That Big White Lens

[yogestee]

I have spent a lot of time reading threads from POTNers,,often coming away shaking my head..

Example,,,,"I am new to DSLR photography getting my brand spanking new Canon Blah Blah this morning..I need a new lens for my camera.What should I buy??"

Reply,,,"Buy yourself a Canon L series Blah Blah..You wont be sorry". Etc etc etc..

What are people thinking..The ink on the receipt is hardly dry and shooters are wanting to buy that sparkling new white lens without first reading their camera's manual or gaining some skill level..Or wanting to buy that big white lens before they have bought a reliable external flash or even a sturdy camera bag to house their precious Canon Blah Blah..

Is it market appeal or is it too much expendable cash??

Jurgen

[ypx3]

For me, I know it is partly peer pressure, but more so it is hoping that the glass will make my photos better.
I don't have any L glass yet, I do have a bag, a flash and some other lenses, but I don't have the skill yet.
It is just easier to find a better lens, than it is to find the skill ;)

[shannyD]

for the most part when i am walking around in san francisco and see people with a 40D and a big white lens shooting in auto.. i just have to giggle at myself. their flash is always going off. so you know whatever they are shooting at is going to look flat.

they do their gear no justice.

i agree.. i like that i learned on my little Xti, and im glad for all of the mistakes that i made buying cheap glass. and using some bunk flash that i had to ghetto rig.. i think it made me better at some things.

so with that being said.

much love.

shannon

[blonde]

I have spent a lot of time reading threads from POTNers,,often coming away shaking my head..

Example,,,,"I am new to DSLR photography getting my brand spanking new Canon Blah Blah this morning..I need a new lens for my camera.What should I buy??"

Reply,,,"Buy yourself a Canon L series Blah Blah..You wont be sorry". Etc etc etc..

What are people thinking..The ink on the receipt is hardly dry and shooters are wanting to buy that sparkling new white lens without first reading their camera's manual or gaining some skill level..Or wanting to buy that big white lens before they have bought a reliable external flash or even a sturdy camera bag to house their precious Canon Blah Blah..

Is it market appeal or is it too much expendable cash??

Jurgen

i don't know what it is but i can tell you that you are wasting your breath. this is just something that became very common here and as sad as it is, i doubt that it will change.

my advice is to simply go to the share sections and admire the work that some members are posting even without any L lenses :)

[TooManyShots]

Hehehehe.........:) I doubt that the person would actually go out and buy one because the lens is often costing more than the body 2x or 3x. He or she is a noob. That won't make any sense to him or her.


I have spent a lot of time reading threads from POTNers,,often coming away shaking my head..

Example,,,,"I am new to DSLR photography getting my brand spanking new Canon Blah Blah this morning..I need a new lens for my camera.What should I buy??"

Reply,,,"Buy yourself a Canon L series Blah Blah..You wont be sorry". Etc etc etc..

What are people thinking..The ink on the receipt is hardly dry and shooters are wanting to buy that sparkling new white lens without first reading their camera's manual or gaining some skill level..Or wanting to buy that big white lens before they have bought a reliable external flash or even a sturdy camera bag to house their precious Canon Blah Blah..

Is it market appeal or is it too much expendable cash??

Jurgen

[Shasta]

Why are they white anyway? Once I find what equipment I need, I research everything and buy what I can afford that will fit the bill, don't really care what color or series it is, I'm not buying something just to say I have this or that. In fact I have quickly learned buying used saves me a lot of money. Thats why I laugh at show me your boxes threads too. I'm quite satisfied with the Sigma EX DG series anyway.

[JCheungPhoto]

for the most part when i am walking around in san francisco and see people with a 40D and a big white lens shooting in auto.. i just have to giggle at myself. their flash is always going off. so you know whatever they are shooting at is going to look flat.

they do their gear no justice.

i agree.. i like that i learned on my little Xti, and im glad for all of the mistakes that i made buying cheap glass. and using some bunk flash that i had to ghetto rig.. i think it made me better at some things.

so with that being said.

much love.

shannon

I had the priviliege of being a spoiled little photographer, learning the basics on a Nikon D70, kit lens, flash (the standard fleet camera for my yearbook staff) After shooting all manual on that rig I was entrusted with a Canon 30D, 16-35L MkI, 70-200 f2.8L, and 50mm f1.4. I know this spoils the hell out of me, but I'm glad I at least learned the basics of manual shooting with a prosumer Nikon D70.

[blonde]

Hehehehe.........:) I doubt that the person would actually go out and buy one because the lens is often costing more than the body 2x or 3x. He or she is a noob. That won't make any sense to him or her.

you are so wrong on this one.... we have seen it so many times here that it is not even funny anymore. many guys came to POTN and asked for advice and the first thing that they were told is that they need to get a better lens. a couple of days later, that guy will come back and say that his images still suck even though he picked up that 17-40L or 70-200 F4 L (the 2 most recommended here to noobs)

[yogestee]

I had the priviliege of being a spoiled little photographer, learning the basics on a Nikon D70, kit lens, flash (the standard fleet camera for my yearbook staff) After shooting all manual on that rig I was entrusted with a Canon 30D, 16-35L MkI, 70-200 f2.8L, and 50mm f1.4. I know this spoils the hell out of me, but I'm glad I at least learned the basics of manual shooting with a prosumer Nikon D70.

