Canon L series

[nden]

What is it? I surf this site http://web.canon.jp/imaging/l-lens/index.html and I don't know what is L stand for. "Luxury"?

So to someone who has these L lens. How do they compared to normal Canon lens. My wishlist is the 50mm f1.2 L USM lens :) They are very expensive lens I could not afford one any soon as my noob experiences.

[VorteC]

they are made with better materials.. so it's quality is on another level. because of the extra pieces of metal around the rings and stuff (don't know technical terms), it's weight is also upped. The price and the weight suggest the lens are very distinctly purposed and for pro's or hardcore enthusiasts.

[KorruptioN]

L does seem to indirectly refer to "Luxury".

That said, you said you wanted the EF 50mm f1.2L. The EF 50mm f1.4 is a third of the price and you only lose a third of a stop ;)

[urameatball]

L is like the Infinity to Nissan, the Acura to Honda, the Lexus to Toyota.

people who can justify the expense will go straight to the "L" for the reassurance that they're getting a better product (sometimes a lot better, sometimes marginally better, but always better).

it's great marketing... and it works.

[ryan_lau100]

Flourite vs Glass
Metal vs Plastic
Sealed vs Non-sealed
Fast vs Slow
High contrast vs Low
Heavy vs Light
Reduced flare vs High
Smooth focus ring vs choppy

And of course the most important... the red ring... LOL
Once you go "L" you will never go back.

[tienm23]

I just picked up a 70-200mm f/4L IS USM and I am amazed, the image quality, contrast and sharpness are amazing. Now with the rebates on, I think I'm gonna grab me a 24-70mm f/2.8L... $2650 is lenses in a month..I must be crazy.

[nden]

Thanks for replies.

I was looking at Canon EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM and a EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM. I like taking landscape photos. There are my next lens I'd get. Prices on these lens are almost same. What should I pick?

[klam]

You pick the one based on the focal length you need. 10mm is a lot wider than 17mm on a crop camera. Likewise, 40mm is a lot longer than 22mm.

[Little Dragon]

L does seem to indirectly refer to "Luxury".

That said, you said you wanted the EF 50mm f1.2L. The EF 50mm f1.4 is a third of the price and you only lose a third of a stop ;)

true. i don't think the price difference is worth that third of a stop.

Thanks for replies.

I was looking at Canon EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM and a EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM. I like taking landscape photos. There are my next lens I'd get. Prices on these lens are almost same. What should I pick?

if you like landscape shots, i'd suggest a wide angle. therefore, the 10-22.

[CSAgent]

Careful, once you go L, you gotta satisfy your L cravings. Its like an addiction, no other kind of lenses will compare. They say the 17-55mm F2.8 IS is almost L quality though, I do not know if its true, however. Its price is up there with L glass.

[nden]

CSAgent, 17-55mm F2.8 IS is nice... Is it new product released? Look like a nice lens too.

Now, my notice: the EF 17-40mm f4.0L has hood and bag included in package, but the 10-22mm doesn't have anything included. Let me reconsider one more time.

This is my 2nd lens to add to my addition. It's a hard choice. Thanks for your inputs.

[jamied]

Now, my notice: the EF 17-40mm f4.0L has hood and bag included in package, but the 10-22mm doesn't have anything included. Let me reconsider one more time.

This is my 2nd lens to add to my addition. It's a hard choice. Thanks for your inputs.

I have the 17-40 L and it's one of my favorite lenses. Acceptably sharp at all focal lengths, good contrast, not too heavy. I wish I could say the same for my 24-105 L, which isn't as sharp and doesn't match the contrast of the 28-135 non-L it was "replacing" even though it was twice the price.:mad:

[aximrocks]

Now, my notice: the EF 17-40mm f4.0L has hood and bag included in package, but the 10-22mm doesn't have anything included. Let me reconsider one more time.

17-40 is a great walk-around lens, it's ultra wide on FF but not wide enough on a crop body. Personally I think the 17-40 is way over-rated. I'd go for the Tamron 17-50 F2.8. The Tamron is more value for money as it has a bigger zoom range and is 1 stop faster. The 17-40 has better build quality and faster focus speed (USM).

