What was your first L lens?

[uplander]

My first was the 100-400L IS USM then
70-200 f/2.8L IS USM
400 f/2.8 L IS USM
24-70 f/2.8 L USM

 

[Big]

Hey Uplander, how do you like the 100-400? I've heard mixed reviews.

 

[KmH]

A Nikon AF 24-85 mm f/2.8-4D.

 

[R1100S]

It's interesting to see how many people chose to buy the 70-200 f/2.8 before they bought their 24-70 f/2.8.

I'm pondering the same thing right now. I plan on eventually owning both lenses, but was leaning towards buying the 24-70 first as I will probably use it most of the time anyway.

If I buy the 24-70 first, then I can bank the additional $660 of my current $2k budget towards the 70-200.

 

[Overread]

I guess one thing is that most people have a kit lens to cover the rough range of 24-70mm for use. Might not be as good as the 24-70mm but it makes more sense for many to extend what they can take (and go for hte 70-200mm) over just improving their current level of shot technicals. Though of course for some the extra reach is not nessessary and so they do go for the shorter lens first - depends what the priorities are

 

[erhard]

mine was the 70-200 f4 L, which I then swapped for the f2.8 L, best thing I ever did!! :mrgreen:

 

[rufus5150]

It's interesting to see how many people chose to buy the 70-200 f/2.8 before they bought their 24-70 f/2.8.

I'm pondering the same thing right now. I plan on eventually owning both lenses, but was leaning towards buying the 24-70 first as I will probably use it most of the time anyway.

If I buy the 24-70 first, then I can bank the additional $660 of my current $2k budget towards the 70-200.

As this thread was only about L glass, I have to backup what Overread said from my own perspective. I did get a 70-200 2.8 (sigma) first and a 10-20 (sigma) at the same time. It was later I got the 24-70L. The next L is going to be the 300mm F4L/IS which should be just a few weeks away now...

 

[Josh66]

First (and only, for now) was the 70-200 f/4 (non-IS).

 

[uplander]

Hey Uplander, how do you like the 100-400? I've heard mixed reviews.

The 100-400L is probably the most used long glass I have .

It's really quite sharp through out the range and the being a zoom really gets you a lot of shots you would miss because you are in a situation that you can't move.

If you think you need a 400mm lens this is the best way to find out. Like any long glass it really shines when you crop a shot and really notice the detail that is there.

Here are some 100-400 examples

I better stop now ...I was just going through my photobucket account.

There are more at photobucket too.

 

[maman]

In less than two weeks, I will have my first bit of L glass...

the Canon 70-200mm f4 IS L

I can't wait! Hopeing for a dramatic imporvement over my current kit lens.

 

[cfusionpm]

It's interesting to see how many people chose to buy the 70-200 f/2.8 before they bought their 24-70 f/2.8.

I'm pondering the same thing right now. I plan on eventually owning both lenses, but was leaning towards buying the 24-70 first as I will probably use it most of the time anyway.

If I buy the 24-70 first, then I can bank the additional $660 of my current $2k budget towards the 70-200.

Well my first L lens will be the 70-200 2.8 IS, probably as soon as I get my tax return. I picked the more crop-friendly 17-55mm 2.8 IS first while I save up. I have no desire to get an L mid-range zoom untill I buy a full frame camera and can no longer use my fantastic little EF-S.

 

[wheresnifty]

It's interesting to see how many people chose to buy the 70-200 f/2.8 before they bought their 24-70 f/2.8.

I'm pondering the same thing right now. I plan on eventually owning both lenses, but was leaning towards buying the 24-70 first as I will probably use it most of the time anyway.

If I buy the 24-70 first, then I can bank the additional $660 of my current $2k budget towards the 70-200.

i would go with the 24-70... most people are split between those two and if you think you'll use the 24-70 more than go for it.