L glass on a crop

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!

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.

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.

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)

tbsguy18 wrote in post #15023406
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.

markweaver wrote in post #15023414
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.

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.

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)

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

tbsguy18 wrote in post #15023406
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.

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.

st3mpy wrote in post #15023622
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.

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.

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.

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

Nature Nut wrote in post #15023704
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?