Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 12 Aug 2010 (Thursday) 11:31
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Worst bang for the buck L lens?

 
neil_r
Cream of the Proverbial Crop
Landscape and Cityscape Photographer 2006
Avatar
18,065 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2003
Location: The middle of the UK
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:23 |  #16

bkdc wrote in post #10708621 (external link)
I've owned two copies of it. I just can't justify its performance over the alternatives any more, especially based on cost. My favorite autofocus 50mm would be the Canon EF 50mm f1.4, only at f/4 and above. What a performer. I wish the 50L had something more to offer than build quality.

LoL I must be a mirror image of you I had 2 x f/1.4s both of which had USM failures shortly after the warranty ended, it's the build quality that pushed me towards the f/1.2 :-)


Neil - © NHR Photography
Commercial Site (external link) - Video Site (external link) - Blog - (external link)Gear List There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. ~ Ansel Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Tommydigi
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,612 posts
Gallery: 51 photos
Likes: 504
Joined May 2010
Location: Chicago
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:31 |  #17

Its gotta be that 28-300. You get a lens like this for convenience so why buy a white, almost 4 pound $2400 superzoom? Why not just get a rebel an an 18-200. ok, maybe thats not fair to say because I never tried it but has anybody


Website (external link) | Flickr (external link) | Instagram (external link)
Canon 5DII • 7DII • G7XII • 24LII • 50L • 100L • 135L • 40 STM • 16-35L F4 IS • 100-400L II • 600EX II • 270 EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
wask_
Senior Member
Avatar
297 posts
Joined Mar 2010
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:37 |  #18

1200 for sure


- 7D -
Σ 30 f/1.4 | 50 f/1.8

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
S30L28
Senior Member
Avatar
448 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: États-Unis
     
Aug 12, 2010 12:41 |  #19

Thoroughly disappointed with the 16-35 Mark I. Even after calibration.

Worst purchase ever.


-Brian

Equipement d'appareil photo
Seller Feedback:1 (external link), 2 (external link), 3 (external link), 4 (external link), 5 (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Yusef
Senior Member
677 posts
Joined Dec 2009
     
Aug 12, 2010 13:18 |  #20

They 50L might not be a huge jump over the 50 1.4 I would still love to have one, but not before I get a 35L first. I think the worst bang for the buck would be whatever lens you buy that never leaves your bag. The 1200mm comes in a very close second at $120,000 which is $1000 per mm.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
muusers
Goldmember
Avatar
1,024 posts
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Haarlem, Netherlands
     
Aug 12, 2010 13:32 |  #21

Yusef wrote in post #10709057 (external link)
The 1200mm comes in a very close second at $120,000 which is $1000 per mm.

Where did you go to school? bw!


50D + 17-55 | s100 | flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ben_r_
-POTN's Three legged Support-
Avatar
15,894 posts
Likes: 13
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Sacramento, CA
     
Aug 12, 2010 13:34 |  #22

Yea my vote is for the 28-300L. Now to be fair, I have never actually used one, BUT I also have never seen any good shots from one nor heard anyone talk about how much they love it either. I dont even think many people ever bought it.


[Gear List | Flickr (external link) | My Reviews] /|\ Tripod Leg Protection (external link) /|\
GIVE a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. TEACH a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
airfrogusmc
I'm a chimper. There I said it...
36,325 posts
Gallery: 147 photos
Best ofs: 6
Likes: 5713
Joined May 2007
Location: Oak Park, Illinois
     
Aug 12, 2010 13:35 |  #23

TooManyShots wrote in post #10708423 (external link)
But jump from 200L F2.8 to F2 version there is a $4000 difference??? :) You are rich, that's fine.

The 200 2L smokes the 200 2.8 in sharpness, C/A and is a full stop faster and has a real 4+ stop IS. The worst bang for your buck is the lens that stays in the camera bag.