,,,,and we are spoiled by choices and realistically the cost of equipment..

Jurgen

[_aravena]

I think it's money really. I'm seeing so many kids coming here asking about lenses and what not with apparently unlimited funds? When did the internet become a haven for the rich and taking the advice of the first person to say get this? And maybe something else while they're at it.

:rolleyes:

[TooManyShots]

:) :lol::)

you are so wrong on this one.... we have seen it so many times here that it is not even funny anymore. many guys came to POTN and asked for advice and the first thing that they were told is that they need to get a better lens. a couple of days later, that guy will come back and say that his images still suck even though he picked up that 17-40L or 70-200 F4 L (the 2 most recommended here to noobs)

[JCheungPhoto]

I think it's money really. I'm seeing so many kids coming here asking about lenses and what not with apparently unlimited funds? When did the internet become a haven for the rich and taking the advice of the first person to say get this? And maybe something else while they're at it.

:rolleyes:

I hold multiple jobs to fund my camera equipment, it's not that I hold unlimited funds, but I have some options after saving a whole bunch of my own income.

[JCheungPhoto]

,,,,and we are spoiled by choices and realistically the cost of equipment..

Jurgen

even after saving up for years, I am still put into reality by prices...thank god for third-party lenses

[yogestee]

even after saving up for years, I am still put into reality by prices...thank god for third-party lenses

Nothing wrong with 3rd party lenses,,I have a few..

[_aravena]

I hold multiple jobs to fund my camera equipment, it's not that I hold unlimited funds, but I have some options after saving a whole bunch of my own income.

How old are you?

[perryge]

It's so true. I remember my dad telling me that he would only buy me my first SLR if I got a photo published first (I was really into photography, as was he, and he was impressed with my images). Then when I finally got it done and got the camera, he made me read a book on composition, which I followed up with about 8 other books + the manual. Then I found this site XD.

I'm eternally grateful to him for that and ultimately, the final image is where the real satisfaction comes from. I remember in my first darkroom class, nobody asked about gear because we were too busy ooing and aaahing over the final prints. I don't own any L lenses, let alone white ones yet either :(, though that might will likely change haha.

Actually one of my photography profs in a lighting class a while ago did something that I really appreciated. Most people in my class were n00bs but he knew that I knew my stuff, so he takes his 5D + 135L, puts it on green box, then tells me to shoot the same scene with my 400D + 85 1.8, and as a class, we chimped and he explained to them why my shot was better :lol:, it was pretty satisfying haha. He really enjoyed smacking down gearheads...

[drPheta]

Half of my gear is a write off, so that's why I have half of the lenses in my kit. I also learned to (or tried to learn) shoot in manul, Aper/Shutter priority on my Powershot S1 IS. With the telephoto zoom already built into it, I learned a hell of a lot. But, I definitely need to learned about 100x more.

That said, most people who enter dSLR do so thinking that their point and shoot results in poor quality images. In fact, they don't even realiz half of the P&S cameras out there have manual and scene modes that allow for specific ISO settings, lighting, even shutter and aperture values. So, they already have the "more $$$ = better image quality" mentality. Too bad more $$$ doesn't = more IQ in their cranium.

[lauderdalems]

Why are they white anyway? Once I find what equipment I need, I research everything and buy what I can afford that will fit the bill, don't really care what color or series it is, I'm not buying something just to say I have this or that. In fact I have quickly learned buying used saves me a lot of money. Thats why I laugh at show me your boxes threads too. I'm quite satisfied with the Sigma EX DG series anyway.

White reflect the sun rays and suppose to be cooler than black - when used in the sun for 3-5 hours at ball games.

Guess that is why the white lens are cooler.

[TitusvilleSurfer]

After using my friend's 10D and 18-55/70-300 for god knows how long, I knew I was ready for a 24-70 when I needed a lens for my 40D. I never looked back. I hope to add a 10-22, 70-200, and 100-400 or 400 prime as well. (though I'll admit it was pleasing to see his face greener than the "box" with envy)

[cicopo]

I am sorry to say but I most certainly agree with the idea that far too many new purchasers DON'T read the manual, nor do a lot of others thinking the new camera works like the old one. That is easily proven by the number of request re "how to change the owners name".
I also HATE seeing how so many others recommend others spend THEIR money on things they don't own (but wish they did) that just don't fit the question asked. I have a good gear set up, but that doesn't mean I need it, nor that I couldn't do fine without it. The most money I have made with photo gear was using an Olympus C-3030 but that wasn't because I am a pro, it was because I was ahead of my time & no longer needed to rely on a Polaroid.
To date the very best message I have taken issue with that once I did others also jumped all over was not here but elsewhere on a very popular forum where most members think "L" or it might as well be a dispoable camera; and told a 14 year old that IF while asking if a Sigma 70-300 APO DG would be a nice step up re wildlife use was worthy, ALMOST EVERY SINGLE REPLY suggested 100-400L or to forget about it and stick with the kit lens until he could afford one. That one was too much for me and I took them to task, but not one answered my question to them as to if that was what they would give their teenage photo enthusiast to HELP them enjoy a new hobby.
There is no substitute for a basic knowledge to basic photography and the rules that dictate what creates a proper exposure, and I HAVE taken 2 photography courses, BUT DO CONFESS to using the P mode most of the time because I have set my camera variables to suit my needs, BUT can quickly switch to manual, Tv or Av and know what to do instantly to correct an unusual situation. I don't consider myself an "artistic" photographer, but I can capture a scene.

[Shasta]

White reflect the sun rays and suppose to be cooler than black - when used in the sun for 3-5 hours at ball games.

Guess that is why the white lens are cooler.

Really, although I hate the color, if thats the reason, it makes sense. I think its a marketing gimmick.

[number six]

There isn't much difference between religious fanatics. Well, maybe a bit: as far as I know L zealots won't try to kill you for arguing with them.

Still: it's mostly irrational defense of the One True Path.

-js

[yogestee]

cicopo,,,I come from The Olde School of Photography,,,probably showing my age here..When I was shooting film I used manual everything,,,auto focus had not been invented and auto exposure was just becoming reliable..

Funny thing I mostly shoot on Program and always on Auto Focus..This current crop of Canons are just so good at metering and Auto Focus so accurate..Most of my work is documentary rarely setting a shot up..Auto is just so fast..

Jurgen

[yogestee]

There isn't much difference between religious fanatics. Well, maybe a bit: as far as I know L zealots won't try to kill you for arguing with them.

Still: it's mostly irrational defense of the One True Path.

-js

Huh??????

[computerguru3190]

I started out with a Nikon D100 and some ordinary lenses, the best being a decade old 80-200 that had seen better days. Learning to use that equipment was the most benefical thing ever.

Having just bought a 24-70 yesterday, I know the lure of expensive equipment. What makes it worth it is that I worked fourth months to save the funds for that lens.

I went and shot a basketball game last night and the pictures were a little sharper, but also it was nice to walk out there and go next to our normal newspaper guy. He took notice of the new lens and we spent a while talking about it. Also the other team's photographer came over and started chatting, which before I was always ignored by that guy.

So the alure of those expensive lenses have a reason. Now only in the knowledge was a prerequisite to that lens.

[yogestee]

On another note..In the 80s a local fellow photographer won the International Hasellblad Maters.A photographic store in town sponsored a 110 Masters (remember 110 format?) for the pro photographers in the area with the best entries exhibited..The subject matter was open as long as all entries were shot on 110..We were give 21 days to shoot, print and mount our entries..All entries had to be 16x20 inches..Talk about presure,,but fun..

Amazing what can be done with 110 and a bit of photographic knowledge..

Jurgen

[photojournalista]

a couple of days later, that guy will come back and say that his images still suck even though he picked up that 17-40L or 70-200 ...

:lol:
At least the images are sharper and has better colors. :p

[the_incubus]

my first and only dlsr is the 30D. When i was first looking to buy one a year or two ago i knew the xti wasn't for me. i would just not be happy with it (ergonomics wise not image quality). Also i had no clue about anything photography (advanced) related. So i got the 30D and its a great camera (im young and had to pay for it myself) but i could only afford it in the kit with the 18-55 and the *shudders* 75-300. However, now that i am pining for a 5D i wish i bought it instead and went straight for the top. The thing was, i didnt know if i was going to like photography and would want to pursue it further. Knowing what i know now i would have bought the 5D but the advice i would give to a person just starting out is get the Xti because you never really know if your going to like it.

Now i have no idea what the point of this point was i started with one thought in mind then just rambled. Sorry, im delirious.

:)

[_aravena]

^As always :p

[Anke]

So which one are you getting, the 24-70L or the 24-105L?

[_aravena]

Don't start that debate again.

[vwjoe76]

I always try to get what I need. I have a $60 lens, a $400 lens and a $1500 lens. When I started out it w/ photography I pulled out my dad's old AE-1 and a couple primes he had. I was hooked from that point and that was about 7 years ago. In no way do I consider myself a great photographer...I just shoot. Presently, I am a "PJ in learning". That of course involves the art of showing people the way I see them. It just so happens that lenses are as varied as the people and the situations I shoot in. That's how I fell into the 3 lenses I own. Yesterday, I shot a Chicano youth conference and a college basketball game. That's one example for my personal necessity for variety. That said, I got my best shot at the B-ball game (and the one that will probably be published in the little college paper I shoot for) with my Tamron 17-50. I'm rambling. But, I do agree that people like to float around advice on here as if it were their own $. I see A LOT of those "which lens to buy with my $600-700 budget?" questions and the majority of the responses start throwing big white lenses around. I don't know if this makes any sense, but I'm about to press the "submit reply" button.:) --joe

[vwjoe76]

Go with both! Haha! :lol:
So which one are you getting, the 24-70L or the 24-105L?

[drPheta]

I don't see why it's so hard to figure out which lens to get. There are a ton of archives. All one needs to do is figure out what style of shooting they like, look into a lens that fits their budget, and then see if people consistently produce the desired style photos.

PS. all this is "which lens" stuff is also tainted with "I have a soft copy," but that's a whole other can of worms.

[danielyamseng]

drPheta that's true:)!

[oaktree]

Since I've been shooting for 50 years and did lot of reading before getting a DSLR, I "knew" what I wanted for my first kit: XTi and 3 lenses. However, since I finally had enough money to afford other lenses, the question of what I should get next kept coming up whether I really needed more lenses or not.

So I can imagine that someone who is just starting in DSLR would have the same question. I think it's due to a combination of being excited with a new toy, thinking that getting a good lens will automatically make you a better photographer, the availability of dozens of lenses (not just the 50mm) and not wanting to make a BIG MISTAKE. So we ask, "What lens should I get?"

It takes time for newbies to realize that they should slow down, read the manual, go out and shoot, review/criticize their photos, learn more, etc. Eventually, once you know what you like to shoot and how you like to shot, "what lens should I get" becomes self-evident. But until then, the question keeps coming up. We old timers should be understanding. Most of us would probably have the same question if we had to start all over again knowing very little about photography.

Long ago, the answer was, "50mm, f/1.8". Now, the answer is: primes? zoom? wide, normal, telephoto? EF or EF-S? L, non-L, kit? IS, non-IS? Canon, Tokina, Sigma, Tamron? etc, etc!

[spamster]

I must agree that there's a good number of people who just get lenses right off the bat ... personally, I didn't get any lens until months after playing with the functions on my XTi and deciding on what I like to shoot, what focal lengths would suit my needs, etc... doesn't need to be an L lens of course, either way once you buy a lens (Canon, Sigma, Tamron, etc.) your wallet goes dry. :) Photography is quite the addiction.

[h4rri]

I've been through the whole 'buy cheap and regret later' alot. I've had a few lenses which were also expensive and been disappointed with their performance so in the end I have a bag of L's.

It doesn't help my shooting in that if I shoot crap then it's still crap but at least I know it's me thats producing crap and not my gear. I see it as false economy these days but then I have a reasonable disposable income so I can afford to have all that gear lying about.

I agree though, the solution [ie, the recommended lens] should fit the problem, if they have less to spend then go with the best you can afford. L's are a bit of a status symbol and some see them as a badge of honour :|

[Neilyb]

I only have the L's that I have becasue they fit my shooting. The 24-105 was a no brainer, it came with the 5D and was a whole lot cheaper than separate purchases. The 17-40 is the landscape dream...and a whole lot cheaper than the 16-35. With cash back it made no sense to buy a 3rd party lens. The 100-400 is the only lens that fit both budget and bag, had IS and was long enough for wildlife on the 5D....Sigmas version is heavier and the OS system klunkier. i took me a while to chose and get to the selection I have, experience and testing counted for alot....some people have enough money to dive straight in....well if they have the dosh let em get on with it. If there were 3rd party solution to my above selection I would have bought them....regardless of all the "Gotta get an L" syndrome here.

h4rri....where did you get the 100-400 f4 in your sig?? I want one :)

[pakomo]

Like h4rri, I don't want to "buy cheap and regret later", and that is what you risk if you don't buy quality lenses. Now, notice what I said: quality lenses - and I'm sorry to break it to you, but most L's are. There are also a lot of good lenses which aren't L's, a great deal of them are 3rd party, but there are certainly canon non-L quality lenses available.

However, let's look at another part of most peoples setup, the tripod. Would you really claim, that learning landscape photography with a cheap tripod is BETTER than learning on a steady tripod from the beginning? Many have said it already, learning composition is learning to be a good photographer; but I don't see how learning composition with a lens that well give you nice looking well composed shots is bad, compared to learning composition with a lens that will give you not so good looking well composed shots. Leaving me with the opinion: if you want it and can afford it, buy it - if you want it and can't afford it, save your money. That applies if it's L or not.

I just don't see it. Why would you learn better on inferior equipment? I'm not saying you always learn better using better equipment, even though I think in some you do, but you certainly don't learn worse using it.

[daleftw]

I sort of agree. This forum has started me on a very expensive path in which I'm pretty much just going to look at L series because "they're the best" and "you don't want to be caught out with something that is second best". Someone posted a comparison between the 17-40L and 10-22 at similar aperture and similar focal lengths, saying that the colours were better on the L. I couldn't tell a difference! Maybe I need to calibrate my monitor ;)

But I have seen some straight up awesome photos with L series lenses, and in the Canon Lens Work book you can see which lenses they are pushing (with good reason, I guess!). L lenses get great example shots. Kit lenses and lower level lenses, never have that impressive of a photo.

More often than not, the L also offers something that is not seen in the non-L offerings. Like for example, constant aperture, or the lens is just a whole lot faster than the consumer series lenses. If you need that fast glass, or the constant aperture, and you think it will affect the images you produce, then you obviously need to spend more money to get the image you want. There is no point in buying a cheap lens that doesn't do exactly what you want it to do.

[Chas.]

...but I have some options after saving a whole bunch of my own income.

You need a wife.:)

[blackshadow]

I bought L glass because I value the performance with the type of photography I do.

Today I got a few "wow - nice lens" comments from other photographers as I walked around Melbourne Zoo with a 70-200 f2.8L and a 1.4x teleconverter on the front of a 1DM3.

[Anke]

70-200 f2.8L and a 1.4x teleconverter on the front of a 1DM3.


Can't think of any better way to impress the ladies. I'm taking mine to the pub with me tonight as an experiment ;) :D :D

[drPheta]

I sort of agree. This forum has started me on a very expensive path in which I'm pretty much just going to look at L series because "they're the best" and "you don't want to be caught out with something that is second best". Someone posted a comparison between the 17-40L and 10-22 at similar aperture and similar focal lengths, saying that the colours were better on the L. I couldn't tell a difference! Maybe I need to calibrate my monitor ;)

But I have seen some straight up awesome photos with L series lenses, and in the Canon Lens Work book you can see which lenses they are pushing (with good reason, I guess!). L lenses get great example shots. Kit lenses and lower level lenses, never have that impressive of a photo.

More often than not, the L also offers something that is not seen in the non-L offerings. Like for example, constant aperture, or the lens is just a whole lot faster than the consumer series lenses. If you need that fast glass, or the constant aperture, and you think it will affect the images you produce, then you obviously need to spend more money to get the image you want. There is no point in buying a cheap lens that doesn't do exactly what you want it to do.

That would be me posting to help someone decide between two lenses. You bring up a very very valid point. How many people here have calibrated monitors? *raises hand*

That's another thing noobs need to consider when looking at images. For about a month, I was scratching my head wondering why images I took looked so different than other peoples. Then I realized the provided ICC for my monitor wasn't correct. Bought a monitor calibration kit, and things have been tasty since.

[SQMazda6]

If people want to spend money why hold them back? I think people on this board are the real problem.. we should maybe tell them to rent or borrow a lens.

[sadowsk2]

I think the strong resale value of L glass is comforting to some folks... Knowing you could turn around and see the thing used 2 years later for 80%-90% of its value is enticing to me to buy L glass.

[HyperYagami]

If people want to spend money why hold them back? I think people on this board are the real problem.. we should maybe tell them to rent or borrow a lens.

the problem is people are recommending L lenes blindly, regardless of cost, shooting style, etc.

if the need is narrowed down to only L would work then yes, it's up to the asker to bite the bullet.

[JCheungPhoto]

I always recommend renting first for those who try out L series lenses

[Randy1213]

Perhaps the problem is too many people on POTN spend too much time judging others' decisions and motivation? Hey, if someone wants to know whether the 70-200 f/2.8 L is really a good piece of glass, I'm going to offer my opinion without questioning whether they have the photog-cred to own one. Besides, anyone can take crappy pics. What separates me from the pack is that I can take crappy pics with the best glass around!

[smoov]

That said, most people who enter dSLR do so thinking that their point and shoot results in poor quality images. In fact, they don't even realiz half of the P&S cameras out there have manual and scene modes that allow for specific ISO settings, lighting, even shutter and aperture values. So, they already have the "more $$$ = better image quality" mentality. Too bad more $$$ doesn't = more IQ in their cranium.

I learned on a Canon Rebel 35mm camera. Film! I bought an Olympus digital but the response was so slow it frustrated me. I then got the first Canon Rebel, I believe it's a 300D. I had that until October of last year when I got the 5D. During that time I taught myself stuff by reading, practicing, asking and all using pretty cheap lenses because it's what I had. I ended up selling my motorcycle and decided I liked photography more (and it's safer!) so I used the bike money to buy the 5D and my first L lens. But that said, I love to use my little Canon Powershot and the cheap plastic Holga camera too. Sometimes the funky, blurry, grainy pictures are great too. I think people who go out and spend the big bucks right out of the gate simply fall into the bigger is better crowd. I know I am a tad jealous when I see someone with a big, pimped out camera bag and don't really know how to use it. :(

[n1as]

What else would you expect. This group is a bunch of knowledgeable enthusiasts. We study the gear, we pixel peep. We have tried the less expensive stuff and in general found it left us uninspired.

So why would we recommend something to someone else that we weren't satisfied with?

Clearly L glass isn't required to make great images, but L glass produces more satisfied photographers.


Ironically, I have 5 lenses, 2 of which are L. I'm making a few switches here and when I'm done I'll have 5 lenses, only 1 L and I'll have moved myself forward.

- Keith -

[Tandem]

I cannot remember a single instance of when I have regretted paying extra for quality.

I have regretted buying cheap car parts, bicycle parts, camera equipment, etc. Ever broken a seat post or a handlebar far from home? I have, it's no fun. Buy cheap tires and you'll regret it every day until you get a better set. The only camera parts that have failed me were the cheap ones.

Quality lasts - I still have a Harmon-Kardon amp and Klipsch corner-horn speakers I bought in the 70s. They work just as good as the day I bought them and I am sure I could sell the speakers for more than I paid for them.

[oaktree]

Perhaps the problem is too many people on POTN spend too much time judging others' decisions and motivation? Hey, if someone wants to know whether the 70-200 f/2.8 L is really a good piece of glass, I'm going to offer my opinion without questioning whether they have the photog-cred to own one. Besides, anyone can take crappy pics. What separates me from the pack is that I can take crappy pics with the best glass around!

Me, too!

[JeffreyG]

I kinda learned on film...but film sucked cause you had to take notes and mistakes cost money. I finally went with a Rebel XT and 18-55.

I see a lot of people say "I wish I had just bought top quality to start" but this is bunkum. Most people confronted with high end gear at the start would freak out at the cost. Also....you might lose interest.

I found the XT + 18-55 (and then a 50/1.8) great to get back into photography and to learn a bit without spending a fortune. My expenses have grown since then but I think that has been measured (and heck, I can afford it).

Biggest failings leading to GAS here:
1. Very general "I want a telephoto" or "I want a better lens" questions are met with posters personal ambitions instead of reasoned questions into needs.
2. Stated budgets are ignored. I've seen people who are looking at the $540 EF 70-300 IS get pushed first to the 70-200 f/4L + a 1.4TC (this is another $270) and then all the way to the 70-200 f/4 IS and the TC. Even then a few are pushing the poster to the f/2.8 or the 100-400.
3. People who are picky forget that mid grade consumer Canon lenses are actually pretty good and can be printed to 8x12 without much trouble. Just because you shoot for National Geographic doesn't mean that nobody can live with the 28-135, 50/1.4, and 28-105 f/3.5-4.5.

[Elton Balch]

I kinda learned on film...but film sucked cause you had to take notes and mistakes cost money. I finally went with a Rebel XT and 18-55.

I see a lot of people say "I wish I had just bought top quality to start" but this is bunkum. Most people confronted with high end gear at the start would freak out at the cost. Also....you might lose interest.

I found the XT + 18-55 (and then a 50/1.8) great to get back into photography and to learn a bit without spending a fortune. My expenses have grown since then but I think that has been measured (and heck, I can afford it).


Boy---I'm really going to show my age here. Anyone remember the "brownie"? That's where I started. In the late 60's I bought GOOD stuff; Nikon Photomic FTN, 50 mm 1.4 followed by a 135 and a couple other primes. I hated developing though so I got bored with it. Send stuff out, get stuff back, a couple good shots and lots of bad shots and plenty of what was I thinking on THAT one. Fast forward to my first Canon 2 MP P&S--once I discovered digital, I was enthused again. The digital darkroom and no chemicals!! Next up, the 350XT and now the 40D plus lenses. This is all not good for my bank account but, like JeffreyG, I can afford it. That's why I have those big white lenses and I can't wait for the 5D replacement!!:D

[JeffreyG]

Boy---I'm really going to show my age here. Anyone remember the "brownie"? That's where I started. In the late 60's I bought GOOD stuff; Nikon Photomic FTN, 50 mm 1.4 followed by a 135 and a couple other primes. I hated developing though so I got bored with it. Send stuff out, get stuff back, a couple good shots and lots of bad shots and plenty of what was I thinking on THAT one. Fast forward to my first Canon 2 MP P&S--once I discovered digital, I was enthused again. The digital darkroom and no chemicals!! Next up, the 350XT and now the 40D plus lenses. This is all not good for my bank account but, like JeffreyG, I can afford it. That's why I have those big white lenses and I can't wait for the 5D replacement!!:D

When I started I had my Dad's AE-1 and a 50/1.8 lens. I think my learning was really slow. I think film really slowed me down.

I went to Europe for 3 months when I graduated HS and I took along a borrowed 28mm lens to complement the 50mm. That really opened my eyes to wide angle.

Anyway....the Roth, 401 and kids college funds are fully funded. If you can afford this then buy what you like (like MDJAK) and learn the best you can.

When I make recommendations to people with budgets I try to respect those budgets. A also try to warn people about some common problems:

f/4 and slower is useless for indoor sports usually. f/2.8 is marginal.

300mm is really short for songbirds. Birdfeeder and blind is the budget solution.

Really cheap lenses do have drawbacks....but if that is the budget a little searching can at least find the best one.

You really do need a flash and a tripod more than a $1000 f/2.8 zoom.

Great gear and zero understanding = crap generally.

[number six]

1. Very general "I want a telephoto" or "I want a better lens" questions are met with posters personal ambitions instead of reasoned questions into needs.

AHA! Nailed it!

:lol:

-js

[Maureen Souza]

I waited 2 years to get my 85/1.2 lens and 3 years to get my 70-200 lens. I learned my camera function with my trusty Tamron lens which I still use frequently to this day.

I think it is silly to throw a lot of money into photography when you just start out.... one needs time to practice and learn.

[joeman]

So, how many people refuse to buy a L series lens because of the external color of the lens?

My friend at work is seriously thinking of getting the 70-300 DO over the 70-200L based strictly upon the external color of the lens. I believe that he would be better served by the L glass, based upon how he plans on using the lens, but he believes the black shorter lens will allow him to get photos without getting too much attention. He has agreed that the IQ of the L glass will be better and the sealing of the L lens will be better when hiking and camping. I suggested getting a lens wrap/cover or armor to "hide" the big white lens.

I can only imagine that there are many more people out there who feel the same way.

[TooManyShots]

The color isn't really white. Is more like dark beige.


So, how many people refuse to buy a L series lens because of the external color of the lens?

My friend at work is seriously thinking of getting the 70-300 DO over the 70-200L based strictly upon the external color of the lens. I believe that he would be better served by the L glass, based upon how he plans on using the lens, but he believes the black shorter lens will allow him to get photos without getting too much attention. He has agreed that the IQ of the L glass will be better and the sealing of the L lens will be better when hiking and camping. I suggested getting a lens wrap/cover or armor to "hide" the big white lens.

I can only imagine that there are many more people out there who feel the same way.

[transcend]

I have spent a lot of time reading threads from POTNers,,often coming away shaking my head..

Example,,,,"I am new to DSLR photography getting my brand spanking new Canon Blah Blah this morning..I need a new lens for my camera.What should I buy??"

Reply,,,"Buy yourself a Canon L series Blah Blah..You wont be sorry". Etc etc etc..

What are people thinking..The ink on the receipt is hardly dry and shooters are wanting to buy that sparkling new white lens without first reading their camera's manual or gaining some skill level..Or wanting to buy that big white lens before they have bought a reliable external flash or even a sturdy camera bag to house their precious Canon Blah Blah..

Is it market appeal or is it too much expendable cash??

Jurgen

I read some posts, and come away shaking my head at the incredibly poor grammar, punctuation and sentence structure.

Is it lack of education, time or simply too little attention to detail?

On a lighter note, what does it matter to you what other people spend their money on?

[chabooky386]

Some people just are very impatient on starting off slow. So they shoot off and get the best of the best and never look back!

[yogestee]

I read some posts, and come away shaking my head at the incredibly poor grammar, punctuation and sentence structure.

Is it lack of education, time or simply too little attention to detail?

On a lighter note, what does it matter to you what other people spend their money on?

Silly me,,,I didn't realise this is an English language forum!!! Sorry my mistake..

Jurgen

[ed rader]

I always recommend renting first for those who try out L series lenses


good advice. i first rented 17-40L, 24-70L, 100-400L & 35 1.4L....and bought them all later :D.

i am an unapologetic L lens owner. i'm not going to make excuses or give you a bunch of pious horse dung about why L lenses don't matter.

L lenses are the best lenses made for canon cameras...PERIOD....and i am worthy of the best :D!

i earned the money. you didn't have to cosign my checks.

ed rader

[Maureen Souza]

I read some posts, and come away shaking my head at the incredibly poor grammar, punctuation and sentence structure.

Is it lack of education, time or simply too little attention to detail?

On a lighter note, what does it matter to you what other people spend their money on?

Silly me,,,I didn't realise this is an English language forum!!! Sorry my mistake..

Jurgen
This is an international forum and many people don't speak English as a first language.
Now mind your manners.

[yogestee]

This is an international forum and many people don't speak English as a first language.
Now mind your manners.

Then why does transcend complain about grammar, punctuation and sentence syntax??

Jurgen

[Maureen Souza]

Then why does transcend complain about grammar, punctuation and sentence syntax??

Jurgen
Which is why I asked him to mind his manners.

[yogestee]

Silly me,,,I didn't realise this is an English language forum!!! Sorry my mistake..

Jurgen

Maureen either I have been misquoted to you miss understood..I was being sarcastic..I am also an ESL teacher here in Laos..I belong to an "English Lanugage Forum" where we discuss lesson plans, problems teaching non native English speakers etc concerning ESL...I would be the last one to insult or denigrate anyone who is not a native English language speaker..

Sorry for the confusion..

Jurgen

[aladyforty]

I started out at the age of thirteen (I’m now 48 ) with a point and shoot then my dad got a news photographers yashica second-hand which was passed on to me. It came with the lens and I used that camera for sometime before it had problems and I ended up purchasing a fully manual zenit SLR which I had to learn to use for myself. Once I progressed to digital (Canon 300D) I started with the cheapest lens I could get. I then read up on lenses as time went on. From what I could see the L lens was the best and I purchased the 70-200 F4 (non IS). Having discovered I did not need IS I then purchased the 400 f5.6 prime. These two lenses I just love, I could never get as good a shot out of my cheaper lenses as I do with these. After discovering just how good the prime was I purchased the nifty 50 which is so sharp. The EF-S 60m macro was a choice after a lot of reading (it is as sharp as any L lens I’ve seen) and then the EF 85 F 1.8 as I could not see too much reason to go with the L version. I do believe that you can get great shots without an L lens but I myself love the L lens and the colour plays no part in my choices. I think the most important thing you can do when it comes to buying lenses is research the lens a LOT. It’s worked for me

[Tim Sheridan]

"The trick is to not recommend champange to someone with beer taste and a water budget" :~)

[yogestee]

I started out at the age of thirteen (I’m now 48 ) with a point and shoot then my dad got a news photographers yashica second-hand which was passed on to me. It came with the lens and I used that camera for sometime before it had problems and I ended up purchasing a fully manual zenit SLR which I had to learn to use for myself. Once I progressed to digital (Canon 300D) I started with the cheapest lens I could get. I then read up on lenses as time went on. From what I could see the L lens was the best and I purchased the 70-200 F4 (non IS). Having discovered I did not need IS I then purchased the 400 f5.6 prime. These two lenses I just love, I could never get as good a shot out of my cheaper lenses as I do with these. After discovering just how good the prime was I purchased the nifty 50 which is so sharp. The EF-S 60m macro was a choice after a lot of reading (it is as sharp as any L lens I’ve seen) and then the EF 85 F 1.8 as I could not see too much reason to go with the L version. I do believe that you can get great shots without an L lens but I myself love the L lens and the colour plays no part in my choices. I think the most important thing you can do when it comes to buying lenses is research the lens a LOT. It’s worked for me

aladyforty,,,like me you have progressed from film to digital learning your skills using film..I would argue with anyone shooting film is a lot more demanding than digital..Before you bought your L series lenses you had a good grasp on photographic principles..

What this whole arguement is about on this thread is people buying or asking for recommendations before they develop a skills base,,then come back complaining this lens doesn't do this or that..I will argue everytime get to know your camera first and realise your limitations before spending the big ones on that white lens..Without any knowledge of basic photographic principles that big white lens will not make you a better photographer..

If one really wants to learn about photography and become a better photographer mount your 50mm on your camera, lock that zoom away in a draw and shoot with the 50mm for a few weeks..Concerntrate on compostion, exposure etc..

Jurgen

[Tandem]

Don't forget the hidden costs of buying cheap products. When it starts to wear are you going to continue to use it and grumble about the results? Are you going to repair and re-condition it? Is it even worth repairing and can you get parts for it? Or will you throw it out with the rest of the rubbish? Will it sit on the back of your shelf while you look for something newer and better? Even if it does survive your use and abuse will you get anything for it when you decide to upgrade?

When you compare lenses do you compare the best results from one lens vs the best results from another? That doesn't tell the whole story. What about the shots that were missed because the lens was hunting for focus or simply took too long to focus? What about the shots where the lens didn't have enough contrast to focus or couldn't let in enough light to focus properly? What about shots ruined by lens flare? What about the extra time spent in post-processing trying to fix marginal images?

Be honest and add up all the costs and suddenly that lens with the red ring isn't so expensive after all.

[Double Negative]

"The trick is to not recommend champange to someone with beer taste and a water budget" :~)

Are you saying champagne is better than beer? As if! :eek:

[rockabilly808]

personally I think it's what's jokingly referred to as the "bling factor" personally when I bought my 30D it came with the 17-85 IS and i bought a 100-300 because I knew I wanted to shoot sailing and I need more reach than the kit lens, but everything else I've bought was only after careful consideration of whether or not I'd use it enough ti justify the cost. but there are those that have enough disposable income to simply buy whatever they want when they want it. I kid you not there's a clown I've seen on a few occasions at high-school sports games with an XT mounted on a 300 f/2.8 and hes shooting on the green box, makes me wanna vomit.

[oaktree]

So, how many people refuse to buy a L series lens because of the external color of the lens?


I'm guilty. Mainly due to shyness and lack of confidence. But, so far, I'm happy with my non-white lenses. Everytime I shot a small concert using my 3 fast primes, I think of a 70-200/2.8 IS. Maybe someday.:)

[probe1957]

I have always believed that if you buy the best you can afford, you will seldom be disappointed. I am fortunate enough, at 50 years old, to have some disposable income. If I want to spend that on L series lenses, I guess that is my business. However, at the moment, I am choosing to spend any extra money I might have on performance mods to my '04 GTO. :) And so, much as I might wish differently, L lenses aren't in the cards for me, at the moment.

Like someone else mentioned, I also started my photography hobby with a Brownie. From there, I progressed, if you want to call it that, to a Petri FTEE. Anyone remember those? ;) From there, to a Canon EF, which was stolen and replaced with a Canon AT-1. A few years ago, I bought a Canon F-1n. I had several FD lenses, which served my marginal capabilities well, over the years.

I have only recently gone digital and sold all my film equipment. I bought the xti, with the kit lens. I also got a 100-300 USM and have the nifty fifty on the way.

Will I every buy L lenses? Possibly. I have no doubt they are worth the premium price. OTOH, renting them is always an option.

Most of the time when someone asks for lens advice, they are asked what their budget is. I think this is good. Recommending an L series lens, for some high school kid, working a minimum wage job, just might lead him to conclude that photography is a hobby he can't afford. Anyone can afford to pursue photography as a hobby, whether they can afford L lenses or not.

[CyberDyneSystems]

Thread moved.
Since htis was not about lenses at all, but rather a complaint about how some reply to posts it needed to be moved.

At first I was thinking delete it, but It can go here for now if people really want to talk about other peoples replies.

[Jon]

Maureen either I have been misquoted to you miss understood..I was being sarcastic..I am also an ESL teacher here in Laos..I belong to an "English Lanugage Forum" where we discuss lesson plans, problems teaching non native English speakers etc concerning ESL...I would be the last one to insult or denigrate anyone who is not a native English language speaker..

Sorry for the confusion..

JurgenYour post was quoted to bring home the point that transcend was out of line. No more, no less.

[blackshadow]

I think a lot of people who go around suggesting L series lenses in the forums don't actually read what the initial poster asks regarding what they want to use the lens for and their budget.
Instead they will recommend the lens or lenses they have themselves, it seems to be a way of reinforcing their own gear.
I do make recommendations but I try to actually read the question and try to answer to best meet the needs of the poster.
I had a long but erratic interest in photography and owned a couple of 35mm SLRs over the years before embarking deciding that at the time a 20D offered me the best solution to shooting concerts and that the right lens for me at the time was a Sigma 30mm f1.4 due to the venues I was shooting. I did my homework and don't regret buying either, both have served me well.
Over time I have upgraded my gear - starting with lenses. I did try a couple of third party zoom lenses but found their performance was lacking in the environments I was shooting so I settled on a 24-70f2.8L and really do notice the difference.
I now have a bag full of L lenses; they aren't there because they look cool or make me feel good about myself, they are there because they do the job I need them to do better than any other lenses available. I saved and sacrificed to buy them knowing they are an investment that will serve me well over the years.