Why no "L" EF-S

Was wondering why canon doesn't make a "L" lens in EF-S format. I think us crop owners deserve the best too.

Canon11385 wrote in post #15338678
Was wondering why canon doesn't make a "L" lens in EF-S format. I think us crop owners deserve the best too.

You can still use ANY L lens on a crop, where are you missing out on the best ?

L lenses are the best, and naturally more expensive, lenses that Canon make, they are therefore going to sell in lower numbers than the more budget priced lenses. Why would Canon limit that further by limiting them to only fit the consumer grade cameras and not the pro ones?

If you want to use Ls on your crop then do so.

^ si what he said, L's work on all the crop and FF bodies.

Marketing is the biggest reason. Canon's #1 goal is to make money (as with any business)

If Canon produces and markets their L lenses as top of the line, you're going to want to spend more on a FF set-up that is optimized for those lenses.

I would think a crop body would be more optimized since they use the sweet spot of the lens. Even some L lenses have edge problems.

The top of the line EF-S lenses aren't cheap either.

why make a weather sealed crop only lens, when most of the crop bodies aren't weather sealed anyways...

there are EF-S lenses that are considered optically equivalent to L's...which is where it should matter...

The only real reason for EF-S lenses is for the wide end of the range. So why make an EF-S L lens for a few cameras, when all cameras can use L lenses anyway. The 17-55 is L optics quality, but I guess the lack of a red ring is an issue for the insecure types.

SinaiTSi wrote in post #15338722
Marketing is the biggest reason. Canon's #1 goal is to make money (as with any business)

If Canon produces and markets their L lenses as top of the line, you're going to want to spend more on a FF set-up that is optimized for those lenses.

I agree that Canon's #1 goal is to make money, of course it is, they are a business not a charity. I don't agree with the logic that goes with the second comment though, Ls work just as well on a crop as on a FF. Of course most serious hobbyists and pros are going to want a FF body but that is for the same reason as they want L lenses - they want the best - not because L lenses aren't EF-S format.

As you say it is all about making money and Canon would be pretty stupid making a professional standard lens that WON'T FIT their professional standard bodies.

I have multiple L lenses and four bodies, my Ls work on ALL my DSLRs. If they only fitted my two crops and not my 5Dc or 5DIII I would never have bought them. What use to me are expensive high quality lenses that don't fit my better cameras. I would either buy Sigma lenses that fit them all (even though I am not a Sigma fan) or, more likely, buy a Nikon outfit as I can get good lenses that fit all bodies.

So, yes, you are right that it is all about making money but the real reason is that most L buyers either have, or are considering purchasing at some time, a FF camera. They therefore want the lens to fit FF as well as crop. Canon would sell a lot less L lenses for EF-S than EF. It would also hamper sales of FF bodies as those with expensive EF-S "L" lenses would be less likely to upgrade. Most people don't mind having to replace a couple of cheaper kit lenses, but expensive ones with 4 digit price tags?

The reason for EF-S lenses is to provide a cheaper option than EF as they can be produced for less, by covering just the smaller sensor area. This is particularly the case with shorter focal lengths. Producing a "cheap" L lens that only fits some cameras just downgrades the "L" badge.

There are a couple of EF-S lenses that are said to have L (or at least near-L) optical qualities. The 10-22mm is one of these, but it will never get an L designation because it doesn't have the build quality, and to give it that would add too much to the price for many crop users.

DreDaze wrote in post #15338762
why make a weather sealed crop only lens, when most of the crop bodies aren't weather sealed anyways...

there are EF-S lenses that are considered optically equivalent to L's...which is where it should matter...

Well both the 60D and 7D are weather sealed, that leaves only the 650D and 1100D as non weather sealed. It would be nice if weather sealing was present on non L lenses, it can be useful even if the body isn't sealed.

Sirrith wrote in post #15338846
Well both the 60D and 7D are weather sealed,

No, they are not. They are sealed better than earlier xxD series cameras but that doesn't make them weather sealed.

But in the context of this thread it doesn't matter because there are plenty of L lenses that are not sealed.

sandpiper wrote in post #15338842
Canon would be pretty stupid making a professional standard lens that WON'T FIT their professional standard bodies.


There are a couple of EF-S lenses that are said to have L (or at least near-L) optical qualities. The 10-22mm is one of these, but it will never get an L designation because it doesn't have the build quality, and to give it that would add too much to the price for many crop users.

^this

Optically there are EF-s lenses that are "L quality" but since they won't fit on all Canon bodies they won't be designated as "L".

Focus on lens proformance not the red line.

sandpiper wrote in post #15338842
I agree that Canon's #1 goal is to make money, of course it is, they are a business not a charity. I don't agree with the logic that goes with the second comment though, Ls work just as well on a crop as on a FF. Of course most serious hobbyists and pros are going to want a FF body but that is for the same reason as they want L lenses - they want the best - not because L lenses aren't EF-S format.

As you say it is all about making money and Canon would be pretty stupid making a professional standard lens that WON'T FIT their professional standard bodies.

I have multiple L lenses and four bodies, my Ls work on ALL my DSLRs. If they only fitted my two crops and not my 5Dc or 5DIII I would never have bought them. What use to me are expensive high quality lenses that don't fit my better cameras. I would either buy Sigma lenses that fit them all (even though I am not a Sigma fan) or, more likely, buy a Nikon outfit as I can get good lenses that fit all bodies.

So, yes, you are right that it is all about making money but the real reason is that most L buyers either have, or are considering purchasing at some time, a FF camera. They therefore want the lens to fit FF as well as crop. Canon would sell a lot less L lenses for EF-S than EF. It would also hamper sales of FF bodies as those with expensive EF-S "L" lenses would be less likely to upgrade. Most people don't mind having to replace a couple of cheaper kit lenses, but expensive ones with 4 digit price tags?

The reason for EF-S lenses is to provide a cheaper option than EF as they can be produced for less, by covering just the smaller sensor area. This is particularly the case with shorter focal lengths. Producing a "cheap" L lens that only fits some cameras just downgrades the "L" badge.

There are a couple of EF-S lenses that are said to have L (or at least near-L) optical qualities. The 10-22mm is one of these, but it will never get an L designation because it doesn't have the build quality, and to give it that would add too much to the price for many crop users.

"optimized" was the key word that I used.

L lenses have been designed to be used with FF cameras. There's really no argument there though, it is what it is. It doesn't mean that you can't use L lenses on crops and get great results though.

An example would be the 17-40L, it's designed to be an UWA zoom and on a crop, it's just a good 27-64mm lens, it's no longer an ultra-wide.

DreDaze wrote in post #15338762
why make a weather sealed crop only lens, when most of the crop bodies aren't weather sealed anyways...

there are EF-S lenses that are considered optically equivalent to L's...which is where it should matter...

word

krb wrote in post #15338859
No, they are not. They are sealed better than earlier xxD series cameras but that doesn't make them weather sealed.

But in the context of this thread it doesn't matter because there are plenty of L lenses that are not sealed.

Well if we're being pedantic, then no Canon bodies are weather sealed.
Nor are any L lenses.

The 'L' label was first applied by Canon to represent...

• Use of at least one element of rare earth glass for better optical performance than lenses without that.
  
• More robust construction, to better withstand physical abuse that often comes with professional situations.