10-22 is an excellent lens for ultra wide work. I have also considered getting a 10-22, but ended up buying a Tokina 12-24 f4. It has very good optics, gorgeous color and contrast, constant F4 throughout the focal range and excellent build quality. The 10-22 is 2mm wider and has USM. Again the Tokina is more value for money. It's also $300 cheaper and comes with a hood!

[CSAgent]

CSAgent, 17-55mm F2.8 IS is nice... Is it new product released? Look like a nice lens too.



Its been out for a few years now actually, the price tag is what gets most people.

Tamron has a similar equivalent of 17-50mm F2.8 throughout, but no IS though. For 1/3rd of the price, its an awesome alternative.

[zero_]

Thanks for replies.

I was looking at Canon EF 17-40mm f4.0L USM and a EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM. I like taking landscape photos. There are my next lens I'd get. Prices on these lens are almost same. What should I pick?

For everyday walkaround lense, I will go with 17-40. The 10-22 is too tight of a focal range and wide angle is more for doing creative stuff (for me anyway). Plus 10-22 will not work on 5d or 1-series if you decide to upgrade later.

[zero_]

Its been out for a few years now actually, the price tag is what gets most people.

Tamron has a similar equivalent of 17-50mm F2.8 throughout, but no IS though. For 1/3rd of the price, its an awesome alternative.

I agree. Tamron 17-50 is a great alternative to the expensive 17-55 f2.8. Tokina has annoucned a 16-50 (i think) a while ago but have not seen it on the shelf yet. Plus the dust issue with the 17-55 scares me away.

[hagbard]

Not to disappoint KorruptioN, my 17-40L was total crap x100. Before sinking money into one, read in the computer forums what people say about the Tamron 17-50. Most agree its a much nicer lens though some say it doesn't have the "build quality" (which considering mine, is a good thing). The Tamron is faster and sharper, and has a longer warranty (and whatever the warranty, it can't possibly be any worse than the Canon).

[cy]

Careful, once you go L, you gotta satisfy your L cravings. Its like an addiction, no other kind of lenses will compare. They say the 17-55mm F2.8 IS is almost L quality though, I do not know if its true, however. Its price is up there with L glass.

I do own the 17-55 F2.8 IS, and it's a beautiful lens. It uses UD glass elements as well which is the same on the L lenses. I am loving the F2.8 for the lowlight capability and the good bokehs ;)

One down side is, it's an EF-S mount, which means if you are planning to go full frame (5D for now), and the 1D series, it will not work. Having that said, I would say 85% of the average shooter will 1) Have more than 1 body as a backup, and it will probably be a 1.6x crop camera (EF-S) 2) keep one of the 1.6x crop camera since it's good if you need the extra length 3) just stay in the range of cropped sensor since the others are out of the price range.

Having that said, I will be keeping my 17-55 as long as it doesn't break, and will also keep one of my bodies as a back up. (currently with XTi and 40D, but will upgrade to 5D/5DMkII soon)

[cy]

Not to disappoint KorruptioN, my 17-40L was total crap x100. Before sinking money into one, read in the computer forums what people say about the Tamron 17-50. Most agree its a much nicer lens though some say it doesn't have the "build quality" (which considering mine, is a good thing). The Tamron is faster and sharper, and has a longer warranty (and whatever the warranty, it can't possibly be any worse than the Canon).

As far as I know, 17-40L is a great lens. Please define "crap".

[magical]

Not to disappoint KorruptioN, my 17-40L was total crap x100. Before sinking money into one, read in the computer forums what people say about the Tamron 17-50. Most agree its a much nicer lens though some say it doesn't have the "build quality" (which considering mine, is a good thing). The Tamron is faster and sharper, and has a longer warranty (and whatever the warranty, it can't possibly be any worse than the Canon).

You should rename your nick to 'canonbasher' or something like that, because we all know your story about being burned by canon, many many people have the 17-40L and have nothing but excellent results with the high quality lens, yes with any lenses there is the chance that you might get one that isn't up to spec.

It seems that if "canon" is in the subject that you must bash them, everyone is sick of hearing it and we all understand what its like to get burned, but I think its time you move on and free us of hearing about your rant that we have heard over and over now for what seems a eternity.

I myself own the Tamron Lens but the only reason I suggest it over the Canon counterpart is its affordability, other than that I would rather have the canon equiv but it all comes down to money.

