do not waste your money on L glass

Jason Stoller · Apr 21, 2003

Lets go one further. Actually if you want to shoot indoor sports without flash in some of the gyms with poor lighting you really need 1.8 lenses.

Jason

Bjarne B. Dollerup said:
Try to shoot indoor sports with anything but a 2.8 lens. It doesn't
matter whether it's a prime 200/2.8 or a 70-200/2.8 L. You will
find that you really need that kind of glass to get the autofocus
to work when you are photographing basketball or other indoor
sports.

I fully realize that the L lenses are expensive, but the also hold
their value well. I have had mind over 5 years now and I have
little want to change them.

Bjarne

--
Jason Stoller [email protected]

We are just Beta Testers who pay the Camera Companies to test their new products!

Rob Martin · Apr 21, 2003

I agree, the original comment was quite trite. Just plainly doesn;t understand the human psyche.

If we only bought what we needed we would still be on plots of land, making babies and feeding ourselves. The want and need to get more has been (more recently) less for the rich and aristocratic but for the populace as a whole. This is manifested in a self serving medium (TV) where greed and avarice are promoted as good things (such as dreams can come true).

But there's nothing wrong with it. Everyone should have a good look at what they've got and assess it against a specific need, then reassess it against what you could actually get away with living with.

It's a big difference.

But in the end, I want everything I can get before I die so that the people in my wake get cool hand me downs.

Never die wondering if............

$0.02c

zidar said:
Also, don't waste your money on a car that goes 195 mph cause the
speed limit (at least in America) is normally below 75. Don't waste
your money dating super-models cause normal-looking women are
usually nicer and don't need a hit of coke every ten minutes. Don't
buy a $7,000 bicycle if you are more than 4 pounds overweight. A
bike for $1500 will do just fine. Don't buy a $9,000 Rolex Daytona
Chronograph - a Timex Ironman for $39.99 is more accurate. etc. etc.

Zidar
Alaska

--
It's not about stuff.
http://www.pbase.com/zidar

--
------------------------------

if you take the time to do something urgent, make sure it is important .............................

Chris Dodkin · Apr 21, 2003

It's all a matter of how you view your hobby......

You buy your 10D, let's say......

You really enjoy taking pictures, and due to the excellent feedback from your new digital camera, and from forums like DPReview, you rapidly improve your technique.

As it's so cheap to keep shooting, without that costly film and developing, you shoot and shoot, and find that enlargements from your computer and printer are so much better than your local lab...

Other people notice how good your pictures are, and start to ask you to shoot for them at weddings, or portrait sittings, or sports events, or you enjoy entering competitions, or just putting your work on the Web...

Time passes, technology marches on, and you are enjoying things so much that you upgrade, to a 1D or a 1Ds, or the replacement for the 10D.....

Now this is a serious camera, a real 'pro' model, allowing your to take your hobby even further, better composition from you, better quality from the camera...

Now, if you've bought std EF lenses all this time, you'd be looking at your camera bag, and perhaps thinking that you should check out their value on Ebay.....it's time to upgrade you think, to match the level of my hobby and my equipment and my expectations.........

So you'll loose money on your EF lenses as you move onwards and upwards....

If however, you think long term, and buy L lenses from the start, you'll be investing in the future of your hobby.

Those L lenses will be there when you upgrade, when the 1Ds is replaced and exceeds xxx Mega-pixel, when the 10D is extinct.....

They are, in the end, the sharp-end of your photography, they image the world onto which ever camera you use.

These lenses are where you should be putting your money, for now and for the future.

They are your investment, not the camera body.

You need to re-think your ideas - and stop focusing on cameras/pixels/resolution (sorry about the pun!)

Invest in L glass.

IMHO.

Chris.
--
http://www.1D-images.com
[email protected]
Mac G4/iMac/iBook/iPod

Joe Wilson · Apr 21, 2003

Don't buy a BMW or Lexus either, even if you can afford it. Ride around in a 1972 Pinto, it will get you where you want to go. :-S

jdobbs2001 said:
if you are not a pro you will be wasting money on L glass that can
be spent on other things. If you plan on only viewing photos on the
PC/MAC or printing 4x6s of the CAT/DOG office party etc.. you will
not notice any difference between a 24-85 picture and a 24-70L. get
a 28-135 IS it would stay on the 10D and would be the best
investment for a general purpose lens.

