Is the Red ring worth it?

I think some of the L lenses are absolutely worth it. The 135mm 2.0 comes to mind. As does the 100-400 and the 70-200 f4. But to buy a lens simply because it has a red L on it is kind of doing yourself a disservice, as there are other tools available that might fit your needs better.

Canon Pro line has never let me down. Love my 24 to 70mm F2.8 II L

gnome chompski wrote in post #16461746
I think some of the L lenses are absolutely worth it. The 135mm 2.0 comes to mind. As does the 100-400 and the 70-200 f4. But to buy a lens simply because it has a red L on it is kind of doing yourself a disservice, as there are other tools available that might fit your needs better.

Wise words. And those options are increasing every day as Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and the flavours of Samyang release nice new lens on a regular basis.

onurrus wrote in post #16461711
Since tamron and sigma doesnt have the fastand reliable AF like the L lenses I wont buy them only for MTF charts. BEcause ı manly shot on the streets and I need very fast AF to catch the moment. Color, contrast and characteristic look of the images mean much more to me than the MTF charts.

May be that's not the case so much any more. Tamron and Sigma have both made huge advances in the last couple years. Not only in image quality but in focus speed and accuracy as well. I think that the one part of the equation that is missed in general with third party lenses is the perception that they are small companies/manufactures​. Don't have any idea how many lenses are sold by lets say Sigma, but based on the fact that you can go to Canon, Nikon, Sony and Sigma forums and read about Sigma lenses and the great new products they are producing would indicate they are producing a boatload of lenses. So, based on what they produce and the volume it would seem that it is only a matter of time before they overtake Canon and Nikon in the lenses arena. Their profits all go back into lenses R&D, not so much into trying to develop a new body, sensor, shutter etc. for multiple lines of bodies every year.

I think the general perception is that Canon and Nikon are the big guns and everyone else builds their products in a basement in Shanghai. I believe that there have been several shots across the bow of the "big guys" lately and that the tides of change in the lenses industry are changing quickly.

Soon Canon will no longer to able to put a red ring on their lenses and charge a premium over the third party guys. Canon has had the corner on the market for far to long and this change should wake them up to market reality. Me, I am slowly building a great kit less any Canon Ls. May not be able to get to the goal but so far I am more than happy with the results from the Sigma, Tamron and Canon non Ls.

More importantly, the budget and wife are happy..

brianh4204 wrote in post #16461881
May be that's not the case so much any more. Tamron and Sigma have both made huge advances in the last couple years. Not only in image quality but in focus speed and accuracy as well. I think that the one part of the equation that is missed in general with third party lenses is the perception that they are small companies/manufactures​. Don't have any idea how many lenses are sold by lets say Sigma, but based on the fact that you can go to Canon, Nikon, Sony and Sigma forums and read about Sigma lenses and the great new products they are producing would indicate they are producing a boatload of lenses. So, based on what they produce and the volume it would seem that it is only a matter of time before they overtake Canon and Nikon in the lenses arena. Their profits all go back into lenses R&D, not so much into trying to develop a new body, sensor, shutter etc. for multiple lines of bodies every year.

I think the general perception is that Canon and Nikon are the big guns and everyone else builds their products in a basement in Shanghai. I believe that there have been several shots across the bow of the "big guys" lately and that the tides of change in the lenses industry are changing quickly.

Soon Canon will no longer to able to put a red ring on their lenses and charge a premium over the third party guys. Canon has had the corner on the market for far to long and this change should wake them up to market reality. Me, I am slowly building a great kit less any Canon Ls. May not be able to get to the goal but so far I am more than happy with the results from the Sigma, Tamron and Canon non Ls.

More importantly, the budget and wife are happy..

I was happy with the non L lens options by Canon as well as the 3rd party options until I tried out and bought my 135L. Colors and sharpness are truly better than any non L I've owned in the past. The 24-105 I have is another common L out there that produces stunning results compared to its non L counterparts. The 85L may be overpriced in some peoples eyes but if you compare say the Sigma 85 to the 85L which I've done, you can see the difference in overall image quality in prints.

Yes the 3rd parties have made great strides in closing the gap. Don't believe for a moment though that Canon is sitting around doing nothing with their lens lineup. It takes time to rework an already stellar lens to produce even better results in an updated version. The 70-200 f/2.8 II and 24-70 f/2.8 II are two examples of lens that have raised the bar again in those focal lengths.

Thorrulz wrote in post #16461998
I was happy with the non L lens options by Canon as well as the 3rd party options until I tried out and bought my 135L. Colors and sharpness are truly better than any non L I've owned in the past. The 24-105 I have is another common L out there that produces stunning results compared to its non L counterparts. The 85L may be overpriced in some peoples eyes but if you compare say the Sigma 85 to the 85L which I've done, you can see the difference in overall image quality in prints.

Yes the 3rd parties have made great strides in closing the gap. Don't believe for a moment though that Canon is sitting around doing nothing with their lens lineup. It takes time to rework an already stellar lens to produce even better results in an updated version. The 70-200 f/2.8 II and 24-70 f/2.8 II are two examples of lens that have raised the bar again in those focal lengths.

Very true, but. Ford and Chevy once owned the American market. Then they got complacent. They were the Ls of the market and rested on their status. So, Nissan (Datsun) sneaks in and steals a portion of the market. Then the import bonanza starts and before Ford and Chevy know what happened, they are playing catch up not only in quality but pricing as well.

Innovation. Cannon produced one truly new and innovative lens in the last several years. The 200-400 w/TC. Yes they have created MIIs and even 3s of several of their products. But at the same time the 3rd party guys have created a whole new class of lenses. Not suggesting that the L is not still the industry standard, just that the gap has closed considerable and is closing even more with every new "3rd party" release.

Hey, I am trying to justify my lack of owning Ls....

But I think it is getting easier every day to do that. May be that all we need is to be good at PS and the lenses become a complete non factor. Have seen some really crappy images turned into art by PSing..

The 135 f2 is calling me. I just dont have much use for that focal length. I rented one and I loved it though.

gnome chompski wrote in post #16462154
The 135 f2 is calling me. I just dont have much use for that focal length. I rented one and I loved it though.

Know the pain...there are so many lenses that I love but would never use. As a hobbyist it is pretty hard to justify owning the Canon chest set, but pretty hard not owning a lens for every possible scenario. Of course I am a big fan of the aftermarket guys and suspect they will come along with an option that fills the need..

gnome chompski wrote in post #16462154
The 135 f2 is calling me. I just dont have much use for that focal length. I rented one and I loved it though.

I didn't think I would either since I either typically use my 150-500 at the long end or use my 8-16 for fun, but since I got my 135mm, I have used it for heaps of things. Portraits, backyard birds, pseudo-macro (extension tubes), car photography (inside the pit garages at the track where it's dark) and panning shots of the cars.