Canon L Glass

[jackieclayton]

So i'm just starting up and really want to make a wise decision in purchasing lenses... however whenever I look for Canon primes i'm torn between standard and L glass. The price is almost TRIPLE! Is it really worth the price??! Thanks in advance!!

 

[bitteraspects]

ABSOLUTELY

 

[Josh66]

In most cases, yes. They don't charge that much just for the hell of it...


There are plenty of good non-L lenses though...

 

[musicaleCA]

There are cases where it's not worth the money at all. Compare the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM to the EF 50mm f/1.2 USM L and the L is actually not as sharp as the former sometimes. And the bokeh isn't that much of an improvement either. Nor is CA or barrel distortion (which are both already practically non-existant on the f/1.4). Compare the L-series lenses to the other models, very closely.

If you're just starting out, I'd hardly think it's a wise idea to spend tons of money on L glass. Get yourself a more versatile set-up of different lenses at a lower cost, find-out what you absolutely love to shoot, and then start investing in quality glass geared toward the focal lengths you're shooting at.

 

[jackieclayton]

There are cases where it's not worth the money at all. Compare the EF 50mm f/1.4 USM to the EF 50mm f/1.2 USM L and the L is actually not as sharp as the former sometimes. And the bokeh isn't that much of an improvement either. Nor is CA or barrel distortion (which are both already practically non-existant on the f/1.4). Compare the L-series lenses to the other models, very closely.

If you're just starting out, I'd hardly think it's a wise idea to spend tons of money on L glass. Get yourself a more versatile set-up of different lenses at a lower cost, find-out what you absolutely love to shoot, and then start investing in quality glass geared toward the focal lengths you're shooting at.

thats good advice... i'm usually the type that invests in the good stuff right off the bat, but in this case you really make a good point... thanks!

I wish there was a site that showed comparison of the same lens, subject, and camera to that of the L glass type... that way you can really "see" the difference...

I see a lot of people rent stuff to try out but i'm overseas and unfortunately don't have that option

 

[Bravotwofive]

I have used L Glass exclusively for several years now. I feel as though it is what the older nikkor lens used to be in their day. I agree that you should be sure that Canon is your choice before laying out this type of money.

Lens for lens, glass for glass, I would not trade my L's for anything else.
Other than maybe a complete large format setup, and a lifetime of instruction, and supplies.

 

[table1349]

It can depend on the intended use of the glass. While L glass is generally superior, it is not always so, depending on the need. As an example, my main interest is sports photography. If you check my, somewhat outdated, gear list you will see a large amount of L glass listed. The two noticeable exceptions are the 50mm f1.2L and 85mm f1.2L.

The 50mm is far to slow in it's AF even on a 1D body. The 85mm is not quite as slow, but the 85 f1.8 is noticeably quicker.

I will say that I have yet to find an L lens with a build quality that is not outstanding compared to other glass.

 

[musicaleCA]

Indeed. Build quality on L glass is nearly always superior to their non-L counterparts. They'll take the pain of constant shooting, all day, every day.

For lens reviews, check out Photozone.