Zero · Apr 21, 2003

I have to make do with cheapie L lens because Zeiss doesn't make glass to fit my Canons.

jdobbs2001 said:
if you are not a pro you will be wasting money on L glass that can
be spent on other things. If you plan on only viewing photos on the
PC/MAC or printing 4x6s of the CAT/DOG office party etc.. you will
not notice any difference between a 24-85 picture and a 24-70L. get
a 28-135 IS it would stay on the 10D and would be the best
investment for a general purpose lens.

--
Zero my hero

Paul Pope · Apr 21, 2003

You will never even know what all those stupid little dials are for !
A simple DayDate with a president band in platinum is all that is nessesary.
About $25,000 ....
One of my hobbies is Rolex watches ... ;-)

zidar wrote:
. Don't buy a $9,000 Rolex Daytona

zidar said:
Chronograph -

Paul Pope · Apr 21, 2003

Zero said:
jdobbs2001 said:

if you are not a pro you will be wasting money on L glass that can
be spent on other things. If you plan on only viewing photos on the
PC/MAC or printing 4x6s of the CAT/DOG office party etc.. you will
not notice any difference between a 24-85 picture and a 24-70L. get
a 28-135 IS it would stay on the 10D and would be the best
investment for a general purpose lens.

Click to expand...

--
Zero my hero

smehe · Apr 21, 2003

You don't even need a DSLR for this. Get a small, simple P&S.

jdobbs2001 said:
if you are not a pro you will be wasting money on L glass that can
be spent on other things. If you plan on only viewing photos on the
PC/MAC or printing 4x6s of the CAT/DOG office party etc.. you will
not notice any difference between a 24-85 picture and a 24-70L. get
a 28-135 IS it would stay on the 10D and would be the best
investment for a general purpose lens.

Adam-T · Apr 21, 2003

As it happens I am a Pro and need lenses which aren't the weak link in the chain and perform at F2.8 BUT It's not ONLY pros which need this, there are a LOT of people who shoot concerts, sport, Theatre and other low light venues who benefit from fast aperture zooms and even faster aperture primes who need to stop action as well as shoot in low light. fast lenses are also excellent for creative DOF.

There aren't any consumer primes over 100mm and consumer Zooms are very slow after that (usually F5.6 etc) - also OLD fast high quality L glass is almost as cheap as higher end consumer glass - witness the 80-200L F2.8 and 28-80 F2.8-4L ..

Buy lenses to suit your Photography not to be a Status symbol or to satisfy an inverse snobbery reaction, also some of us want our lenses to work hard and last a lifetime of EOS bodies, the old Ls have certainly proved that Quality matters...

As it happens, the 28-135IS you mention plays an important role - indoor architecture and museums etc where Tripods aren't allowed or flash is undesirable - if they made a 24-135IS L F2.8 with the same quality as the 28-70L, I'd Jump at it ..

Of course you can get great results using consumer glass, but don't knock those who NEED the features and quality L lenses offer

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

Benjamin Angel · Apr 21, 2003

sorry, fairly new to forums, what is a troll or trolling (I appreciate it's not good)

cheers

Adam-T · Apr 21, 2003

Benjamin Angel said:
sorry, fairly new to forums, what is a troll or trolling (I
appreciate it's not good)

I didn't mention Trolls, but they are people who post messages on forums deliberately to start a fight - such as for example someone from the Fuji Forum coming here and slagging off the 10D just to get a reaction, they may then do the same in the Nikon forum slagging off the D100 and the Sigma forum slagging off the SD9 etc etc .. a lot of Trolls may not even OWN a camera and go through the lot attacking something to generate a "Flame war" (a thread where people do nothing but argue and get personal with it)

--
Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist

My Ugly mug and submitted Photos at -------->
http://www.photosig.com/viewuser.php?id=27855

Tony Lodge144005 · Apr 21, 2003

Interesting point. Wonder why they don't?
Not comm. viable? Licencing issues? Rampaging Hassleblad mob?

Zero said:
I have to make do with cheapie L lens because Zeiss doesn't make
glass to fit my Canons.

Seth Honeyman · Apr 21, 2003

Wonder whether it derives from those nasty beasts who used to lurk under bridges or fishermen casting their lines behind their boat.

Adam-T said:
Adam-T said:

sorry, fairly new to forums, what is a troll or trolling (I
appreciate it's not good)

Click to expand...

