do not waste your money on L glass

Keith Dodson145047 · Apr 21, 2003

--
Keith
http://www.pbase.com/dod1011/galleries
(More images to come...)
(See my profile for gear)

'If Saddam survives the war but loses a leg how pi$$ed will his body doubles be?'

BTaylor · Apr 21, 2003

I think the point may have been missed, the point is do you spend a lot upfront for better quality or do you spend little, but keep replacing over the long run?

with purchasing anything this is the case, but seems to me this is a wallet decision, if you aren't going to get money back and you can't afford the L glass then don't buy it, if you can afford and want it, then open the wallet and have at it; really who cares?

Frank Nichols said:
Maybe, but my 20 year old Canondale is in much better condition
than my 5 year old Rebel lens. And the resale value is much better
( percentagewise) also.

Frank

Jung said:

Frank Nichols said:

A good comparison might be on bicycles. If you are going to take up
bicyling you could go to your local discount store and buy a
touring bike for $150-$200 US (or less.) Or you could buy a
Canondale (hmm... interesting name) or better. One is expensive to
buy but will last a life time or longer, the other is inexpensive
to buy but you will be lucky if it lasts a year or two.

Frank

Click to expand...

Bad analogy. bike has parts that require more care and wear out.
Lenses don't. Most people I suspect won't wear out their 24-85.

Click to expand...

--
I plan on living forever - so far so good!

--
Brett Taylor
http://www.amichi.info

tuanokc · 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.

I guess you would probably say don't waiste money on anything right? like: dont buy the more expensive Cadillac, the Ford Focus will do allright, it's ony a car. Don't buy the more expensive HDTV, a regular Magnavox TV will do the same, it's only a TV.

You pay for what you get, so spend your monye wisely, and affordable but don't jump on a vague conclusion for others.

Canon and Nikon user. Film/Digital

Keith Dodson145047 · Apr 21, 2003

Michael Long said:
The secondary reason is that the 10D crops out most of the "bad
part" (technical term) of the lens.

I have an 8-10 year old CHEAP 80-200 Canon lens. I think I paid $99 for it at Wal-Mart or something. On my 10D you'd really be suprised at how good the images can be, especially in small prints. Having said that, I CAN see a difference in my 100-300 5.6L's images.

Keith
http://www.pbase.com/dod1011/galleries
(More images to come...)
(See my profile for gear)

'If Saddam survives the war but loses a leg how pi$$ed will his body doubles be?'

Adam-T · Apr 21, 2003

Andrew Chiciak said:
That's all well and good...just show me a picture thats really
sharp from a 28-70 at F2.8

I don't know why I'm bothering to do this because you're not intererested really are you? but here goes .. Compressed to Photoshop Level-8 so quite heavily, Sorry but I have to delete stuff from my webspace everytime I have to ad anything.

Anyway, it's the full frame resized followed by a 640x480 sized 100% crop from the image .. Of course it could NEVER be THAT sharp could it because of the aggressive 10D AA filter, but the lens performs very well indeed at all focal lengths at F2.8

May the typical forum negativity commence ..

--
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

Forrest41926 · Apr 21, 2003

draxjobs 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

If you are not a food critic, you will be wasting money on eating at restaurants and fancy grocery store food. Two bowls of brown rice and a piece of fruit is all you need to sustain your body. Anything beyond that and you are WASTING your money. Eat cheaply and stuff all your money under your matteress.

And then tell me where you live.

Keith Dodson145047 · Apr 21, 2003

"L" is Canon-speak for their professional, high dollar series of lenses. Generally they are $1000 and up but usually worth it.
--
Keith
http://www.pbase.com/dod1011/galleries
(More images to come...)
(See my profile for gear)

'If Saddam survives the war but loses a leg how pi$$ed will his body doubles be?'

Juli Valley · Apr 21, 2003

They just hold their value better than the non-Ls. It's a relative thing.

IgorD · Apr 21, 2003

Excuse me, but this is kind of idiotic statement. And, as usual, it generates a lot of thread and wasting valuable bandwith of this site. So, as this message as well... That's really depends how deep your pocket is. I am personally, don't have a billion $ in my account, but I bought 1Ds and all L zoom glass with it. And I am not pretending to be a pro eighter, I am sure that some people can to better with their 300 $ camera that I do, but that's not the point. Just my 2c...

DavidP #28649 · Apr 21, 2003

Glenn James said:
DavidP said:

Even $1500 is over my budget for a bike.

Click to expand...

Yea, but I bet you don't say that about some of your lenses

The people I ride with drop $5,000 on a bike without batting an
eye. Of course most of them, like me, take their riding seriously.
They either race or did race, and put in 100 to 200 miles a week.

This gets me thinking. In cycling, we have a term for people that
have the best equipment, wear the clothing that the pros wear, but
can't handle themselves in a pack - "Fred". Is there a term for
photographers that have all the best stuff but use full automatic
mode because they don't know what an f-stop is and what happens
when you change it?

