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 Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
Thread started 21 Sep 2012 (Friday) 10:08
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

L glass on a crop

 
tbsguy18
Member
Avatar
230 posts
Likes: 5
Joined May 2012
Location: Michigan
     
Sep 21, 2012 10:08 |  #1

I decided to add another less to my lineup and was trying to decide between the Canon 135 f/2L or the 70-200 f/4L...
I played with my buddies 135, and rented the 70-200. For me, they were both great and I got the images I wanted.
It wasn't till after I finished my testing that my buddy told me "not to waste my money on L glass...you have a crop sensor. Its not worth it."
He's been shooting for 6+ years, and I tend to value his opinion when it comes to photography. He's always been my go to guy for any questions I've had, but now I'm confused. Ultimately, I'm going to make my own decision, but is there any grain of truth to what he said? Or is it just his preference>
Thanks!


Gripped Canon 60D 50 f/1.8---17-50 f/2.8---70-200 f/4 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
markweaver
Senior Member
Avatar
458 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Fairfax VA
     
Sep 21, 2012 10:12 |  #2

That sounds like a Ken Rockwell line. L glass will look great on a crop. I shot a 7D with 70-200 f4 and it was stupid sharp. Don't listen to crop sensor poo-pooers. L glass is worth it, even on a crop.


Mark
XTi | 5D MkII | Zeiss 21/2.8 Distagon | Zeiss Jena 35/2.8 Flektogon | 24-105 L | 70-200L f4 | 10-22 f3.5-5.6 | 50 f1.4 | Samyang 14mm | 24mm f/2.8 | Sigma 15mm Fishy
www.flickr.com/photos/​marksweaver/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JohnThomas
Senior Member
Avatar
401 posts
Joined May 2012
Location: Long Island, New York
     
Sep 21, 2012 10:13 |  #3

That seems silly to me. Why would an "L" lens not benefit a crop sensor? Crop sensors have the highest density senors available. I have a 5Dii and 50D.. both benefit from using better lenses.

But that's just my opinion.


You can call me JT
jsantiniphotography.co​m

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
"spouting off stupid things"
Avatar
55,886 posts
Likes: 2648
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Sep 21, 2012 10:17 |  #4

Your buddy is full of bovine excrement and knows not what he is talking about or is a snob and trying to beat you down so you can't show him up. An image can only be as good as the glass you stick in front of it. The better the glass, the better the quality of the image. It does nothing for composition and subject of course and will not instantly give you great pics, but there is absolutely no reason what so ever to avoid L lenses for crop cameras. (unless your looking at the 17-55 which is one sweet piece of glass even without the red ring) :)


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mplezia
Senior Member
Avatar
429 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2009
Location: Orange County, CA
     
Sep 21, 2012 10:17 |  #5

tbsguy18 wrote in post #15023406 (external link)
I decided to add another less to my lineup and was trying to decide between the Canon 135 f/2L or the 70-200 f/4L...
I played with my buddies 135, and rented the 70-200. For me, they were both great and I got the images I wanted.
It wasn't till after I finished my testing that my buddy told "not to waste my money on L glass...you have a crop sensor. Its not worth it."
He's been shooting for 6+ years, and I tend to value his opinion when it comes to photography. He's always been my go to guy for any questions I've had, but now I'm confused. Ultimately, I'm going to make my own decision, but is there any grain of truth to what he said? Or is it just his preference>
Thanks!

My 24-205 rarely leaves my dumpy little t1i. Is it a waste of lens and $$? Not for me. The sharpness and overall IQ throughout the range and even wide open is excellent. I rented an EF-S 15-85mm for a week or so and was unimpressed; the 24-105 is much much better.

Even if your current camera can't take advantage of 100% of the quality of an L lens, your next body probably will.

So get the L if it will do things for you that your current lenses can not. A good lens will last you through multiple body upgrades, so don't shy away from more expensive lenses just because your current camera isn't a pro body.


Canon 60D | Canon 500D | Canon 430EX II | Canon EF 24-105mm f/4 | Sigma 30mm f/1.4 DC HSM 'A' | Canon EF 50mm f/1.8 II | Canon EF-S 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tbsguy18
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
230 posts
Likes: 5
Joined May 2012
Location: Michigan
     
Sep 21, 2012 10:20 |  #6

markweaver wrote in post #15023414 (external link)
That sounds like a Ken Rockwell line. L glass will look great on a crop. I shot a 7D with 70-200 f4 and it was stupid sharp. Don't listen to crop sensor poo-pooers. L glass is worth it, even on a crop.

^ I enjoyed all of this. Especially the "stupid sharp" line lol.
Yea, nothing about what he said made sense. Regardless of sensor size, how would a better lens not be good? Thats like saying "oh you drive a Geo, don't bother putting on good tires"

I think he's just a proud full frame supporter, and looks down on my 60D lol.
Makes me wonder what else he might have been wrong about...

And @gjl711 I totally agree. I think he's just being a snob.


Gripped Canon 60D 50 f/1.8---17-50 f/2.8---70-200 f/4 L

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
onona
Senior Member
Avatar
511 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Aug 2012
Location: Hertfordshire, UK
     
Sep 21, 2012 10:39 |  #7

I've heard this sentiment many times before as well, and have never really understood it. The usual justification was to use EF-S lenses instead as they were "designed for the crop factor bodies" but I don't really see how people make the leap from that to suggesting that other lenses are therefore unsuitable.

If you like a lens, get it.


