Why do you pay more for a lens

Also max aperature (performance) for me. Not for low light, but for isolation.

It looks good on my gear list.

You missed one category. It feels good to walk next to a guy at a park/Disneyland knowing that you have a better lens then he does. That is the reason why Canon put a red ring around all of their L lenses.

wrxrocks wrote in post #11970810
You missed one category. It feels good to walk next to a guy at a park/Disneyland knowing that you have a better lens then he does. That is the reason why Canon put a red ring around all of their L lenses.

Absolutely...every time I see someone with a Rebel and a kit lens, or that pathetic, lowly 17-55 IS I go out of my way to make sure they feel every bit as inferior as I think they are. Sure, it usually results in them coming on here and crying a river about how tough it is to be a Rebel owner, but in the end, I know that my upturned nose and L glass come out ahead in photography, as in life!

It also works for picking up chicks.

Funny! If only most of them had any idea what that red ring means! I'm an admitted snob and give my DH my older (re: cheaper) lenses since he uses my 5D like a P&S. I haven't told him what the red ring means!

The more I learn, the more I want:

Focusing speed and accuracy for AF
Sharpness
Fast, constant aperture

I just got the TS-E 24mm and can't shut up about it. It is NUTS - sharp, gorgeous, makes me look like a better photographer than the crap I've been churning out recently. I though the MF would annoy me but it makes me slow down and really take the time to contemplate the shot, the framing, the composition, etc.

I would sell off all my furniture and my truck if I could to get the other TS-E lenses.

This has been interesting to read because I am plotting the next few purchases and my list plus your lists are what I'm weighing, heavily, daily.

LowriderS10 wrote in post #11970865
It also works for picking up chicks.

No it doesn't. Possibly for picking up guys. When I lug a DSLR with my 70-200/II around I get two types of comments, coming exclusively from guys: "How far can you see with that thing" and "Are you a pro?".

The Leica M9 on the other hand is a true chick magnet. When I'm carrying it around I get comments from women instead and they tend to be of the type "What a pretty camera!". The M9 also gets on occasion comments from senior citizens who used to shoot Leica back in the day.

obviously...it is the red rings.

Aperture - 1.8 is OK for me for a fast prime. 2.8 is standard for a prime.

Sharpness - Semi-important for me.

Color rendition - Irrelevant. Post-processing determines the final color. Digital sensors produce false colors. Display and printing devices are not calibrated. How do I know that what I see in reality matches the color intended by the lens designer?

Focus speed and accuracy - Accuracy yes, speed not as much.

Resale value - Good if you have no intentions to keep the lens.

Build and weather-sealing - The lighter the better.
_______________

As you can guess, I would not pay for an L lens if there are other, cheaper, alternatives that fulfill my needs.

whtchocla7e wrote in post #11972324
Color rendition - Irrelevant. Post-processing determines the final color. Digital sensors produce false colors. Display and printing devices are not calibrated. How do I know that what I see in reality matches the color intended by the lens designer?

Umm... by calibrating the devices involved? After all, if you can't trust their color accuracy, then how is post-processing going to improve the situation?

denoir wrote in post #11971803
No it doesn't. Possibly for picking up guys.

+1

Bulky/flashy gear attracts all the wrong kinds of attention.

For me there is no one single reason. It's a combination of several reasons but the main reasons are aperture, sharpness, and speed/accuracy.

Refresh Image wrote in post #11968524
So what is the single main reason you decided to pay for times more for an "L" lens ?

I have never made a lens purchase decision based on whether or not it was an "L" lens. That doesn't mean much to me. I have Canon L lenses, Canon non-L lenses, and non-Canon lenses.

Each purchase was made based on the features I need (aperture, sharpness, USM, image stabilization). Once I find a lens that meets my needs, I compare all brands to see which is the best value for the money.

Plain and simple, low light capabilities.

denoir wrote in post #11971803
No it doesn't. Possibly for picking up guys. When I lug a DSLR with my 70-200/II around I get two types of comments, coming exclusively from guys: "How far can you see with that thing" and "Are you a pro?".

The Leica M9 on the other hand is a true chick magnet. When I'm carrying it around I get comments from women instead and they tend to be of the type "What a pretty camera!". The M9 also gets on occasion comments from senior citizens who used to shoot Leica back in the day.

rvdw98 wrote in post #11972446
+1

Bulky/flashy gear attracts all the wrong kinds of attention.

Humour is completely lost on some of you guys...

LowriderS10 wrote in post #11972548
Humour is completely lost on some of you guys...

Oh, it was supposed to be funny?