Canon L lenses

I have read some posts on here regarding bad versions of some lenses. Would buying canon L lenses guarantee that every version of a specific lens is perfect or close to it?

Chris

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1029&message=19061148

http://the-digital-picture.com/Canon-Lenses/Canon-L-Lens-Series.aspx

--
http://www.pbase.com/arshutterbug/

I own two Canon L lenses, 24-105 f4 IS & 70-200 2.8 IS. I couldn't be happier with them. I haven't done any formal lens test, I just take them out and take pictures.

http://vette74.smugmug.com

No
Possibly more likely than a non - L

However perfection, or close to it for an L is in general much much better than for a non -L

To me the larger question with the L lenses is what exactly are you paying so much for? Some of the L zooms don't rate that well when it comes to distortion, for example (at least according to photozone).

IMHO you can't beat L lenses for color and contrast.

http://vette74.smugmug.com

I have four L lenses. All of them have been perfect right from the box.

I just got the 135mm f/2L. Here is one of my first shots:
http://www.usefilm.com/Image.asp?ID=1140057

My first 17-40L was awful. Had to send it back. Second one was okay.

Andy, very nice dragon fly picture.

http://vette74.smugmug.com

But probably less likely. I work in manufacturing and usually the higher priced items get larger sample size or more frequent inspections. I would guess that Canon does the same. This is one of the reasons for higher prices on certain manufactured items, material used and labor hours affect price.

I like your shots of the Angels/Dodgers game with the 5D. My Dragon FLy shot is one of the last with my 10D. I have a 5D arriving tomorrow via UPS.

(I was born in Brooklyn. I'm a Dodger fan.)

I meant the "A's"

Andy, I had a 10D, actually still have it, and loved it. I really love the 5D and I'm sure you will also. Before I retired I did all my work with FF cameras, 35mm, 2 1/4, 4x5, 5x7, and 8x10. With the 10D I had a hard time getting my head around the crop factor, especially the fact that my lenses didn't act the way they do with FF.

http://vette74.smugmug.com

Andy Simmons said:

I meant the "A's"

Click to expand...

No problem.

I was never bothered by the crop factor with the 10D. In fact I like the extra reach it gave to the lenses. I think it will take a while for me to get used to FF, but I am looking forward to it. Especially the larger view through the viewfinder.

I've really enjoyed the 10D and will probably hang on to it. We'll see. My wife might take it over.

I am going to agree with most everyone in saying that just like anything in life each will be slightly different. But generally I am sure some are lemons, and most of these get dealt with in a easy way (on of the reasons I like shopping with a reputable store) also I have shot several lenses, 17-40, 70-200 both f4 and 2.8, 24-105 etc. Most of the ones everybody talks about and dont have many complaints.

I think alot of people worry too much about counting pixels as well. Most any L lens will make a superb 11x14 which is larger than what a magazine would mostly print and most all will stretch way larger. So I wouldnt worry too much about if lens a is sharper than lens b, it will be very noticable if you have a dud rigth away.
--
My gear as of current

Canon 5D
Canon Rebel XT w\ battery grip
17-40
70-200 F4
100mm Macro
50mm 1.8
550 EX flash

L lenses are hit and miss just like the regular line

If you can afford L lenses, then by all means go ahead and get them. However I would say that image quality, maximum aperature, colour, contrast, focus speed etc would be much better reasons for getting them than fears about quality control!
----------------
Thanks for looking,
Check out my photo blog at http://keeperofthekeys.blogspot.com

There is no gaurantee that any lens is 'perfect'. All lenses are manufactured - and during such processes thing can go wrong - so you occasionally get duds. However by putting the "L" label on their lenses Canon are saying that those lenses are of a certain standard (or better).

There is a real difference between "L" lenses and non-L lenses in the Canon range. Compare the images and you will see it immediately in the sharpness, contrast and colour of the shots. You pay for what you get - but quite simply if image quality is a big deal for you (as it is to any professional) - once you have shot "L" lenses there is simply no going back to consumer lenses!

There are some caveats to this. If you find a great lens and like using it - stick with it. Personally I have a Sigma 15mm f2.8 EX Diagonal Fisheye that is a ripper lens! It's not Canon and it's not an "L" series lens - but the shots I get with it are awesome so I will stick with it. The EF 50mm f1.4 USM I have is also a sweet piece of glass - and I love shooting with it for it's sharpness, narrow depth of field and usefulness in low light situations. But the rest of the lenses I have are all L series lenses - and having progressed up through some good consumer level lenses such as the EF 28-135mm f3.5-5.6 IS USM, I won't sell the L series lenses to anyone! They are simply that good!

Do whatever you have to to get the L series lenses - they are quite remarkable...

I have a bunch of L lenses, both primes and zooms. Some were keepers on the first try, others not.

My impression from having followed this Forum is that some lenses show more sample-to-sample variation than others. For example, the 24-70 f/2.8 L seems to show quite a bit of variation ... but I don't recall anyone posting bad experiences with the 135mm f/2 L.

Whether L or not L, trade-offs must be made between the amount of variation which is considered acceptable to ship from the factory vs. the cost of manufacturing (and thus the selling price of the product.) For L lenses, one might expect much tighter control in an absolute sense -- but I believe most L designs are intrinsically more difficult to manufacture than non-L designs, so the effective amount of variation seen by a customer may be the same, or possibly even greater.