What was your first 'L' Lens ??

  • Thread starter Thread starter kinchy
  • Start date Start date
Mine was also the 100-400mm. Lovely lens, and very flexible.
 
Ah, very interesting, thanks :)

and thanks Glen too. No L glass for me... YET :lol:

Grendel said:
When I bought my 24-105 is was for my 30D (crop sensor). I later bought a 5D and I have to say the difference with that lens on a ff body is huge! You can't believe it's the same lens.

I did a comparison a while ago with the 24-105 on both bodies.

But back to the OP's question - my first L glass was the 100-400 and I absolutely love it :love:
Click to expand...
 
Got my 17-40mm f/4 in August then got the 70-200mm f/4 in September.
I've made a few friends of mine very jealous.
 
i'd go for the 70-200 everytime ;) you can't beat L glass, everything else is just inferior :gag:


Occasionally you get glass that is almost L in performance, I have a really sharp 100mm Macro which is superb, and lots of peeps say it should be an L.

If you can afford it you won't regret it :thumbs:

Janice said:
These two canon lenses are both the same sort of price........... which is best?

Canon 70-300 IS f4-5.6

Canon 70-200 F4 L (non IS)

I can see both have advantages and disadvantages over each other but cant see a winner!

You get the extra focal length with the 70-300 and the IS but is that lot cancelled out by the constant F4 and the L of the 70-200?
Click to expand...
 
Snap blinkerz.

70-200 f.2.8 and a 24-70 on its way from kerso as we speak :)

My biceps appear to have doubled in size lugging around a 30D + grip + 70-200 :( It's worth it though.
 
Agger said:
i'd go for the 70-200 everytime ;) you can't beat L glass, everything else is just inferior :gag:
Click to expand...

That will probably be my second lens for purchase, but i need something to fill the gap that will be left by the 17-70 Sigma.
Something which the 24-105 may be useful
 
Janice said:
These two canon lenses are both the same sort of price........... which is best?

Canon 70-300 IS f4-5.6

Canon 70-200 F4 L (non IS)

I can see both have advantages and disadvantages over each other but cant see a winner!

You get the extra focal length with the 70-300 and the IS but is that lot cancelled out by the constant F4 and the L of the 70-200?
Click to expand...

Personally I would say the 70-200 f4L, its quite possible that you'll get a better shot from the 70-200 cropped to be the same fov as the 300. I know mine is ultra sharp at 100%, its only surpassed by my L primes.
 
On the subject of L glass, is £650 a decent price for a secondhand 100-400 L?
 
kingborris said:
On the subject of L glass, is £650 a decent price for a secondhand 100-400 L?
Click to expand...

Id say so. They're around £1000 new, cheaper from Kerso of course
 
My first, and still only, L is the 70-200 F4L IS. Coincidentally it accompanies my Sigma 17-70 :)
 
just recently got a CANON EF 70-200mm F4.0L USM for my 40d.

erm its...





fab.


get some good light and it takes v nice pictures. Up until now my fav lens was my tamron 28-75 f2.8 which I still love but the L lens widdles all over it in eveery aspect.
 
I go with Canon Bob, used a 35/350 and a 17/35L 2.8 for years, going down the IS route now with 24/105 L and 100/400.

All excellent.

George
 
100-400mm for me too.
Great versatile lens, and superb in the right hands (unfortunately not mine:lol:)
Dean:)
 
24-70 2.8 was my first. I've now got the 70-200 2.8 IS as well which I prefer using but wouldn't be without the 24-70 on a day out. Just need a 5D now to get that full frame goodness.
 
George said:
I go with Canon Bob, used a 35/350 and a 17/35L 2.8 for years, going down the IS route now with 24/105 L and 100/400.
All excellent.
George
Click to expand...

Good on yer George....I was beginning to think I was the only person to use one....(or both)
 
Ranarama, you could have my 1Ds mk 1 in a month or two..

Bob, it's a belter, used it so often and it's not one that's mentioned much.

Thought of getting rid of it as I have the 24/105 and 100/400L's but don't think I will, for all you'd get for it.
 
The wonderful 70-200 f2.8 L IS is still my only piece of L glass. I love it to bits though - it's spent more time on my camera throughout this sumer than any other lens I owned.

After much thought and several threads on here (LOL!) I finally settled for Sigma EX lenses for my other two "Main" lenses - those being the 24-70mm f2.8 and its "ideal companion" the 12-24mm f4.5-5.6. Both have had a lot of use, and I have to say given the same choice again I'd buy exactly the same lenses. :)
 
70-200 f4 was my first followed by my 300 f4 prime :thumbs:
 
24-105 for my 400d was my first.... followed 5 months later by the 70-200 f4 IS...
 
70-200 f2.8 non is LLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL
 
I haven't got any L glass at the moment. I can't afford it really, and the lenses I'm looking at, the Sigma counterparts are just as good IQ wise and totally acceptable for the level of photography I'm at.

I would eventually want to get a 70-200 f/4, but I'm not sure how much I'll use it considering the majority of my photography is landscapes and sports, both of which I use wide to standard focal lengths.

So, for me, the first Sigma EX lens I got :D

10-20mm was my first, with a 24-60 f/2.8 (at a bargain price of £50) on its way :D
 
100-400L was my first.
 
LOL Did I? Senility setting in then. :cuckoo:
 
17-40 f4L.

To be honest, I was never that struck on it. Not fast enough and didn't feel as snappy to use as the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX that I 'upgraded' from.

Ended up selling it and going back to Sigma in the end.

Cheers,
James
 
70-200 for me, followed by 24-105 F/4L IS and finally 100-400L IS
 
100 -400 for me followed by the same for the wife, as a trip to SA was comming up, now wanting the 70 - 200is
 
17-40 F4 then the 70-200 F2.8 IS and last but not least 300 F4 IS. All fantastic lens.......looking for a 500 / 600 but just need to get the wife on side!!!
 
70-200 F4 non IS, have to say it was rubbish, didnt like it at all, and produced 'ok' image quality, I guess it was a duff one, I find my 55-250IS to smash it to bits in regards for bang for buck, while to my eyes producing better image quality and more 'keepers'.

Seeing other L lenses though, and my 55-250IS, I have to say I think my 55-250 is an exceptional case, one that happened to leave the factory 'perfect' by sheer fluke, the IQ it produces just doest match the price tag I paid for it (170 total), its exceptional
 
My 1st L was the 24-105 L IS USM.
As for the 1DMK11 being recalled, I have had no problems with mine.
Set it up the right way and you are onto a good one, got some of my best shots ever with the 1st few frames, it's a beast. And for all you Nikon D3 lovers out there I had the chance to test the D3 with the 70-200 lens. Great camera, with some great stuff on it, but for me the 1DMK111 still blows it away.
 
foodposion how did you get a sigma 24-60mm for #50
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top