The Mystery of the "L"

[WebErika]

ok. I know I shouldn't ask ...

but why "L"?

I mean --- does it compose the pictures for you?
Does it compensate for your lack of talent?
Is it really like the maserati of lenses?

Why would I want one?
What does it stand for?
How does one know what to look for?

Please don't shoot me ... :D

<---n00bie! :D

[WebErika]

ok ok.

I came across this ...
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-L-Series-Lens-Review.aspx

Guess it sums it up pretty well.

Is there anything that I should know that's not in that article? :D

[Ikinaa]

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Photography-Tips/Canon-L-Series-Lens-Review.aspx


I like this best Many of the Canon L lenses share a 77mm filter size. Because of this, sharing filters such as the Heliopan Circular Polarizer is possible with many of the lenses in this lineup. More space in the bag and money savings result.

In fact, if you buy these lenses, it's for saving money. :twisted:

[Scottes]

Do you need L? No.

Do you want L? Yes.

L lenses ("Luxury") are just overall excellent lenses, like the article said. And they're an addicition, like the article said. And they're expensive - I'm not sure if they mention that.

Generally speaking, but not always - if you want sharp images without chromatic aberrations, fast focusing speeds, or a combination - then L will fit the bill.

There are others out there - some Sigmas and Tokinas and Tamron - which are also excellent, and just about always much cheaper than L.


The real questions are: Do you *need* better image quality? Do you need faster AF? Do you need better bokeh? Do you need better low-light handling?

If the answer to any of these is Yes then go out and look for (or ask here) the best lens that you can afford. If the best you can afford is not good enough, sit back and save for a while. Either way, you may or may not end up with an L lens.


L is not the answer to everything. But it is a damned good answer.

[KennyG]

I will add a couple of more points:

Better resale value. L glass holds its value.

All but a few L lenses are weather sealed. You need a matching camera to take total advantage of that feature, but it also means they are less prone to dust problems.

Better built than the competition and Canon's own consumer line. You certainly know it is an L lens when you get hold of it.

Generally tend to be faster lenses both in aperture and focus speed. Some of the competitive lenses look great on paper and in fact work well on stationary subjects, but fall over the minute the AF gets stretched.

Image quality is always a subjective issue. In general terms an L lens has less CA and flare, more contrast, better bokeh and produces images that almost have a 3D film look about them. You may or may not like or even notice the difference. Not everyone can see some of the subtle differences.

Is it the Maserati of lenses? Well, Maserati don't exactly have a good reputation for build quality so I would say more like a Bentley R Turbo.

[hmhm]

"L" is just a marketing designation, it denotes lenses designed to be "particularly high quality", typically targeting professional applications, and priced accordingly. There is no single piece of "technology" that is connoted by the L designation, it's just a "marquee" for Canon's "best stuff".

Anybody who can look at a photo and say "that was shot with an L lens!" is a goofball. The L lenses are typically good examples of what they are. For instance, a 24-70L is a good f/2.8 24-70 zoom. But it's still not as sharp as a 50mm prime.

If you need a fast telephoto prime, well, they're all L lenses. If you need a very fast wide-angle lens, well, they're L lenses too. If you need a zoom, well, the L zooms are faster and with higher build quality and higher image quality at a given aperture.

Do you need them? You never need an L, as (by itself) that only implies a red ring and maybe some light beige paint. You may need a lens with properties (speed, image quality) exhibited only by a lens that happens to hold an L designation. More likely, though, you'll only want it, and there are certainly those who want the L designation more than the lens' capabilities itself.
-harry

[Tom W]

"L" is just a marketing designation, it denotes lenses designed to be "particularly high quality", typically targeting professional applications, and priced accordingly. There is no single piece of "technology" that is connoted by the L designation, it's just a "marquee" for Canon's "best stuff".

Anybody who can look at a photo and say "that was shot with an L lens!" is a goofball. The L lenses are typically good examples of what they are. For instance, a 24-70L is a good f/2.8 24-70 zoom. But it's still not as sharp as a 50mm prime.

But its pretty close to being as sharp at f/2.8 as other primes - not quite, but very close and certainly close enough that I doubt if the difference would show up on 8X10 or 11X14 inch enlargements.

If you need a fast telephoto prime, well, they're all L lenses. If you need a very fast wide-angle lens, well, they're L lenses too. If you need a zoom, well, the L zooms are faster and with higher build quality and higher image quality at a given aperture.

Do you need them? You never need an L, as (by itself) that only implies a red ring and maybe some light beige paint. You may need a lens with properties (speed, image quality) exhibited only by a lens that happens to hold an L designation. More likely, though, you'll only want it, and there are certainly those who want the L designation more than the lens' capabilities itself.
-harry

Well, it also implies superior build quality, but that's not a necessity either. People are shooting excellent pictures from lenses with a plastic mount and a missing distance scale.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Erika,

It is only a mystery to those who have not had the experience..... :roll: :wink:


The simplest way to answer is this...

