300D AND L GLASS...

[Steve Parr]

I've been looking at a couple of different lenses, and I'm now in position to consider the purchase of two.

The first is definitely going to be the 85mm f/1.8. I've just heard too many good things about this lens to not get it. I'm also looking at the 70-200mm f/4L.

My question is this: Is it worth it to invest in the L glass for the 300D?

Thanks...

Steve

[Dubsta]

The lens makes the camera...so why not.

And besides, you can always upgrade the body..and still have the same lenses.

[rebel61021]

I have several "L" lens with my 300D and I love the results they give me I have the 70-200 f/4L and probally use that one the most since I got it. As far as if it is worth the investment I would say Yes just becasue they do not loose much in value and once you start taking lots of pictures and run out of lens to buy the nest step is the 20D or better.

[DocFrankenstein]

You get what you pay for. L are the best for the canon lineup in terms of build and optical quality.

After shooting at the beach a few times, I got assured that L glass is worth it... if for nothing else, then for weather protection!

So I hope sometime in the future I'll trade my sigma 70-200 f/2.8 for 70-200 L IS
And also get 24-70 and 17-40... or maybe 16-35 even...

All of them are sealed, dust and moisture resistant.

[Medic1]

The L glass in my opinion is the way to go......the 300D may not produce as good a quality image with L glass as a higher end Canon would, but then again.....it certainly will produce better images than non-L glass with the 300D.

That being said, if you take enough images with any lens you are bound to get a good sharp image, but I think L glass will consistently produce the better image. Aside from this, as said, when you upgrade to a better camera you already have a good L glass selection to go with the better body.

[timmyquest]

www.questphotos.com/bus/beard.jpg

300D with 70-200 f/2.8

you tell me...

The only thing the 300D does not do well is sports photography. Anything else can be made up by the photographer, and really the same applies for a sporting venue as well.

If i didnt have an interest in sports photography i doubt i'd have upgraded my camera.

[Citizensmith]

I too have the 70-200 4 on a 300D, as well as the 85 1.8 and 17-40. They all take fantastic photos, and much better then the consumer grade glass I've used on the same body.

[bolling]

The 300D will take as good of pictures as any digital camera out there so absolutely. I used the 100-400L with mine with great results. I just upgraded to the 20D for speed reasons and hope I have not made a mistake, my pictures don't look as good to me yet as they did with the Rebel although the 20D is fast. I'm sure I will get used to it.

[Steve Parr]

www.questphotos.com/bus/beard.jpg (http://www.questphotos.com/bus/beard.jpg)

300D with 70-200 f/2.8

you tell me...

The only thing the 300D does not do well is sports photography. Anything else can be made up by the photographer, and really the same applies for a sporting venue as well.

If i didnt have an interest in sports photography i doubt i'd have upgraded my camera.

That's definitely a nice shot, but I'd really need to see a side-by-side comparison. Hell, there are so many people here taking great shots with 300D's and non-L glass!

I came real close to buying the 70-200mm f/4L yesterday, but opted for the 85mm f/1.8 instead, as it'll be better suited to what I'll be shooting most of the time (club photography).

My next lens will be either the 70-200 or a short zoom. I liked the 16-35 f/2.8L, but it's a bit more than I can sink into a lens in the foreseeable future. Any other suggestions for a short zoom which won't break the bank? I was also looking at the 17-40 f/4L. Not cheap, but definitely a possibility...

Steve

[CyberDyneSystems]

It's all about the glass baby!

Doesn't matter what Camera it's on! :)

[griff2]

300D and L glass? Do birds have wings? The 300D might not be up the the level of the 1D family, but it will easily differentiate between consumer and L glass. And trust me, L glass on a 300D is definitely worth it.

[Steve Parr]

300D and L glass? Do birds have wings? The 300D might not be up the the level of the 1D family, but it will easily differentiate between consumer and L glass. And trust me, L glass on a 300D is definitely worth it.

I'm already in "save mode" for another lens. I've got four lenses that aren't L glass. I see no reason to have a fifth.

L glass it shall be...

Steve

[schmoelzel]

I started my DSLR experience with the DRebel and found that once you get L glass, it is hard to go back to anything else. The camera is important but the optics are even more crucial to getting the shot. My first was the 70-200F4 L and it is a GREAT lens for the money. I needed a little more light so I moved on to the big brother 70-200F2.8 L; even better optics and the extra stops of light have made a huge difference. I then bought the 135F2 L; definitely my favourite lens and probably one of Canon's best. Now I have traded my favourite lens for a used 1D body and use the 85F1.8 a lot more. Great glass, pretty decent build quality and very close to L optics. I also have the 100F2.8 Macro and find that this is on par with the L glass that I own as far as sharpness and build. I wouldn't hestitate in buying any L glass as long as you are sure you will use it.......I sometimes wonder how many 85f1.2 L lenses sit in some bags just because the buyer had to 'HAVE' the best but now doesn't use it..........

[Citizensmith]

I started my DSLR experience with the DRebel and found that once you get L glass, it is hard to go back to anything else.

I agree. I've had a huge selection of lenses over the years, starting with the lowly 35-80 way back in '93. I got my first L a few years back and since then haven't really used consumer glass. I've only got 4 lenses (17-40, 24, 85, 70-200), and it'll take me a while to buy more but I'll only by L glass or primes from here out.