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
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
Thread started 13 Sep 2006 (Wednesday) 17:24
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

What is the least expensive "L" lens?

 
BiikeMike
Senior Member
Avatar
656 posts
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Richmond, VA
     
Sep 13, 2006 17:24 |  #1

Just wondering....


30D w/Grip; 10Dw/Grip; 70-200 f/4 L; 17-40 f/4 L; Canon 50mm 1.8 II,; Tokina 10-17 f/3.5-4.5; 580EX, 430EX. lotsa' memory, lotsa' batteries. Macbook Pro 2.16 15" w/2 gigs RAM. Mac Pro 2.66 Quad w/5 gigs RAM. Adobe CS3/Lightroom

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Billginthekeys
Billy the kid
Avatar
7,359 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
     
Sep 13, 2006 17:25 |  #2

New? i believe the 70-200 F4, then the 17-40 F4 and the 200 2.8 prime


Mr. the Kid.
Go Canes!
My Gallery (external link)My Gear
what the L. just go for it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
malla1962
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
7,714 posts
Likes: 5
Joined Jul 2004
Location: Walney Island,cumbria,uk
     
Sep 13, 2006 17:27 as a reply to  @ Billginthekeys's post |  #3

Billginthekeys wrote:
New? i believe the 70-200 F4, then the 17-40 F4 and the 200 2.8 prime

And all very good value.:D:D:D


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aero145
Senior Member
Avatar
909 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Germany
     
Sep 13, 2006 17:27 |  #4

70-200 f/4L vs. 17-40 f/4L.

Am I right that 17-40 f/4L is more complicated in design, that's what makes it more expensive?

Isn't 70-200 f/4L much sharper and has better IQ than the 17-40 f/4L? Of course it lacks the weather sealing for the 1-series bodies.


EOS 5D Mark II | EF24-105 f/4L IS | EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS | EF200 f/2.8L II | 580EX | Manfrotto 055xProB + 808RC4, and 679B
Le Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Billginthekeys
Billy the kid
Avatar
7,359 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Islamorada, FL
     
Sep 13, 2006 17:31 |  #5

well, they both serve very different purposes. my 17-40 is sharp as a tack. if you need a good wide angle, at that price it certainly is a great lens.


Mr. the Kid.
Go Canes!
My Gallery (external link)My Gear
what the L. just go for it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
SuzyView
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
32,094 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 129
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Northern VA
     
Sep 13, 2006 17:34 |  #6

Yes, it is the 70-200 f4, don't think the new IS version will be anywhere close to that price. I just got one and love it already. Funny though, the L primes are way more expensive than the zooms.


Suzie - Still Speaking Canonese!
RF6 Mii, 5DIV, SONY a7iii, 7D2, G12, 6 L's & 2 Primes, 25 bags.
My children and grandchildren are the reason, but it's the passion that drives me to get the perfect image of everything.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
jgl927
Member
152 posts
Joined Mar 2006
     
Sep 13, 2006 17:36 as a reply to  @ aero145's post |  #7

aero145 wrote:
Isn't 70-200 f/4L much sharper and has better IQ than the 17-40 f/4L? Of course it lacks the weather sealing for the 1-series bodies.

I have both and would not say that the 17-40 is less sharp. As previously stated they are for different purposes and both are excellent.



  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aero145
Senior Member
Avatar
909 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Germany
     
Sep 13, 2006 17:44 as a reply to  @ Billginthekeys's post |  #8

Billginthekeys wrote:
well, they both serve very different purposes. my 17-40 is sharp as a tack. if you need a good wide angle, at that price it certainly is a great lens.

I understand VERY well that they serve different purposes, but my 70-200 f/4L produces much better results than my friend's 17-40 f/4L. :confused:


EOS 5D Mark II | EF24-105 f/4L IS | EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS | EF200 f/2.8L II | 580EX | Manfrotto 055xProB + 808RC4, and 679B
Le Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
elader
Goldmember
Avatar
2,374 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Nov 2005
Location: Maryland
     
Sep 13, 2006 18:19 |  #9

I own both. I will never, ever, part with the 70-200 f/4 except to replace it with a 70-200 f/2.8 for HS football. The 17-40 is a great lens, but if you are strapped for cash, I would look at the tamron f2.8 17-50.

