to L or not too L

[mrdinh]

gonna buy the D60, wonder what the xperts think...should i buy the l series lenses or save money and get something a little less in money...

thanks

[Pekka]

There are a lot of fine lenses which are not L and also some L's which might be not as L's as they could be (35-350/3,5-5,6 L comes to mind) :)

Some great non L lenses:

- Sigma 20, 24 and 28mm f/1.8
- Canon 35 f/2
- Canon 50 f/1.8 and f/1.4 and macro f/2.5
- Sigma 28-70 and 70-200
- Canon 100 f/2.8 macro and Sigma 105 and 180 macros
- Canon 85 f/1.8
- Canon 28 f/2.8
- Canon 100 f/2
- Canon 24-85

For some quality reference (read with some reservations) check out ratings in
http://www.cmpsolv.com/photozone/resultEOS.htm

Quite reliable sharpness measurements are at http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html

User comments: http://www.photographyreview.com

[mrdinh]

help please...no one else out there?

[mrbobco]

hi...

i agree with most of pekka's list...i think the 50/1.4 and 85/1.8 are indispensable for low light lenses...i've never been really satisfied by the sigma's build and quality control...so i haven't a lot of experience with them...

but...if you MUST own one L...i think you'll see most everybody will mention the 28-70/2.8 L...it was my first L lens (my first lens was the canon 28-135 IS...a good lens although the variable aperture could get very tiring after a while...and not nearly as sharp...of course for $500 less than the 28-70L i suppose you get what you pay for :eyes

the photozone site is a bit weighted in FAVOR of non-L lenses (since there are so many more reviews of non-L lenses)

if you are really interested in numbers...check out the photodo site that pekka mentioned...or just browse forums for input (it's all SO subjective, i know)

so...a suggestion from a serious amateur? think a good collection would be the 50/1.4; 100/2.8 macro and 28-70/2.8 L (the macro is really optional...it depends on what you shoot)

hope this helps :)

bob

[jadams]

How do you intend to use your D60? What type of photos will you be taking? What do you intend to do with them once you've taken them? Are you willing to spend a lot of time in post processing?

All of these questions could help me give you a better reply. Check out the links Pekka gave you. They should help you figure some tings out. Of course, there's a bias in many of those sites, but generally if you look long enough you can figure it out and form your own opinion.

With my new 1D, I've just been thrown into the world of now needing Canon EF mounts. I bought the 28-70 f/2.8L USM when I bought my camera. It's a good "traveling lens" and I plan to get a lot of use out of it. It currently has a $100 Mail in Rebate from Canon if you buy from a valid reseller. That, of course, aided my enthusiasm to purchase it.

Well, it will at least hold me over until I've decided which lens to add next. I'm drooling over the selection of "white" lenses. I just can't decide. :)

The day I first got my 1D I borrowed a few "cheap" lenses from a friend (my lens didn't come in for a day or two.. they had to order it). The photos were good. I find, at least in my experience, that the L glass produces sharper pictures (better focus) and more crisp/contrasty colors. It performence also tends to be stable throughout all settings.

As long as you know the limits of the lens that's on your camera, you should be able to get good results with whatever you buy. (i.e. if your lens doesn't perform as well at it's smallest/widest app. and/or largest focal lengths -- stay away from them)

If you're willing to spend the time, many times you can help a lesser quality lens along with post processing in Photoshop. I did this with some of the photos I took with my friend's lenses. I found that I sharpened/saturated more than I do with my photos on my lens.

Keep in mind that your lens is your camera's eye to the world. It's going to be the biggest factor in the quality of your photos. I suggest that you get at least one lens that you spend "a good amount" of money on. Spend what you can justify. If you're taking vacation snapshots, you probably don't need a $6500 telephoto (I had to wipe up the drool after I saw some of the photos from this lens). But if you're devoting a serious amount of time to photography, you don't want to buy the minimum.

With few exceptions, you get what you pay for in a lens. And it DOES show. It's just a matter of what you're going to do with the photos and if the difference is going to matter.

A good lens tends to hold it's resale value pretty well. I've sold some lenses that I took good care of 5 years later for within 5% of what I paid for it new. Not that you should invest your savings in lenses, but a good lens will be a good lens for some time.

I hope this helps,
Jasper

P.S. - Now if some of my A/R's would just pay me, I could go shopping again and "review" some lenses. :)

[Rudi]

Jasper,

May I suggest one of the Canon 70-200 L zooms for your next purchase... :D

To make it easier on you, it really doesn't matter which one you buy... they're all wonderful! I had the f/4 version for a while, and for a (relatively) very cheap lens, it could not be beat. It's the best kept secret in the Canon arsenal, IMO. I have since upgraded to the f/2.8 version, and, if you don't mind carrying the extra weight, it's well worth it.

If you don't mind carrying even MORE weight, the f/2.8 IS version is the one for you! :) And, as your arms get tired and you start getting the "shakes", the IS will really come in handy! :D

[Sheila]

mrdinh wrote:
gonna buy the D60, wonder what the xperts think...should i buy the l series lenses or save money and get something a little less in money...

thanks

Before you do anything, I suggest you order the D60 as from reading many sites, there is a dearth of D60s both in the US and here in Australia. When you get the D60 in your hot little hands, then decide which lenses to buy. Lenses are in full supply everywhere whereas the D60 isn't! I am still waiting for mine to arrive and I have sold my G2 in expectancy - now I have no camera (except the little Ixus).

Cheers and happy waiting!
Sheila

[Sheila]

Pekka wrote:
There are a lot of fine lenses which are not L and also some L's which might be not as L's as they could be (35-350/3,5-5,6 L comes to mind) :)

Some great non L lenses:

- Sigma 20, 24 and 28mm f/1.8
- Canon 35 f/2
- Canon 50 f/1.8 and f/1.4 and macro f/2.5
- Sigma 28-70 and 70-200
- Canon 100 f/2.8 macro and Sigma 105 and 180 macros
- Canon 85 f/1.8
- Canon 28 f/2.8
- Canon 100 f/2
- Canon 24-85

For some quality reference (read with some reservations) check out ratings in
http://www.cmpsolv.com/photozone/resultEOS.htm

Quite reliable sharpness measurements are at http://www.photodo.com/nav/prodindex.html

User comments: http://www.photographyreview.com

Thanks Pekka for this information.
Regards
Sheila

[Rudi]

It's amazing how few zooms show up in that list... :)

Even more amazingly, the 28/2.8 and the 85/1.8 are on my "to buy" list! (already have the 50/1.4) :D