On another note, on one of the above posts, where listing the differences between L Glass and Standard glass, I might note that not all of the canon L lenses are Weather Sealed... IE the 70-200 F4/L and others are not, whereas the 70-200 F2.8's are ... something you might want to add or make sure that is clear.

[hagbard]

You should rename your nick to 'canonbasher' or something like that, because we all know your story about being burned by canon,

Apparently not, since every time I bring it up, people ask me about it.

many many people have the 17-40L and have nothing but excellent results with the high quality lens, yes with any lenses there is the chance that you might get one that isn't up to spec.

I suggest you check dpreview or photography-on-the.net. You'll find more than your average amount of complaints on this lens. Yes, you'll also find lots who love it but even this people admit its "a bit soft on the edges".

It seems that if "canon" is in the subject that you must bash them, everyone is sick of hearing it and we all understand what its like to get burned, but I think its time you move on and free us of hearing about your rant that we have heard over and over now for what seems a eternity.

Add me to your "ignore" list. Problem solved.

I myself own the Tamron Lens but the only reason I suggest it over the Canon counterpart is its affordability, other than that I would rather have the canon equiv but it all comes down to money.

Your choice. Again, if you check what people say, most prefer the Tamron as the superior lens. I strongly suggest people research both lenses before making a choice. And I will repeat, if Canon screws up with a repair, they won't be helpful.

[cy]

Your choice. Again, if you check what people say, most prefer the Tamron as the superior lens. I strongly suggest people research both lenses before making a choice. And I will repeat, if Canon screws up with a repair, they won't be helpful.

Canon has been very good to me, and all the people around me.

You didn't answer my question tho...please define "crap" and share your experience? What do you use?


FYI: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=3&sort=7&cat=27&page=1

Afterall it's only around a 700-800 (even cheaper used) L quality lens.

[hagbard]

Canon has been very good to me, and all the people around me.

But did they totally screw up in your case? In mine, they actually LOST the lens and their response was to ignore me rather than admit and and works something out.

You didn't answer my question tho...please define "crap"



Mine produced very soft photos even on a tripod. I suspect there was oil film on the lens, since it was clearly not a typical "back focus" issue that so many others had reported.

and share your experience?

I sent it to Canon to let them have a look at it. Called to confirm they got it a week later (they did), was told they were "very busy" but would get back to me in a few days. A month passed and I got no call. Called them, no one available, left a voice message. No reply after a couple days. Called again, got the receptionist, still no one available, left another message. Repeated this daily for over a week before I started getting angry with the receptionist for not putting me through to a real person ("you have NO ONE that can tell me about my repair???"). After an additional two weeks of this, wrote a Fax to the President of Canon Canada. Within the day, the Calgary repair facility called and left a message that they'd "escalate you're repair". A week after that, got another call (left on my machine) that they'd lost the lens. I finally got a refund, but not for what I could actually buy a replacement for, nor any compensation for the BS they put me through. This lens, btw, was under warranty.

What do you use?

For now, I'm back with a P&S. I intend to get the Nikon D300, I'll decide on a lens later.

FYI: http://www.fredmiranda.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=3&sort=7&cat=27&page=1

Afterall it's only around a 700-800 (even cheaper used) L quality lens.

You'll find, if you look around, that many do not consider this particular lens "L" quality. If you're looking for a wide zoom, go with the Tamron. Its cheaper, sharper and faster.

[cy]

I see....that definitely doesn't sound like a nice experience.

I hoep nikon will treat you better :)

[CSAgent]

That is really bad what you went through.

Losing a lense and not even reimbursing you for the item or a full monetary amount to replace it is unacceptable. I'm surprised you did not take it further through legal means. The item was your property and it was lost, I would say that's grounds for further legal action. Its just smart corporate responsibility when it comes to a customer.

If it was me, I'd get a lawyer involved to reclaim my lost property. A L class lense is not cheap, its more than a thousand dollars!

[KorruptioN]

A L class lense is not cheap, its more than a thousand dollars!

Not always.

The 70-200mm F4L is easily found under $1K.

[hagbard]

That is really bad what you went through.

