhaps we dress the shot to add in a plant, a background window or drapery, etc. to dress the shot.  I'll arbitrarily choose a dimensional field of view (at the chair distance) of 5 x 7.5'.  

I can use this site to find the distance I need to stand to get that framing:  http://www.tawbaware.com/maxlyons/calc.htm

If I look at the "dimensional field of view calculator" and test some values, I find that we'd need to be somewhere around 16-17' away to get that framing.  Let's just go with 16' for now.

If I go to DOFmaster.com and use their online DOF calculator here  Online Depth of Field Calculator  I can poke in some values to test.  Remember... we want a DoF of about 3'.

I'll need to pick a camera body with an APS-C size sensor (the 70D isn't listed but the 60D is... the math will be identical).
I need to pick the 50mm focal length.
I need to pick that 16' distance we established earlier.

Now I can toy with f-stops ... looking for an f-stop that yields about 3' of DOF.

It turns out f/2.8 does this rather nicely (a DoF of about 3 1/3rd feet)

But the next factor is to consider the background.  Background elements which are "immediately" behind the chair won't have much blur to them (just a little).  The farther back you place them, the stronger the effect of blur.   This chair would need to be brought well-forward of any backgrounds.

If we crop in a bit tighter on our "chair" and reduce the focusing distance, we can increase the amount of blur in the background.

Here's where you get to be a little artsy:  Is it actually necessary for 100% of a subject to be in tack sharp focus?  I'll see people take pictures of food and they want the entire "plate" in the frame and they want it all in-focus.  But the photograph is not about the "plate" ... we all know what dinner plates look like.  We don't necessarily need to see them and we can even crop out a bit if we want.  The image is about the food and while we need a representative sample in sharp focus, we may not necessarily need 100% in sharp focus.  You certainly don't want a blurry subject, but there's an artistic judgement you'll need to make about what areas and how much of an object needs to be in tack sharp focus before the viewer gets the idea and doesn't need to see the whole thing in tack-sharp focus.   The point here is that you may be able to cheat on your depth of field.  You'll need to be the judge as to how much "cheating" is appropriate to achieve the results you want.

I did some scanning through images at Pixel-Peeper.com to look for something taken with the 50mm f/1.8 lens using focal ratios between f/2 and f/2.8 with far enough subject distance that they "might" show results comparable to this chair example (I couldn't find a great representative shot).  

These are NOT my images (they come from Pixel-Peeper) so I can't post the images here, but I can post the links.  Look at these two:

This one is f/2.8:  https://www.flickr.com/photos/andreas_helke/1351963797/in/photostream/

Notice the background here has only very moderate blur.  

This one is f/2.2:  https://www.flickr.com/photos/42193708@N04/3998715439

Now... you're going to need to imagine this shot rotated to a vertical orientation with a chair in it to get the idea.  Really I'm trying to show the difference between subject and background blur.  This f/2.2 shot obviously shows more blur than the f/2.8 shot... but the blur in the background is not extremely strong (also this shot shows the "nifty fifty's" "nervous" or "jittery" bokeh.  The bokeh isn't so smooth or creamy here.  This is because the lens has a 5 blade aperture and is not well-rounded.  The f/1.4 version of the 50mm lens is a bit higher quality.  The f/1.2 version has an even smoother quality but at a CONSIDERABLY jump in price tag.

Given that you're photographing antique furniture, consider broad lighting sources off to the side.  This causes the light to cast shadows which reveal surface detail with more dimension to them.  Straight on lighting doesn't cast shadows so details in fabrics, carved furniture, etc. will appear more "flat".  Light sources off the sides will cast shadows and that cues the eye that the detail has depth ... the details and contours are more visible.  Pinpoint light sources cast shadows with harsh edges (rapid transition from light to shadow)... but broad light sources cast shadows with softer edges and look more pleasing.


----------



## Vince.1551 (Jun 29, 2014)

For smaller products like antiques I recommend a 60mm macro lens. Lighting is important if you want to take pictures like those you see in Sotheby's ads.

For larger products it depends on how much space you have to play with. You should not use below 50mm if you are not familiar with correcting distortion in PS. Max you would want to go is a 35mm. Again it depends on your lens quality to achieve corner sharpness. Large items are difficult to achieve a 'blur' background unless you have lots of space. I'm trying to imaging how you want to have a large item in your photo and with a OOF background... Using a fast lens is not going to help much if you are shooting within limited space unless you take from close range but that would blur the rest of your furniture.


----------



## IvanRichards (Jul 2, 2014)

Hello,
For Canon EOS 70D (Body) DSLR Camera , Canon EOS 70D Kit (EF-S18-55 IS STM) DSLR Camera, Canon EOS 70D Kit II (EF-S18-135 IS STM) DSLR Camera the best Compatible lenses are 

Canon EF lenses (including EF-S lenses)* Excluding EF-M lenses
(35mm-equivalent focal length is approx. 1.6 times the lens focal length)


----------