I didn't mention Trolls, but they are people who post messages on
forums deliberately to start a fight

--
Regards - Seth

Rich Claypole · Apr 21, 2003

jdobbs2001 said:
if you are not a pro you will be wasting money on L glass that can
be spent on other things. If you plan on only viewing photos on the
PC/MAC or printing 4x6s of the CAT/DOG office party etc.. you will
not notice any difference between a 24-85 picture and a 24-70L. get
a 28-135 IS it would stay on the 10D and would be the best
investment for a general purpose lens.

quite true and a good observation. what I would like to add though is the following:

1. If you are a pro then you will need L glass, if you are a hobbyist then the chances are you won't/

2. If you have just purchaseda 10D or any SLR and are starting off in photography then go with the cheaper consumer lenses to begin with, as time progresses and your photography improoves and you strive for that extra 10% then consider upgrading to 'L' glass.

Reading some of the comments in other threads over the months it often does seem that the opinion is that you will never get great pics until you go with the 'L' glass. For most people the consumer lenses are fine, and if you know the limits of the lenses and what works best with them you can still get great results.

There are situations where L glass is a requirement as previously stated by other contributers. It's all about wants and needs. It would be a shame if people were put of photorpahy after reading comments indicating that you need the most expensive kit to get the results you want.

I used to own the 100-400L anf sold it to get a Sigma 300mm F2.8. It was nice to have 'L' glass, but what I really needed for football was a fast lens, theb Sigma does the job. Of course the Canon 300mm F2.8 would be nice as I guess it is a litle sharper wide open, but the Sigma lets me get the pics I require.

Go with what you want, but don't be misled in to thinking you need 'L' glass all the time.

--
Rich Claypole - (Wannabe Sports Photographer)

http://www.FootballPics.net

Canon EOS D60
Canon EF 50mm F1.8, EF 28-135mm IS
Sigma 300mm F2.8 + 1.4x Tele-Converter

Andre Lam · Apr 21, 2003

Zero,

there is an adapter that lets you fit wonderful Contax Carl Zeiss optics to your Canon body. I got one as well as one for Leica R glass. Stop down metering, MF

AL

Zero said:
jdobbs2001 said:

if you are not a pro you will be wasting money on L glass that can
be spent on other things. If you plan on only viewing photos on the
PC/MAC or printing 4x6s of the CAT/DOG office party etc.. you will
not notice any difference between a 24-85 picture and a 24-70L. get
a 28-135 IS it would stay on the 10D and would be the best
investment for a general purpose lens.

Click to expand...

--
Zero my hero

Dave Lewis · Apr 21, 2003

It seems to me Paul's stuff is a different take than much of what we usually think of as studio photography with diffusers and soft light and smooth textures. His stuff is often sharp and distinct and in your face. I can see his need for extremely sharp lenses much more than regular studio work where softness is a virtue rather than a sin.

In looking at my own "work" ( I use that quite loosely, since I only use photography as a means to an end and a personal pleasure.) I think extreme sharpness is a benefit in much of outdoor photography were resolving small details is often the difference between a shot that jumps out at you and one that just drags along. I am a craftsman and will admit to using my G1 and old Nikon 950 for the details of my craft because of the huge depth of field available with the tiny lenses and sensors of consumer digitals. My outdoor shots are best taken with the D30, though since the "real photography" possible with "real lenses" makes things in the real world just look real. I can see the difference in a good lens and a poor one much better out in the real world than I can in my little studio with my fly rods.
--
Dave Lewis

50/1.4 · Apr 21, 2003

Okay, I did. I tried a f1.4 non "L" lens and it worked out BETTER than with a 2.8L lens.

Bjarne B. Dollerup said:
Bjarne B. Dollerup said:

Bjarne

Click to expand...

--
Cheer up, Peter Jennings. Maybe your side will win next time.

Juli Valley · Apr 21, 2003

Not me. I print mostly 8 x 10s.

DavidP #28649 · Apr 21, 2003

jdobbs2001 said:
if you are not a pro you will be wasting money on L glass that can
be spent on other things. If you plan on only viewing photos on the
PC/MAC or printing 4x6s of the CAT/DOG office party etc.. you will
not notice any difference between a 24-85 picture and a 24-70L. get
a 28-135 IS it would stay on the 10D and would be the best
investment for a general purpose lens.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

DavidP #28649 · Apr 21, 2003

Even $1500 is over my budget for a bike.

zidar said:
Don't
buy a $7,000 bicycle if you are more than 4 pounds overweight. A
bike for $1500 will do just fine.

--
The Unofficial Photographer of The Wilkinsons
http://thewilkinsons.crosswinds.net
Photography -- just another word for compromise

do not waste your money on L glass

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Chris Dodkin

Guest

Senior Member

Leading Member

Paul Pope

Guest

Paul Pope

Guest

Active member

Forum Pro

Member

Forum Pro

Active member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Forum Enthusiast

Dave Lewis

Guest

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts