Canon 'L' lenses

[KarlosFandango]

What do you really get with these lenses that can command such a premium? I'm looking at getting a zoom lens and have a vague idea of what I want. I've heard that the Canon 55-250 is quite capable and at around £150 with IS built in I'm questioning if spending around £400 on a 70-200 f4 L is worth it.

Are the results with an L lens going to be that noticeable for a more amateur photographer?

[Typhon]

Very fast focus, weatherproofing on most of them, build quality, picture quality, and a pleasure to use.. Definatley worth it IMO. With a few exceptions (macro, some primes, etc), I wouldn't buy anything else.

[Byker28i]

Or try MPB photographic for quality second hand lenses.
£319 for the 70-200 F4 I've got one and wouldn't be without it. Very light, great sharp lens
http://www.mpbphotographic.co.uk/index.php?id=23&a...

Edited by Byker28i on Tuesday 22 April 19:00

[miniman]

I was sceptical about how much better a 70-200 f/2.8 L could be than a Sigma 70-200 f/2.8.

Until I bought one.

[Jenx]

Once you've got got some you realise that L is for love Ther'sno going back once you've had them.

Martin.

[Goldeeno]

I think its mainly the trade off on the pure quality of the product. Sure there are alot of products that are similar, but ask anyone who owns L glass you wont hear a bad review, maybe apart from the price. But once you have the best, why have anything else. Although i must admit the sigma lenses are great value for money.

[Jenx]

Goldeeno said:

I think its mainly the trade off on the pure quality of the product. Sure there are alot of products that are similar, but ask anyone who owns L glass you wont hear a bad review, maybe apart from the price. But once you have the best, why have anything else. Although i must admit the sigma lenses are great value for money.

And to prove a point, the only lens I have that isn't an "L" is a Sigma DG HSM

[RobDickinson]

Your paying for a lot extra with the 'L's.


Just about ANY lens will produce decent results stopped down f8/f9.

With the L your paying for usability wide open, and that being 1-2-3 stops faster than the consumer lens. Which is a lot. A consumer f5.6 lens will be sharpish by f7 - and not realy usable wide open, an L f2.8 lens is usable at 2.8 and sharp a stop down.

Then theres the Autofocus motor, canon have 3, normal, micro USM and ring/full time USM, consumer lenses at best usualy have micro USM, which is pants compared to proper USM in both speed and function, being able to manualy adjust focus with AF engaged is excelent.

And then theres build. Solid metal construction with weathersealing. L lenses will go for ever.

Consumer lenses can be fine, and IMO canon charge a premium too much on some L's (17-40, the 70-200f4IS etc) but they are goodness...

[tog]

RobDickinson said:

being 1-2-3 stops faster than the consumer lens. Which is a lot.

and also makes them much larger and heavier. I'm a professional photographer, need the fast apertures so do use the 2.8 zooms, but I really wish they were lighter. Once you put a couple of EOS 1 bodies, a few 2.8 zooms, some flashes, batteries, etc etc in a bag it's getting not very good for your back...

Basically, 9 times out of 10 you won't notice the difference between the 'amateur' lenses and the 'pro' stuff. If you don't have to get the shot, rain or shine, night or day, then save your money. Try the cheaper lenses first, and if they let you get the pictures you want then they are the right lens for you. If you find yourself always running out of light, or unhappy with the sharpness, then splash out some more cash.

[RobDickinson]

Good advice, the best lens in the world does you no good if its left at home because its too heavy.

I just got a bking on another forum from someone because I recomended the 70-200f4 instead of the f2.8 if there not shooting low light/indoor sports, because the f4 is a lot lighter and handholdable easy.

My kit is usualy bought with an eye to weight due to hiking etc with it, I have some thats pure out of the back of the car stuff though.

[JD]

KarlosFandango said:

What do you really get with these lenses that can command such a premium? I'm looking at getting a zoom lens and have a vague idea of what I want. I've heard that the Canon 55-250 is quite capable and at around £150 with IS built in I'm questioning if spending around £400 on a 70-200 f4 L is worth it.

Are the results with an L lens going to be that noticeable for a more amateur photographer?

