A question for EOS guys

excalibur2

excalibur2

My F4's Broken...
Messages
11,785
Name
Brian
Edit My Images
Yes
Why wont a Canon EFS 18-55mm fit onto a EOS 300?
At the bootie was the lens and along side a EOS 300 in a box, well the lens was £1 and thought I can't go wrong as the Canon lens cap was worth a £1...anyway I tried to mount the lens on the camera and it just wouldn't mount, so I persuaded the seller that she would never sell the camera without a lens and either the lens was faulty or the camera (BTW the camera had no batteries so couldn't test)...anyway got it for £1.50.
So I have two items that I can't use due to CRAB (can't resist a bargain)....maybe at a meet I could bring the lens and someone could test it on his digi
 
EFs lenses are for crop cameras and will foul the mirror movement on a FF camera (35 film)
 
The efs lenses sit further into the camera. this is fine for crop bodies with smaller mirrors but if they fit on full frame digital or 35mm film cameras then the larger mirror would hit the end of the lens. For this reason you can't fit efs lenses to 35mm or full frame digital cameras.
 
The EFS lens is designed specifically form digital cameras with a crop sensor; to make best use of available space, the back element of the lens can protrude into the body of the camera, and on full frame bodies, with a larger mirror, it can be in the way of the mirror path when it flips up and so cause a collision.

To help avoid a potential mishap, they designed a different mount so you can't mount a EFS on a camera that is designed for EF mounts only (such as yours).
 
Oh well my son has a Canon 400D I'll ask him if he wants it, but think he already has these kit lenses.................shame on Canon for changing mounts from FD to EF to EFS (n)
 
Don't worry, you got a bargain!

The EF-S 18-55 lens will sell on ebay for more than it will cost to buy a cheap EF lens to fit on your EOS 300.
 
Actually I regret buying this EOS 300 for £1.50 as it's a plastic toy (compared to my Nikon F90x) and don't think it's even worth spending out for batteries to see if it works...so if anybody wants it for £1.50 plus £2.80 postage they can have it.
 
*shudder*
 
Looking at EF lenses the only one I want is the 300mm F2.8 USM..now that would be worth spending £6.20 for batteries to use the EOS 3000 ;)
 
Saw someone selling a 300mm f/2.8 (non IS) this morning on a Facebook group. Looked like it had been used as hammer to build a small house and was missing a lot of paint, and the seller was asking $2000 for it :confused:
 
excalibur2 said:
shame on Canon for changing mounts from FD to EF to EFS (n)
Click to expand...

EFS is not really a different mount. It is the equivalent of Nikon's DX - a set of lenses that are designed for smaller, APS sized digital sensors. These smaller sensored cameras can still use all the full sized EF lenses but the reverse isn't true. If you could mount an EF-S lens on a full-frame camera (and you manage to avoid hitting the mirror!) the image would be a circle in the middle of the frame with black corners. Nikon let you do this, Canon added a small tab to the mount to prevent it.
 
EF lenses are expensive compared to FD\FDn....erm thanks to the digital guys:( But just for fun using the EOS 3000 what VG EF zoom lens do I look for at the bootie other than the kit lenses?
 
excalibur2 said:
EF lenses are expensive compared to FD\FDn....erm thanks to the digital guys:( But just for fun using the EOS 3000 what VG EF zoom lens do I look for at the bootie other than the kit lenses?
Click to expand...

That's always the problem when you are looking at lenses that are compatible with modern cameras. Any EF lens will fit, but you are unlikely to find many of them going cheap at car boot sales. Your best chance is probably third-party - Sigma EF lenses in particular have been produced for many years and sometimes turn up cheap.

The other option is adapters. You can stick Nikon F, M42, Olympus OM or Pentax K lenses on the front of an EOS with aid of the appropriate adapter, which can be found cheaply on eBay.
 
Well Will I have seen a quite few Canon and only a few Nikon but was never interested in EOS or Nikon AF until I eventually got fed up with OOF shots of my grandchildren and at the bootie saw a Nikon 401 with sigma80-200 zoom..erm well I thought you can't go wrong with a Nikon :D Well it was alright for a P&S newbie, so the hunt was on for a F100, but ended up with a F90x body (at the bootie)......well the point of my story is:- if I had picked up an EOS plastic fantastic in the beginning I would have had an AF camera ages before ended up with a decent Nikon ( with a set of zoom lenses) and more shots of my grandchildren (in focus).
That's an idea about adapters as I have plenty of manual focus lenses...but all depends if I keep up the interest in wanting to play with this 3000 as the booties will be ending soon and if I stick it in a drawer might forget to get it out next year ;)
 
I've pretty much come to the conclusion (even as a dyed in the wool Canon shooter) that the Film EOS bodies are pretty much a waste of time UNLESS you've already got a good supply of EF glass already for your existing Digital kit, purely because if you haven't you're pretty much limited to the EF f1.8 50mm and maybe the EF28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM as being the only semi-affordable lenses that are worth bothering with - the EF35-70s that were often used as a "kit zoom" for the low end bodies are IMO truly dreadful things, the EF28-90USM was a fair bit better, at least in terms of focussing speed, but the IQ was nothing to write home about.

But, if like me, you've got a bag full of the better quality EF L Lenses already, then buying one the most highly developed 35mm bodies produced (either the EOS 3 or the EOS-1V) for the peanuts they sell for is pretty much a no-brainer.
 
