EOS R, EF-S Lens Crop Loss of Megapixels

[mindawoo]

I currently using a t2i Canon 18 mp crop sensor camera, According to Canon, when EF-S lenses are used on the EOS R camera the camera "will automatically produce cropped 11.6-megapixel images that match the smaller image circle of EF-S optics." So a 30mp camera effectively is now 11.6mp, much less than what I have with my current set up. I am looking to move to full frame so the EOS R seemed to be the way to go until I hit this stumbling block. I can't afford to buy both the camera and new lenses at the same time but plan to upgrade lenses slowly as budget permits. Is this something I should be concerned about or will having a better sensor and newer technologies make up for the loss in megapixels?

[diverhank]

Everyone will have to cross this bridge sooner or later - when switching to full frame you have to abandon the EF-S lenses.  At least the EOS-R gives you a choice (less optimum, granted).

If budget is tight, I'd suggest getting a EF 50mm f/1.8 STM lens for starter.  This $125 gem is a real bargain with quality way surpasses its modest price.  This FL - 50mm - is quite well suited for a full frame camera.

[CarlG]

Hi!,

I did a little poking around and it appears the EOS R is the only full frame DSLR that can utlize the EF-S lens although at a loss of pixels. I have the EOS-R but I also have an 80D both cameras can utlize either or (The EOS R with Adapter). That being said when I started with crop sensor cameras I also bought EF L Glass along the way (My t3i, T6i and 80D all fit EF-s or EF lenses) knowing I would be moving to full frame eventually. As long as you keep an APS-C camera as a second body the EOS R in my humble opinion is the next generation of full frame cameras. At least your lenses will work on it.

Been shotting Canon since 1976

CarlG

[ebiggs1]

The future is mirrorless. That is a fact.  WHy build a complicated expensive shutter mech if you don;t have to? 

It just isn't today.  "Been shotting Canon since 1976"  You and I might not make the mirrorless take over!  

[CarlG]

Not today yes. But I wanted in so I dove in head first. I remember my switch from 35mm to digital....I spit and cussed and fumed right up until I bought my first DSLR in 2013....yep took me that long.... I used an EOS 630 and my old AV-1 right up to 2013....and I never looked back. Still have MY AV-1. Mom gave me that when I was 15, what a wonderful little Camera and it still operates flawlessly. So it's a keeper. Don't get me wrong I own several Canon Digital Point and Shoots over the years that were OK during my change over decision. Once they got "good enough" I made the decision to switch.

Took me months to re-learn EVERYTHING. I expect about the same learning curve with the EOS R. I didn't buy it for Video so none of that matters to me. What I have found is the EOS R with prime lenses is unmatched in tack sharp photos. I have a 24-105 USM II L that I may actually have a lens issue or operator error issue. Still working with that. Not that big of a deal but it is sometime just too soft. I am keeping the 80D and I thought It was the APS C that kept that same lens from being sharp. I micro-adjusted the fool out of it and never could get it right on the 80D. I may send it into CS and see if they can do something with it. But I Want to do a side by side comparison on different bodies first.

But I digress, this time I wanted in early so I could learn the nuances of Mirrorless vs Pentaprism. When I retire from my current occupation I want to go full time pro. Right now I just shoot small weddings and a lot of PeeWee Football...now that's fun and funny. I've also done some landscape for a few people that paid well.

Keep shooting!

[ebiggs1]

" I micro-adjusted the fool out of it and never could get it right on the 80D."

You do know that focus adjustment does not make a lens any sharper.  Not at all.  It simply moves the critical focus point forward or backward.  Once a lens is made it will never be or get any sharper.

A lot of folks, even one guy that frequents this forum, get lost in AFMA and frustrated and disappointed after they spend hours doing it and the lens still isn't any sharper. In fact you are adjusting the camera and not the lens.

[CarlG]

Yeah I know. I was just trying to get it as sharp as possible. I may send it to CS and let them look at it. It is an L lens it should be sharper. Or maybe I'm just a little bleep retentive about these things

[ebiggs1]

" I may send it to CS and let them look at it. It is an L lens it should be sharper."

OK you can send it in but if there is not any mechanical damage of miss-alignment the lens is still as sharp as it will ever be.  Even Canon can not make it any sharper than it is. It is best to send the camera/lens combo in together.

[CarlG]

---

@ebiggs1 wrote:

" I may send it to CS and let them look at it. It is an L lens it should be sharper."

OK you can send it in but if there is not any mechanical damage of miss-alignment the lens is still as sharp as it will ever be.  Even Canon can not make it any sharper than it is. It is best to send the camera/lens combo in together.

---

With any number of my prime lenses I get tack sharp images even down to 200 300% mag with the EOS R. It is this one L 24-105 I seem to be having issues with. It's about a year old now. I think it is an alignment problem internally. I am overly protective of my glass it has never been banged around or dropped. All of my gear is transported in Pelican Cases when I travel. I am waiting for a 100-400 USM IS L II to arrive. We'll see how that is before I go sending this one off. I may be expecting too much from these lenses.

I really appreciate your input. Nice to get help from a pro.

thanks!

[ebiggs1]

"I Want to do a side by side comparison on different bodies first."

I made that my hobby right after I retired but I did it with lenses. I don't even know how many lenses I bought and sold over the last 15 years but it is in the many dozens.