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 28 Mar 2014 (Friday) 02:41
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Are L lenses overrated and overpriced?

 
Hermelin
Goldmember
Avatar
1,121 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 272
Joined Nov 2013
Location: Sweden
     
Mar 28, 2014 02:41 |  #1

I'm very impressed by my cheap 18-135 f/3.5-5-6 IS STM kitlens.

The sharpness is great through the entire focal length and it can produce pretty good bokeh shot at the end of focal length 100-135mm.

I don't understand why I would ever want to invest in a L lens like, lets say 24-105 f/4 IS. Sure f/4 through the entire focal lenght is great and all. But it's twice as expensive. 200 grams heavier. No wide angle. Is it sharper? I doubt it.
Perhaps a bit better colors and contrast? But after PP, is it even noticeable. Better built quality, ofcourse.

I don't know. I never owned an L lens, maybe you have to actually own one for it to make sense?

What's your thoughts?


Fujifilm X100F

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
Alveric
Goldmember
Avatar
4,598 posts
Gallery: 38 photos
Likes: 1051
Joined Jan 2011
Location: Canada
     
Mar 28, 2014 02:51 |  #2
bannedPermanent ban

Build quality, weather sealing, image quality (not just sharpness, but also control of flare and chromatic aberration)... 'nuff said.


'The success of the second-rate is deplorable in itself; but it is more deplorable in that it very often obscures the genuine masterpiece. If the crowd runs after the false, it must neglect the true.' —Arthur Machen
Why 'The Histogram' Sux (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JeremyKPhoto
Goldmember
1,633 posts
Likes: 45
Joined Apr 2012
     
Mar 28, 2014 02:51 |  #3

Overrated? no. Overpriced? no

Once you own one, you will see ;). So do your wallet a favor.... don't ever touch an L lens lol.


5D Mark III / 70-200 2.8L IS II / 24-105L / 50 1.8 stm / Tamron 70-300 VC / Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lloydd
Senior Member
376 posts
Likes: 104
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Mar 28, 2014 02:51 |  #4

Buy a full frame and have a look at lenses that fit. L stuff isn't aimed at crop bodies, there are plenty of EF-S equivalents, but EF-S lenses are never designated as L lenses.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Sirrith
Cream of the Crop
10,545 posts
Gallery: 50 photos
Best ofs: 1
Likes: 36
Joined Nov 2010
Location: Hong Kong
     
Mar 28, 2014 02:54 |  #5

Hermelin wrote in post #16792074 (external link)
I'm very impressed by my cheap 18-135 f/3.5-5-6 IS STM kitlens.

The sharpness is great through the entire focal length and it can produce pretty good bokeh shot at the end of focal length 100-135mm.

I don't understand why I would ever want to invest in a L lens like, lets say 24-105 f/4 IS. Sure f/4 through the entire focal lenght is great and all. But it's twice as expensive. 200 grams heavier. No wide angle. Is it sharper? I doubt it.
Perhaps a bit better colors and contrast? But after PP, is it even noticeable. Better built quality, ofcourse.

I don't know. I never owned an L lens, maybe you have to actually own one for it to make sense?

What's your thoughts?

The 18-135 does not work on FF.

The 18-135 does not contain as much glass.

The 18-135 has nowhere near the same build quality.

The 18-135 is not weather sealed.

The 18-135 is not wider on crop than the 24-105 on FF.

The IQ of the 18-135 is not as good as the 24-105, especially at the edges.

The 18-135 is not constant aperture.

These are all the reasons why the 24-105 costs double the price.


-Tom
Flickr (external link)
F-Stop Guru review | RRS BH-40 review

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Ginga
Senior Member
Avatar
370 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Jokkmokk - Sweden
     
Mar 28, 2014 03:03 as a reply to  @ Sirrith's post |  #6

Not overrated.

A little bit overpriced.


Sony A7R * 70-200 2.8L II * 24-70L II * Samyang 14
Recently sold: 5DIII * Sigma 35 *

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Evan ­ Idler
Goldmember
Avatar
1,600 posts
Likes: 4
Joined May 2005
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
     
Mar 28, 2014 03:08 |  #7

Some L are definitely overrated, others are not. Over Priced, definitely, especially the latest models.

--Evan


Canon5DIII + Some L + Some non L + Some Sigma + Some Tamron + other stuff....
Patiently awaiting a winning Lottery Ticket to afford all the toys I would really like :-P

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frugivore
Goldmember
Avatar
3,089 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 118
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Mar 28, 2014 03:10 |  #8

Sirrith wrote in post #16792081 (external link)
The 18-135 does not work on FF.

The 18-135 does not contain as much glass.

The 18-135 has nowhere near the same build quality.

The 18-135 is not weather sealed.

The 18-135 is not wider on crop than the 24-105 on FF.

The IQ of the 18-135 is not as good as the 24-105, especially at the edges.

The 18-135 is not constant aperture.

These are all the reasons why the 24-105 costs double the price.

With all this in mind, I think the 18-135mm is overrated and overpriced!!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
VirtualRain
Senior Member
Avatar
541 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 13
Joined Feb 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Mar 28, 2014 03:10 |  #9

Evan Idler wrote in post #16792093 (external link)
Some L are definitely overrated, others are not. Over Priced, definitely, especially the latest models.

--Evan

This is also how I see it.


Sony a7rII / 24-240 / Zeiss 25, 55, 85

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
stang67
Senior Member
Avatar
385 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia
     
Mar 28, 2014 05:06 |  #10

Don't think of L lenses as some other-worldly series of lenses. They are merely what is required to resolve enough detail on a FF sensor (they are EF mount after all) to produce sharp images that professionals would be glad to use. Sure, there are plenty of non-L lenses that are great too. Not to mention provide build quality (this includes weather sealing) that is up to the level of these cameras and can work under almost any condition (I'm thinking weather-wise). Some people who own APS-C DSLR's tend to just look at L lenses as the best option out there because of the red ring and the high price. In fact, sometimes they should not even be considered as APS-C requires different optics in lenses compared to full frame to get the most detail in images due to the (generally) larger pixel density. The 55-250 STM and 17-55 2.8 IS are excellent examples of great EF-S lenses and are better options than a 70-200 f4L and 17-40L for most uses on APS-C.


Canon 6D - Canon 1D Mk III - 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | Σ 105mm f/2.8 | Canon 400mm f/5.6L | Σ 35mm f/1.4 | 17-40mm f/4L
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
titi_67207
Senior Member
Avatar
496 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2008
Location: Strasbourg, France
     
Mar 28, 2014 05:10 |  #11

Evan Idler wrote in post #16792093 (external link)
Some L are definitely overrated, others are not. Over Priced, definitely, especially the latest models.

--Evan

+1

Concerning the weather sealing; the Canon "politic" is a bit strange: no weather sealing on the pricey 24mm TS-E II or 85mm f1.2L II. But the "cheap" 17-40L is weather-sealed....

Titi


Canon 5D MkII + Sony A7 + 24x36 & 6x6 B&W film cameras .
CV 15 4.5 III | TS-E 24L II | FE 28 2 | (50+85) 1.4 | 135 2 | 70-200 4.0L | a collection of old Zuikos + FD + Adaptall + AI-s + M42

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nellyle
Goldmember
Avatar
1,228 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 283
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Bedfordshire, UK
     
Mar 28, 2014 05:21 |  #12

I can understand the lack of sealing on a TS-E due to the moving body parts. Maybe Canon assumed that the 85 was going to be mostly used in a studio environment?


5D3, 7D2, 1D3, 40D, 14 f2.8 Samyang, 17-40 L, 28-80 L, 70-200 2.8ii L, 200 2.8ii L, 200-400 L, 1.4 ii,
http://chris-stamp.smugmug.com/ (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DC ­ Fan
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
5,881 posts
Gallery: 3 photos
Likes: 49
Joined Oct 2005
     
Mar 28, 2014 05:34 |  #13

Hermelin wrote in post #16792074 (external link)
I'm very impressed by my cheap 18-135 f/3.5-5-6 IS STM kitlens.

The sharpness is great through the entire focal length and it can produce pretty good bokeh shot at the end of focal length 100-135mm.

I don't understand why I would ever want to invest in a L lens like, lets say 24-105 f/4 IS. Sure f/4 through the entire focal lenght is great and all. But it's twice as expensive. 200 grams heavier. No wide angle. Is it sharper? I doubt it.
Perhaps a bit better colors and contrast? But after PP, is it even noticeable. Better built quality, ofcourse.

I don't know. I never owned an L lens, maybe you have to actually own one for it to make sense?

What's your thoughts?

Some people are disappointed that a "L" lens does not perform a miracle and automatically make them a better photographer.

Another thread on this forum had people complaining about alleged wide angle distortion from the 24-105mm "L" lens, but pictures posted from the complainers showed the problem was with the way the lens was used. These users were disappointed to learn that boring monochromatic composition was not improved by using a "L" lens. Closely framed images with colorful subjects worked very well.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Phoenixkh
a mere speck
6,828 posts
Gallery: 67 photos
Likes: 1434
Joined May 2011
Location: Gainesville, Florida
     
Mar 28, 2014 06:18 |  #14

I'm not a pro or even an accomplished photographer. I'm a dedicated hobbyist who gets a lot of enjoyment from photography. I've only been shooting a DSLR for a couple years now but when I got my 70-300L, it wasn't hard to tell the differences between the photographs shot with my 15-85 lens and it. The colors, contrast, etc are just better and the differences aren't that subtle.

I sort of compare photography equipment to both guitars and stereo gear. You can get 80% (a number I pulled out of you know where) at one price point... it costs quite a bit more to get your gear to 95% and a small fortune to get all the way to the best in class. I consider my 70-300L to be in that 90-95% range. My wife is getting great photographs with her 55-250 STM and SL1 so Canon's less expensive gear is still quite capable.

A Note: These percentages are subjective so you can adjust them freely, depending on your own experience. I won't be offended if you downgrade my 70-300L to a lower number. ;)


Kim (the male variety) Canon 1DX2 | 1D IV | 16-35 f/4 IS | 24-105 f/4 IS | 100L IS macro | 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II | 100-400Lii | 50 f/1.8 STM | Canon 1.4X III
RRS tripod and monopod | 580EXII | Cinch 1 & Loop 3 Special Edition | Editing Encouraged

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
MattD
Senior Member
Avatar
944 posts
Likes: 34
Joined Dec 2007
Location: Norwich UK
     
Mar 28, 2014 06:22 |  #15

overpriced?

Depends how you define that.

For example, you might find the best lens out there (lets say is an "L" lens) costs more than double a similar consumer lens. But in real world terms only offers slightly better image quality, slightly wider aperture, slightly better flare control.

Is it worth double for small advancements? Only you can answer that.


Flickr (external link).
500PX (external link)
Twitter (external link)
Tumblr (external link)

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

19,899 views & 0 likes for this thread
Are L lenses overrated and overpriced?
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 KenJerrard
1014 guests, 257 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.