The 200 2L is one of Canons sharpest lenses period. So if you're really looking for IQ its not the worst bang for the buck also I have gotten shots with that glass I would have never been able to get with a 200 2.8 or a 135L.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MCB
Senior Member
Avatar
668 posts
Joined Jun 2005
Location: Boston, Mass.
     
Aug 12, 2010 13:49 |  #24

ed from pa wrote in post #10708641 (external link)
My 50L is an awesome lens, never comes off the camera...

Man, talk about worst bang for your buck! Maybe if you send it back to Canon they can get it off for you. They might even swap it out for a f/1.4 that you would be able to get off by yourself. ;)




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
996gt2
Goldmember
Avatar
1,045 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Jul 2008
Location: Cincinnati
     
Aug 12, 2010 15:10 |  #25

Yusef wrote in post #10709057 (external link)
The 1200mm comes in a very close second at $120,000 which is $1000 per mm.

Haha, 120,000/1200=$100 per mm, not $1000

That said, if you are going to look at it that way, the 14mm f/2.8 L II costs $2100, which is $150 per mm :P


Buy/Sell Feedback
5Dc, 50D, Tokina 12-24 f/4, Tamron 28-75 f/2.8, Sigma 50mm f/1.4, 430EX

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Combatmedic870
Goldmember
Avatar
1,739 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: Salem ,OR
     
Aug 12, 2010 15:41 |  #26

Im going to have to agree with the 50L statement for being the worst bang for you buck. I understand the focus shift is a design flaw. For $1450, They should have designed it differently, period. Why make a lens that has a (sometimes) big flaw right out of the box.

Have I tried it? yes, it was ok...compared to the 85L...its more like eh...It could be sharper from 1.2 on. The bokeh for a 1.2 lens is...so so.
The build is great, the color where the usual L colors. The AF is nice in low light. I find the Sigma to be better then it in a couple of ways.

Pretty much your paying 1000 more for the 1.2-1.4 of the lens, which isnt all that great.


Nikon D700: 16-35 F4, 50 1.4G, 85 1.8,105 VR Micro, 135F2 DC, 80-200 2.8 AFS
Olympus XZ-1
,Ryan
Sometimes, I think Photography is worse than Crack.:oops:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JelleVerherstraeten
Goldmember
Avatar
2,440 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2008
Location: Antwerp, Belgium
     
Aug 12, 2010 15:50 |  #27

My vote goes to the 1200L. I can't see no use for it.


-Jelle l Gear l Website (external link) l

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ziyius
Senior Member
407 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: New Jersey (used to be MA)
     
Aug 12, 2010 16:15 |  #28

Second the 1200mm. (It would be nice on a crop though)


Canon 1Ds Mark II
Canon 17-40 f/4 L Canon 85 f/1.8 Canon 70-200 f/4L 430EX I

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
neil_r
Cream of the Proverbial Crop
Landscape and Cityscape Photographer 2006
Avatar
18,065 posts
Likes: 9
Joined Jan 2003
Location: The middle of the UK
     
Aug 12, 2010 16:23 |  #29

The 1200 is a very niche piece of kit that would only be bought / hired by someone who had a specific need for it, including it in a this discussion with more general lenses is, in my view, pretty pointless.


Neil - © NHR Photography
Commercial Site (external link) - Video Site (external link) - Blog - (external link)Gear List There are no rules for good photographs, there are only good photographs. ~ Ansel Adams

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
great ­ divorce
Junior Member
Avatar
28 posts
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Houston, Tx
     
Aug 12, 2010 16:33 |  #30

banpreso wrote in post #10708536 (external link)
pros who buy the 200mm f2 will have the lens paying for itself in no time. same with the 1200mm

the 1200mm lens is $120,000... I can't imagine someone paying that lens off in no time


Canon body + glass and some light
flickr (external link)
twitter (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

7,018 views & 0 likes for this thread
Worst bang for the buck L lens?
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is gardenchefs
1028 guests, 341 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.