For your next lens... serioulsy consider one fo the "L" Bargains...

17-40mm f/4 L
70-200mm f/4 L

...and see for yourself. You will be blown away! :)

These lenses above are very competitive and affordable. Consider that the 17-40mm is just $200.00 more than Sigma's clunker 15-30mm... the 70-200mm is LESS expensive than Sigma's 70-200mm.. (although the Sigma is f/2.8 and is in itself an AMAZING value and fine optic)

Try it,.. you'll like it :mrgreen:

[roanjohn]

There's no mystery.

It's there for you to enjoy..........

Try one and be amazed!!!

Ro1

[Cadwell]

For your next lens... serioulsy consider one fo the "L" Bargains...

17-40mm f/4 L
70-200mm f/4 L

...and see for yourself. You will be blown away! :)


In my opinion the 17-40L is good but not exceptional. The 70-200mm f/4L is something really special... Just my opinion.

[ilya]

Does it compensate for your lack of talent?

Yes

8)

[drisley]

Which L lenses are NOT weather sealed?

[CoolToolGuy]

"L" is just a marketing designation, it denotes lenses designed to be "particularly high quality", typically targeting professional applications, and priced accordingly. There is no single piece of "technology" that is connoted by the L designation, it's just a "marquee" for Canon's "best stuff".
-harry

Just to set the record straight - from 'EF Lens Work III', the latest edition of Canon's hardcover book about lenses:

"L." This name is reserved only for those few lenses that can meet stringent standards of performance using fluorite (an artificial crystal), a ground and polished aspherical surface, UD, super UD lenses, or other special optical materials.

It is curious to me why Canon did not include the DO lenses in the 'L' club, but they have seemed to start a new club for them, as both of the DO lenses have green stripes on the lens barrel - hmmm!?

[Andy_T]

It is curious to me why Canon did not include the DO lenses in the 'L' club, but they have seemed to start a new club for them, as both of the DO lenses have green stripes on the lens barrel - hmmm!?

I've heard that there is some statement from Canon that DO lenses are all that L lenses are, and more.

So DO is actually the 'luxury' L (it sure is more expensive than 'plain' L :lol:)

Best regards,
Andy

[PacAce]

Which L lenses are NOT weather sealed?

According to Chuck Westfall of Canon, the following ARE weather sealed so whatever is not on it would NOT be weather sealed:

Here's the current list:

EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF400mm f/2.8L IS USM
EF400mm f/4 DO IS USM
EF500mm f/4L IS USM
EF600mm f/4L IS USM

EF16-35mm f/2.8L USM
EF17-40mm f/4L USM
EF24-70mm f/2.8L USM
EF28-300mm f/3.5-5.6L IS USM
EF70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

EF Extender 1.4X II
EF Extender 2X II

As a general rule, all L-series lenses announced since the second half of 1999 (plus the 400/4 DO) have lens mount gaskets, and I expect this trend to continue in the future. EF lenses without lens mount gaskets cannot be retrofitted.

[Jesper]

Which L lenses are NOT weather sealed?
According to Chuck Westfall of Canon, the following ARE weather sealed so whatever is not on it would NOT be weather sealed:

Here's the current list:
...
EF17-40mm f/4L USM
...

Hmmm.... I have the 17-40L and it does have a very nice rubber seal around the lens mount, but the manual says that you should put a clear (UV or skylight) filter on the front of the lens to make it completely weather sealed. So it's not completely sealed....

[CoolToolGuy]

It is curious to me why Canon did not include the DO lenses in the 'L' club, but they have seemed to start a new club for them, as both of the DO lenses have green stripes on the lens barrel - hmmm!?

I've heard that there is some statement from Canon that DO lenses are all that L lenses are, and more.

So DO is actually the 'luxury' L (it sure is more expensive than 'plain' L :lol:)

Best regards,
Andy

[start of really stretching for humor]So if you use the alphabet (English, that is) and start at 'L' (12th letter) and count 4 more letters (D is the 4th letter) including 'L', you get to 'O'[end of stretch]

See, there is a logical explanation... :roll:

[roanjohn]

[start of really stretching for humor]So if you use the alphabet (English, that is) and start at 'L' (12th letter) and count 4 more letters (D is the 4th letter) including 'L', you get to 'O'[end of stretch]

See, there is a logical explanation... :roll:

Huh??? :!: :?:

Ro1

[CoolToolGuy]

[start of really stretching for humor]So if you use the alphabet (English, that is) and start at 'L' (12th letter) and count 4 more letters (D is the 4th letter) including 'L', you get to 'O'[end of stretch]

See, there is a logical explanation... :roll:

Huh??? :!: :?:

Ro1

Geez, was it that obtuse? Oh, well never mind. :oops: