APS-C camera + EF lens picture through the viewfinder?

[keviny]

Hi, I've been looking for hours for an answer to this question and can't find it conclusively.
I'm researching my first dslr and am looking heavily into what lens options will be available if I go with Nikon or Canon.
I understand the the fact that the aps-c sensor crops the image and that if I put an EF lens on an APS-C camera that the sensor will not be fully utilizing the lens.
The big question that I have relates to what I see through the viewfinder vs what the final image looks like in terms of area.
If I frame a photo through the viewfinder with an EF lens on a 600D, will that final image cover the same area as I saw through the viewfinder (other than the 95% issue)?
Based on explanations such as the one from this website: Can I use Canon EF Lenses on my Canon EOS 450D ("These digital camera's do not shoot in full frame mode but instead use a 'crop ratio' that actually removes a part of the image you see when looking through the viewfinder when you take the photograph if you're using an EF lens") it would seem that the answer is NO. However, this is the only website I have found with such an explanation, and everyone else seems to be of the mind that putting an EF lense on a crop sensor camera is no big deal. This seems contradictory, because I would think that loosing such a substantial amount of the photo you frame would be massively annoying, and having to just guess what you will end up catching and what you will end up losing would drive me insane.

Can someone please clear this up for me?

[RichardTaylor]

What you see through the viewfinder is what you get (in terms of area), other than the 95% issue.
The lens you have attached to the camera doesn't make a difference.

I use both types of lenses my Canon crop camera.


From the site you linked to
Quote
"Canon EF-S lenses are designed to work with the less expensive Canon dSLR's such as the Canon 450D, Canon 1000D and Canon 50D. These digital camera's do not shoot in full frame mode but instead use a 'crop ratio' that actually removes a part of the image you see when looking through the viewfinder when you take the photograph if you're using an EF lens. The Canon EF-S lenses are already pre-built to take this crop ratio into account so the image you see when using an EF-S lens on your Canon 450D is the image that is saved to the camera's memory file. "
End quote.

The above quoted statement is incorrect.

It is not removing part of the image you see..... It is removing part of the information the lens "sees"

=======================
There are other statements on that linked page that I strongly disagree with also.

[inkista]

Originally Posted by keviny

...
If I frame a photo through the viewfinder with an EF lens on a 600D, will that final image cover the same area as I saw through the viewfinder (other than the 95% issue)?

Yes.

The viewfinder on a crop-body camera matches the sensor size. The whole point of an SLR is WYSIWYG framing.

... everyone else seems to be of the mind that putting an EF lense on a crop sensor camera is no big deal. This seems contradictory, because I would think that loosing such a substantial amount of the photo you frame would be massively annoying, and having to just guess what you will end up catching and what you will end up losing would drive me insane.

Doesn't seem to bother rangefinder shooters any.

Just to look at it a slightly different way; you're getting the full image your sensor can deliver, it's just that that the sensor is much smaller than the image circle the lens projects because the lens was designed for 35mm film. Basically, the tradeoff is one of cost. Smaller sensors cost less to produce. That's why full-frame cameras are around $2500 new, while crop bodies start at around $500. It's actually not that annoying if you never shot 35mm film. If you shot 35mm film a LOT and were used to everything being full-frame sized, then it's annoying. But otherwise, it really is no big deal.

[RichardTaylor]

With range finder camera viewfinders (and it has been a while since I have used one) it can sometimes actually be better as you can see your subject entering the scene before it enters the (deliniated) capture area.

[keviny]

Thank's!

Yeah, I had no idea as to the accuracy of that website, but it was the only thing I could find addressing the issue one way or another.

I appreciate you clearing this up for me.

[ElCapitan]

As stated, what you see is what you get. The main difference between using an EF lens on a crop body is that it gives you more "reach". If you were using a 300mm lens on a aps-c sensor (1.6x crop) it would be like if you were using a 480mm on a 35mm equivalent sensor.

The plus of using an aps-c or aps-h sensor on the higher end cameras is they can offer a better burst rate which is good for sports. The extra "reach" can also be nice for sports and wildlife. The crop sensors aren't necessarily a bad thing. They also offer a deeper DOF at equivalent apertures compared to full frame. Of course you may or may not want that.

[keviny]

Originally Posted by ElCapitan

The main difference between using an EF lens on a crop body is that it gives you more "reach". If you were using a 300mm lens on a aps-c sensor (1.6x crop) it would be like if you were using a 480mm on a 35mm equivalent sensor.

I'm a little confused again because I thought that you had to apply this crop factor to both EF and EF-S lenses. So you're saying that, on a crop body, a 300mm EF lens will perform like a 480mm lense, but a 300mm EF-S lens will perform like a 300mm lens?

I didn't think that was the case?

[RichardTaylor]

@keviny

Your thinking is correct.

The lens being EF-S or not doesn't matter as far as the angle of view goes.
Compared to a full frame camera the "effect" is the same for both lenses.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by ElCapitan

As stated, what you see is what you get. The main difference between using an EF lens on a crop body is that it gives you more "reach". If you were using a 300mm lens on a aps-c sensor (1.6x crop) it would be like if you were using a 480mm on a 35mm equivalent sensor.

The plus of using an aps-c or aps-h sensor on the higher end cameras is they can offer a better burst rate which is good for sports. The extra "reach" can also be nice for sports and wildlife. The crop sensors aren't necessarily a bad thing. They also offer a deeper DOF at equivalent apertures compared to full frame. Of course you may or may not want that.

Wrong on both counts...

Crop factor is affected by sensor, not by lens. EF and EF-S lenses are both subject to crop factor.

The sensor is unrelated to burst rate: that's just silly.

[ElCapitan]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Wrong on both counts...

Crop factor is affected by sensor, not by lens. EF and EF-S lenses are both subject to crop factor.

The sensor is unrelated to burst rate: that's just silly.

You misunderstood me. Perhaps I should have stated both EF and EF-S lenses have the effect. I just used EF because that was what was in question and you can use it on both FF and crop.

Also, I did state the crop was the sensor, not the lens. Just wasn't clear enough.

If you were using a 300mm lens on a aps-c sensor (1.6x crop)

While sensor size isn't a direct reason behind burst rate, it most certainly plays a role. With 2 DIGIC IV processors in a 5D MkII, it would have a faster burst but not as fast as the 7D. At least it was my understanding that sensor size played a role.