Leigh
I shoot concerts and stuff. (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Snydremark
my very own Lightrules moment
18,584 posts
Gallery: 52 photos
Likes: 1661
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Issaquah, WA USA
     
Sep 21, 2012 10:56 |  #8

I'm sorry, but I wouldn't listen to your buddy, as he obviously doesn't really know what he's talking about. I've been using 'L' glass on a 40D and/or 7D, now, for nearly 5 years and it's because you can't GET those tools in non-L models (they haven't yet deigned to make an EF-S 100-400, for example) :p

You buy the tool you need for the job, regardless of what format your sensor is...it isn't rocket science.


- Eric S.: My Birds/Wildlife (external link) (7D MkII/5D IV, Canon 10-22 f/3.5-4.5, Canon 24-105L f/4 IS, Canon 70-200L f/2.8 IS MkII, Canon 100-400L f/4.5-5.6 IS I/II)
"The easiest way to improve your photos is to adjust the loose nut between the shutter release and the ground."

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SkipD
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
20,476 posts
Likes: 159
Joined Dec 2002
Location: Southeastern WI, USA
     
Sep 21, 2012 11:00 |  #9

tbsguy18 wrote in post #15023406 (external link)
It wasn't till after I finished my testing that my buddy told me "not to waste my money on L glass...you have a crop sensor. Its not worth it."

Your buddy is either a fool or is trying to cover something up.

The only three Canon lenses that I own and used on a 20D for years and now use on a 7D are "L" zoom lenses. I've never found anything negative about using them and have been extremely pleased with the results I've gotten with them.

I am very picky about the quality of my tools (of all types). My main cameras for many years was a pair of Nikon F 35mm film cameras and a set of four Nikkor lenses that I bought in the mid 1960s. They were rated as the best of their class in those days.


Skip Douglas
A few cameras and over 50 years behind them .....
..... but still learning all the time.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Brasher
Member
Avatar
113 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Sep 2012
Location: Atlanta
     
Sep 21, 2012 11:02 |  #10

He may mean this:

Crops only capture the "sweet spot" anyway, so why spend money on lenses designed to minimize distortion for areas you sensor doesn't touch?

At least that's how I read it. I think he's just trying to save you money.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
gjl711
"spouting off stupid things"
Avatar
55,886 posts
Likes: 2648
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas
     
Sep 21, 2012 11:05 |  #11

st3mpy wrote in post #15023622 (external link)
He may mean this:

Crops only capture the "sweet spot" anyway, so why spend money on lenses designed to minimize distortion for areas you sensor doesn't touch?

At least that's how I read it. I think he's just trying to save you money.

Thing is though, what is the EF-S alternative to the 135 f/2L or the 70-200 f/4L?

I can see that logic if the choice is between the 24-70 and the 17-55 but there is no alternative to most EF lenses.


Not sure why, but call me JJ.
I used to hate math but then I realised decimals have a point.
.
::Flickr:: (external link)
::Gear::

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Calicajun
Goldmember
Avatar
2,952 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 112
Joined Jan 2008
Location: Quartz Hill, CA
     
Sep 21, 2012 11:09 as a reply to  @ Snydremark's post |  #12

If anything an EF "L" lens would work better on a crop sensor than a full frame sensor camera. One probelm people have is with distoration at the edge of a lens with a crop sensor you never use the egde of the lens because the sensor doesn't cover all the way out to the edge of the lens. So with a crop camera you are only using the best part of the "L" lens, not the edge of the lens. Ask your buddy about that and see what he says.:lol:


Remember, Stressed spelled backward is Desserts.:)
Suggestions welcome.
5DIII, EF 50 1.4, EF 40 f2.8, EF 24-105L IS , EF 70-200 f4L IS, 580EX ll

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
LV ­ Moose
Moose gets blamed for everything.
Avatar
23,399 posts
Gallery: 219 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 4516
Joined Dec 2008
     
Sep 21, 2012 11:15 as a reply to  @ SkipD's post |  #13

As the owner of a crop (40D) and a 100 f/2.8L IS macro, and the 70-200 f/4L, I'm gonna say that you're buddy doesn't know what he's talking about. Using a camera for 6+ years doesn't make him an expert.

There are folks who have been painting or drawing for decades who know nothing about the technical aspect of what they do, don't learn or progress, and produce crap. Photography is the same for some people. Having a camera for a long time doesn't necessarily count for a whole lot.


Moose

Gear... Flickr (external link)...Flickr 2 (external link)...
Macro (external link)...Hummingbirds (external link)
Aircraft (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Nature ­ Nut
Goldmember
Avatar
1,366 posts
Likes: 2
Joined May 2012
Location: NY
     
Sep 21, 2012 11:15 |  #14

Tell him buying a long telephoto is a waste of money on a full-frame, everyone knows it's more effective on a crop ;)


Adam - Upstate NY:

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tbsguy18
THREAD ­ STARTER
Member
Avatar
230 posts
Likes: 5
Joined May 2012
Location: Michigan
     
Sep 21, 2012 11:22 |  #15

Nature Nut wrote in post #15023704 (external link)
Tell him buying a long telephoto is a waste of money on a full-frame, everyone knows it's more effective on a crop ;)

I like that lol.

I'm going to talk to him some more and see if he's just being a snob or if he actually had a legitimate reason. He's great at what he does, and its earning him a pretty nice living, so like I said before, I tend to value his opinion. Maybe I just missed the point he was trying to make?

So...135 or 70-200?


Gripped Canon 60D 50 f/1.8---17-50 f/2.8---70-200 f/4 L

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

7,677 views & 0 likes for this thread
L glass on a crop
FORUMS Photography Talk by Genre General Photography Talk 
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 rono258
769 guests, 208 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.