What is the most non-L L lens?

Just wondering what do you think is the most non deserving lens that is designated L?

?????

They are all deserving of the designation - build quality, special glass elements, autofocus, aperture blades etc that together give the famous L quality

Each lens is designed for a purpose. some are more specialised than others - eg the 85mm f/1.2 or the 180mm L macro lens or the 600mm f/4 IS

But they are all great lenses.

10-22mm

Jettin wrote in post #2054795
10-22mm

I agree that the 10-22 is the lens that, most of all, deserves the L red ring, but the question of the topic was in the opposite way!

delhi wrote in post #2054766
Just wondering what do you think is the most non deserving lens that is designated L?

for the sake of controversy i'll say the 17-55.

and canon agrees with me .

ed rader

I think he wants to know which "L" lens does not belong

If I had to pick one I'd say the 28-300. It's slow and IQ isn't exactly up there. But it's heavy duty and pretty much ideal for a PJ.

That said, Canon doesn't label them Ls just because they have too much red paint in inventory...

calicokat wrote in post #2054936
I think he wants to know which "L" lens does not belong

roger that. i pick the 17-55, and canon agrees with me .

ed rader

I think all L lenses deserve their red line on them

I've heard the worst complaints about the 28-300, So I would say it's the most non deserving.

10-22
50

70-200 F4, but I have only used 5 or 6 L lenses, so my choices are pretty slim. Between the 85 1.2, 135 2.0, 35 1.4, 24-70 and the 70-200, the 70-200 is definately not in the same league, but then again it is like half the price too

delhi wrote in post #2054766
Just wondering what do you think is the most non deserving lens that is designated L?

did everyone misunderstand it? lol

Livinthalife wrote in post #2055184
did everyone misunderstand it? lol

Not everyone.

cdi-ink.com wrote in post #2055188
Not everyone.

well I guess you are the excetion