You can get the 70-200 used on FredMiranda for ~500 and the 17-40 for about $550.


Eric
FJR1300 rider
5D mkIII and 1D MkIII

16-35L | 24-105L | 70-200L f/2.8IS | 85 f/1.8 / 50 f.1,4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
JNunn
Senior Member
538 posts
Joined May 2006
     
Sep 13, 2006 19:32 as a reply to  @ aero145's post |  #10

aero145 wrote:
70-200 f/4L vs. 17-40 f/4L.

Am I right that 17-40 f/4L is more complicated in design, that's what makes it more expensive?

Isn't 70-200 f/4L much sharper and has better IQ than the 17-40 f/4L? Of course it lacks the weather sealing for the 1-series bodies.

I've got both of these lenses too, and for sharpness its a toss-up. I don't think either one is as sharp as my 100mm macro though...but we're REALLY splitting hairs - they're all very sharp!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
CyberDyneSystems
Admin (type T-2000)
Avatar
52,928 posts
Gallery: 193 photos
Likes: 10124
Joined Apr 2003
Location: Rhode Island USA
     
Sep 13, 2006 19:43 |  #11

Telephotos are by nature sharper than wide angles. It's the nature of the type of lens itself, not restricted to the 17-40mm in any way.


GEAR LIST
CDS' HOT LINKS
Jake Hegnauer Photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
papucla10
Senior Member
Avatar
392 posts
Joined Jul 2006
     
Sep 13, 2006 22:39 |  #12

I would get the Tamron 17-50mm


Canon 50D & 20D - Kodak M1033, Canon 24-105 f/4 L, Canon 28-105 f/3.5-5.6, 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
aero145
Senior Member
Avatar
909 posts
Joined May 2006
Location: Germany
     
Sep 14, 2006 04:31 as a reply to  @ CyberDyneSystems's post |  #13

CyberDyneSystems wrote:
Telephotos are by nature sharper than wide angles. It's the nature of the type of lens itself, not restricted to the 17-40mm in any way.

Ah, I understand.

Another question:

Is the 70-200 f/4L on 200mm f/5.6 sharper than the 100-400 f/4.5-5.6L on 200mm f/5.6? Tripod and pixel peeping... IS-off.


EOS 5D Mark II | EF24-105 f/4L IS | EF100-400 f/4.5-5.6L IS | EF200 f/2.8L II | 580EX | Manfrotto 055xProB + 808RC4, and 679B
Le Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mdr
Goldmember
Avatar
1,167 posts
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Glasgow, Scotland
     
Sep 14, 2006 07:27 |  #14

There are much cheaper L lenses, for example a second hand 100-300 f5.6 L...


Marc
Glasgow, Scotland
www.marcderidder.com (external link)
www.deridder.me (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Double ­ Negative
*sniffles*
Avatar
10,533 posts
Likes: 11
Joined Mar 2006
Location: New York, USA
     
Sep 14, 2006 10:23 |  #15

A used one. :)

L lenses hold up very well if cared for properly. Even used in a professional environment, they take quite a beating. There's quite a market of used lenses out there and if you don't need the latest-and-greatest, you can pick up some real gems.


La Vida Leica! (external link) LitPixel Galleries (external link) -- 1V-HS, 1D Mark IIn & 5D Mark IV w/BG-E20
15mm f/2.8, 14mm f/2.8L, 24mm f/1.4L II, 35mm f/1.4L, 50mm f/1.2L, 85mm f/1.2L II, 135mm f/2.0L
16-35mm f/2.8L, 24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/2.8L IS, 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS, Extender EF 1.4x II & 2x II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

2,458 views & 0 likes for this thread, 18 members have posted to it.
What is the least expensive "L" lens?
FORUMS Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

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 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member was a spammer, and banned as such!
2876 guests, 175 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, 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.