Losing a lense and not even reimbursing you for the item or a full monetary amount to replace it is unacceptable. I'm surprised you did not take it further through legal means. The item was your property and it was lost, I would say that's grounds for further legal action. Its just smart corporate responsibility when it comes to a customer.



I considered taking them to small claims court, but it would have been a huge hassle. Having an angry (and vocal) former customer, I'm sure, doesn't help them.

IMO, Canon should drop their current Calgary service centre and contract with another firm. Those people should be out of work. And given that Canon pretty much handed the issue back to the service centre shows a total lack of concern on Canon's part.

I see....that definitely doesn't sound like a nice experience.

I hoep nikon will treat you better :)

Thanks. I hope I never have to use their repair services, though I can't imagine they could possibliy be worse. I was a loyal Canon customer for nearly thirty years, never had to use their repair services till then (though I did have a Canon A-1 rebuilt in 2002 at an authorized service centre locally). Their stuff is usually well enough made as to not require servicing, but if you do and they screw up along the line, good luck getting them to talk to you.

[cy]

All in all, good luck. Keep us posted with your new D300 (when you get it) :)

[eelfliw]

What is it? I surf this site http://web.canon.jp/imaging/l-lens/index.html and I don't know what is L stand for. "Luxury"?
It's just a designation for some lenses with specific capabilities.

Marketing people likes to play up the "L" designation so it implies status symbol and prestige.

And, of course, when they do that, suckers buy into it for the prestige instead of the functionality.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying L series lenses are no good. They are better than none L lenses. But just make sure if you by an L lens, you buy it for the add'l functionality it provides instead of the prestige it carries.

It's the same as people buying Porsches and Ferraris to drive on public roads. There's no where on public roads where the limits of those cars can be tested safely. But they buy it for the prestige.

[nden]

It's just a designation for some lenses with specific capabilities.

Marketing people likes to play up the "L" designation so it implies status symbol and prestige.

And, of course, when they do that, suckers buy into it for the prestige instead of the functionality.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying L series lenses are no good. They are better than none L lenses. But just make sure if you by an L lens, you buy it for the add'l functionality it provides instead of the prestige it carries.

It's the same as people buying Porsches and Ferraris to drive on public roads. There's no where on public roads where the limits of those cars can be tested safely. But they buy it for the prestige.

Yah. True that.

[nden]

Just got the 10-22mm lens yesterday. So, I went all the way down to the Docks to try out this lens this afternoon. Take a look:

http://www.unkool.com/photoblogs/images/20071005194200_cntower_thedocks2.jpg

I will try out in daytime this long weekend.

[o0aZuMi0o]

Nice ultra wide lens!

[cy]

Just got the 10-22mm lens yesterday. So, I went all the way down to the Docks to try out this lens this afternoon. Take a look:

http://www.unkool.com/photoblogs/images/20071005194200_cntower_thedocks2.jpg

I will try out in daytime this long weekend.

For people that don't want to spend as much, check out the Sigma 10-20mm as well. According to testes, it perform just as well as the Canon, but a few hundred bucks cheaper. The Siggy uses UD glass element, which is the glass that is being used in the Canon L lens ;)


You lose 2mm on the long end, but that can be easily compensated.

[akide]

just picked up the ultra rare canon 200 1.8L

been looking for one for 3 years and finally found it! Flew down to the states to meet up with the seller to buy it.... definately worth it's weight in gold!

[shervin2]

just picked up the ultra rare canon 200 1.8L

been looking for one for 3 years and finally found it! Flew down to the states to meet up with the seller to buy it.... definately worth it's weight in gold!

Are you a CEO of a fortune 500 company or something? :razz:

[KorruptioN]

just picked up the ultra rare canon 200 1.8L

been looking for one for 3 years and finally found it! Flew down to the states to meet up with the seller to buy it.... definately worth it's weight in gold!

The thing must be absolutely massive :-0

[nden]

just picked up the ultra rare canon 200 1.8L

been looking for one for 3 years and finally found it! Flew down to the states to meet up with the seller to buy it.... definately worth it's weight in gold!

Want to show us some photos with this lens? omg... 1.8L

[akide]

Are you a CEO of a fortune 500 company or something? :razz:

not quite, good glass is hard to come by and i've promised myself that i'd get this lens and yes finally i got it!

[KorruptioN]

Which of your limbs did you have to give up?