In your position, the 70-300IS is what I would go for, used to have one myself, its sharp, IS works well has both normal and panning modes and gives a really good range, only small gripe is the rotating end. Also regarded as very close to an "L" lens for image quality

but, selling that for something more day to day use, that has the famous Red band, the quality is fantastic, solid as you like, just seems to work well in your hands, full time focus override is very nice and the image quality is far in excess of anything I have had on the front of the camera before (apart from 70-200 F2.8L )

[RobDickinson]

Actualy I've seen some pretty good pics from the 55-250IS , I wouldnt worry about buying it unless you need 250-300 or something faster.

[DIW35]

Don't care what people say, I'm stll saving my pennies for a 2.8 IS.

[KarlosFandango]

RobDickinson said:

I just got a bking on another forum from someone because I recomended the 70-200f4 instead of the f2.8 if there not shooting low light/indoor sports, because the f4 is a lot lighter and handholdable easy.

Stop being ignorant

Thanks for all the info so far, I think I'll have to try and have a go with an L lens to see if it really is worth those extra pennies.

[RobDickinson]

KarlosFandango said:

RobDickinson said:

I just got a bking on another forum from someone because I recomended the 70-200f4 instead of the f2.8 if there not shooting low light/indoor sports, because the f4 is a lot lighter and handholdable easy.

Stop being ignorant

lol. Well at least he knows a bit more about his gear now....

[Captain Beaky]

KarlosFandango said:

Thanks for all the info so far, I think I'll have to try and have a go with an L lens to see if it really is worth those extra pennies.

Maybe rent one for a day or two and see what you think ?

[Greendubber]

Captain Beaky said:

KarlosFandango said:

Thanks for all the info so far, I think I'll have to try and have a go with an L lens to see if it really is worth those extra pennies.

Maybe rent one for a day or two and see what you think ?

where would you advise to rent from?. I'm off to watch a mate race his car in a month or so and would love to get some really good shots of it all for him.

I have a Tamron 70 - 300 which was fairly cheap so I'm not expecting greatness (although I'm sure some skill would help a bit!) so I'm thinking of hiring an L to see how I get on with one before splashing out a shed load of cash.

[Captain Beaky]

Greendubber said:

Captain Beaky said:

KarlosFandango said:

Thanks for all the info so far, I think I'll have to try and have a go with an L lens to see if it really is worth those extra pennies.

Maybe rent one for a day or two and see what you think ?

where would you advise to rent from?. I'm off to watch a mate race his car in a month or so and would love to get some really good shots of it all for him.

I have a Tamron 70 - 300 which was fairly cheap so I'm not expecting greatness (although I'm sure some skill would help a bit!) so I'm thinking of hiring an L to see how I get on with one before splashing out a shed load of cash.

You could try The Flash Centre, though I've not used them myself. A 100-400L sounds suitable for what you have in mind: £20 a day or £70 a week (excluding VAT & insurance)

[Greendubber]

Captain Beaky said:

Greendubber said:

Captain Beaky said:

KarlosFandango said:

Thanks for all the info so far, I think I'll have to try and have a go with an L lens to see if it really is worth those extra pennies.

Maybe rent one for a day or two and see what you think ?

where would you advise to rent from?. I'm off to watch a mate race his car in a month or so and would love to get some really good shots of it all for him.

I have a Tamron 70 - 300 which was fairly cheap so I'm not expecting greatness (although I'm sure some skill would help a bit!) so I'm thinking of hiring an L to see how I get on with one before splashing out a shed load of cash.

You could try The Flash Centre, though I've not used them myself. A 100-400L sounds suitable for what you have in mind: £20 a day or £70 a week (excluding VAT & insurance)

Thanks very much, I'll have a look into that.

Much appreciated.

[C&C]

Other places to rent from include:

http://www.lensesforhire.co.uk/
I think these guys deliver the lens to you or you can pick up in central London or Maidenhead
100-400L £52 for 7 days including VAT & optional insurance


http://www.calumetphoto.co.uk/ctl?ac.ui.pn=common....

http://www.procentre.co.uk/

http://www.fixationuk.com/Fixation/Rental.html

Edited by C&C on Wednesday 23 April 19:29