TheBigYin said:
I've pretty much come to the conclusion (even as a dyed in the wool Canon shooter) that the Film EOS bodies are pretty much a waste of time UNLESS you've already got a good supply of EF glass already for your existing Digital kit, purely because if you haven't you're pretty much limited to the EF f1.8 50mm and maybe the EF28-105mm f/3.5-4.5 II USM as being the only semi-affordable lenses that are worth bothering with - the EF35-70s that were often used as a "kit zoom" for the low end bodies are IMO truly dreadful things, the EF28-90USM was a fair bit better, at least in terms of focussing speed, but the IQ was nothing to write home about.

But, if like me, you've got a bag full of the better quality EF L Lenses already, then buying one the most highly developed 35mm bodies produced (either the EOS 3 or the EOS-1V) for the peanuts they sell for is pretty much a no-brainer.
Click to expand...

You've persuaded me the 300 was a stupid buy even if it was 10p, although it has a Canon strap...the cheapest batteries I could find were £6.20 so if it worked I have no lenses and if it didn't, I have no other cameras they take a CR2 :( Anyway I have the F90x with two decent zooms so I'll stick the 3000 into a drawer or bin it.
About a year or so ago I went into the back room of a charity shop and there were boxes of mainly Canon and IIRC Minolta AF etc bodies, so even the charity shops don't want them
 
Last edited:
At the bootie saw a 299T flashgun (for T70) which is better than my 277T as the head moves up and down and along side it was a EOS rebel with a silly Canon EF 35-80 (h'mm probably the worst lens they made) and a silly small triangle shape bag with instructions......Well I wouldn't mind the 299T so asked how much for the everything...and she said "make me an offer" so I said £4 but she said £5?...so I bought them and the way I look at it is:- at worst I've got a Canon lens cap, 299T and a couple of straps so wasn't a bad deal.
Now to try and find some CR2 batteries for 50p :D
 
Woodsy said:
Really need to get myself to some carboot sales. Never know, might find a Leica! Trololol
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: :D See quite a few folders.....and the really heavy tripods and light boxes get snapped up quite fast......I seem to just always miss the light boxes :(
 
Woodsy said:
Really need to get myself to some carboot sales. Never know, might find a Leica! Trololol
Click to expand...

I've given a list of makes to my car-boot-mad Auntie. I put "Leica" on it, pointed at it, and said "You'll never in a million years see one, but if I didn't write it down you're bound to tell me about the nice Leica you saw for £5, but it wasn't on the list so you didn't get it".
 
abdoujaparov said:
I've given a list of makes to my car-boot-mad Auntie. I put "Leica" on it, pointed at it, and said "You'll never in a million years see one, but if I didn't write it down you're bound to tell me about the nice Leica you saw for £5, but it wasn't on the list so you didn't get it".
Click to expand...

H'mm bit of a gamble as there is no guarantee that everything works and my rule normally is:- Only pay what you can afford to lose if it doesn't work....I've been caught out recently with the de-centred 19mm Canon lens and OM2 that I saw the fault but thought I could fix it, well I couldn't.

BTW..for some stupid reason Canon decided to put two different batteries in their EOS cameras..well I have the rebel II and the EOS 300...anyone know which is better.
 
Last edited:
excalibur2 said:
BTW..for some stupid reason Canon decided to put two different batteries in their EOS cameras..well I have the rebel II and the EOS 300...anyone know which is better.
Click to expand...

Actually, three...

2CR5, CR2 and CR123A were all used in Canon EOS film cameras.

And the EOS 300 is the better of the two. The EOS 300 was released in 1999 and the Rebel II (1000FN) was a cheap camera from 1992 (my very first EOS camera actually). Six zone metering in Rebel II, and 35 zone in the EOS 300, for example.
 
Jolyon Ralph said:
Actually, three...

2CR5, CR2 and CR123A were all used in Canon EOS film cameras.

And the EOS 300 is the better of the two. The EOS 300 was released in 1999 and the Rebel II (1000FN) was a cheap camera from 1992 (my very first EOS camera actually). Six zone metering in Rebel II, and 35 zone in the EOS 300, for example.
Click to expand...

Thanks... looks like the rebel II body for the bin then, so that means the lens (35-80 f4-f5.6) is very old as well although it looks mint and has a gold dotted ring around it saying Ultrasonic..whatever that means :eek:
 
stevelmx5 said:
'Ultrasonic' is in reference to the AF motor in some canon lenses. It's supposedly faster/quieter than 'standard' motors.
Click to expand...

The Nikon F90x is fast and will be interesting to see how the 300 compares...anyway the advantage filmies have over the digi guys is that it can be so cheap to play with the "toys"..so I'll have a bit of fun for £8.10 which inc the battery..
 
Just an update:- The EOS 300 plus older 35-80mm kit lens and all seems to be working, I think the AF is a bit slower compared to the F90x but very quiet and if the kit lens give some VG results would recommend it if you couldn't get a F90x or F100 very cheap.
So it's worth spending about £5 for this very light combo if you want a AF SLR...well only if the kit lens produces the results and now to put a film in it to find out.
Also as the hotshoe has five contacts so everything might work using the super duper 300tl flash gun made for the T90, although the syn speed is only 1/90 sec.... the T90 will go to 1/250 sec.
 
To wrap this thread up:- The lens is quite good but the Kodak colorplus exp 2009 didn't improve the shot anyway a shot for Dean and others who can't drive passed this establishment :D
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top