Glenn

--

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/gjames

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

Stephen Scharf · 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.

Sorry, I don't agree. There is only one Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 and that's the "L" model. This is quite possibly the finest lenses have ever used, with the possible exception of the Zeiss T* Sonnar 35 mm f/2.8 on my Contax T3. And it is way more versatile than that fixed focal Contax lens. After renting one umpteen times at Calumet, I finally realized I needed my own. Snagged an absolutely mint, like new-in-box non-IS version a few weeks ago for $940. Just an awesome lens.

Isaac Sibson · Apr 21, 2003

Scott Sanders said:
I just dont get it. Yea, yea it holds its value better, but look
at all the people who "invested" in a 28-70L. Its all gonna drop
in value when we the new model comes out. I am not saying L lenses
arent worth the money i am just saying its not an "investment".

Because thanks to inflation and variations in the world economy, I can presently sell both of my L series lenses for more than I paid for them.

That's the money terms anyway. They're also an investment in my photographic kit and in my abilities.

As for "if you're not a pro, you won't notice any difference", all I can say is bull* . I'm not a pro, but I sure as hell see a difference between my 70-200 f4L and 300 F4L IS compared to my old Sigma 70-300 APO Macro. And perhaps you could point to a non-L canon lens that would have allowed me to shoot at 600mm focal length (2X tc on my 300 F4L IS) the other day when observing red kites?

As for my 24-85, I can definately see a difference, and that's why it is to be replaced with primes when I can afford.

--
Mostly Full Frame user!

EOS Tree + Nikon Coolscan III
Deef Hurty.

Dominic.Chan · Apr 21, 2003

That is not true. While the quality difference may not be very noticeable at 4x6, I find that with indoor sports (e.g., gymnastics) require at least f2.8 to take any pictures without excessive motion blur, even when shooting at ISO 1600. In a "typical" school gym, I would have to use 1/60s with f4.5, or about 1/40s with f5.6, which would not produce any usable pictures at any size.

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.

Juli Valley · Apr 21, 2003

I snagged the older version 80-200L 2.8 at $725 at KEH. It was very clean, had the caps, hood and collar.

Mishkin · Apr 21, 2003

There are so many things beyond sharpness only. Color, contrast, barrel distortion, CA, bokeh, build quality, AF speed/accuracy, weather protection, and of course, f-stop. All these will affect even 4x6s.

There no general truth for everyone. If you don't need high-quality equipment, don't buy it. But teaching others what to do with their money is plain silly.

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.

--
Mishkin

Forrest41926 · Apr 21, 2003

He wrote books.

Stephen Eastwood · Apr 21, 2003

My shots are unsharp?

I used not only L glass but a prime instead of my usualy 35-350 and look what I got totally unacceptable I think I have a defective L oh wait maybe it was front/back focusing

135 L at f2.0

Paul Pope said:
Dave Lewis said:

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

Click to expand...

--
Stephen Eastwood
http://www.nyphotographics.com

Cory Parris · Apr 21, 2003

I think that this forum ignores the value of prime lenses. You can get sharper photos from a $300 prime than you can from a $1400 L zoom. The same holds true of low-light photography. A flexible f2.8 zoom really pales when compared to a "inflexible" f2 or f1.4 prime. The ability to shoot at 800 rather than 1600 or 3200 will make a huge difference in quality of the final photo. Canon makes some really incredible prime lenses for a very low price. I have the 35 f2 and the 50 1.4. The 85 1.8 and 100 f2 are also great lenses. The only thing missing in their prime lineup is an affordable ultrawide like a 20 1.8 for $500-600. Any Canon engineers out there?

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.

--
http://www.parrisphoto.com

Jarmo Muukka · Apr 21, 2003

If people don't buy L glass, Mercedes, big boat, village by the lake, travel, etc., they will have huge amount of money in the bank when they die. If you have enough money for your hobby, living and what ever, you're allowed to use it. It's stupid if you don't.

I do like to drive my nice car even though I'm not a pro driver. I do like to take photos with D-SLR and L glass rather than with less capable lenses (and P&S has been turned out to be a pain). And I do like to use my fast computer and programming tools, but I'm a pro.

JMu

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.

Cory Parris · Apr 21, 2003

Mishkin,

I agree blanket statements are quite often not useful to an individual. However, I don't think that a different perspective that includes that person's take on a money issue is silly.
Cory

Mishkin said:
There no general truth for everyone. If you don't need high-quality
equipment, don't buy it. But teaching others what to do with their
money is plain silly.

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...

--
Mishkin

--
http://www.parrisphoto.com

do not waste your money on L glass

Leading Member

Active member

Leading Member

Leading Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Leading Member

Forum Pro

IgorD

Guest

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Similar threads

Keyboard shortcuts