What was your First L ?

My first was the 17-40F4L (which I think is a great lens) followed a few months later by the 70-200F2.8L. I think it will be on of the 300/400mm primes next...
 
17-40 seems to get a bit of a slating in here but to me it is a cracking lens and a lot of the time I prefer it to my 24-105, maybe I just have a good one but it virtually lives on the camera for indoor portraits and such round the house.
 
My first L was a 70-200 f4 (non IS). A great lens that I still have. Does not get used very much, but i don't think that I would ever sell it.
 
My first was the 17-40mm, then about 2 months later I got the 70-200mm f4.
Come to think of it, I didn't buy any lenses in 2008 :cuckoo:

I think my next lens will be the 100-400 OR a telephoto prime of some sorts.
 
My first and only was a 24-70.

I'm still wondering what I want to get next as I'm at a photographic crossroads, I'm thinking either a 135 f/2 or 100-400.
 
24-105L, great lens, love it to bits.

Next will be the 100-400L :)
 
BertRoot said:
17-40 seems to get a bit of a slating in here but to me it is a cracking lens and a lot of the time I prefer it to my 24-105, maybe I just have a good one but it virtually lives on the camera for indoor portraits and such round the house.
Click to expand...

Quite like mine too, I certainly agree that it's a much better bit of glass than the 24-105. Although admittedly, not nearly as versatile.

Bought mine second hand along with a 70-200 f4 before I even had a body of my own to put them on. Since I've started to shoot less on medium and large formats, I've managed to collect a few more odds and sods. "L" glass does seem to deliver something of a guaranteed minimum image and build quality but it's certainly not the be and end all.
 
wcavanagh said:
Seems the 100 - 400 and the 24 - 105 is a popular pair :)
Click to expand...

Yep, My first was the 24-105, rarely off my camera, but you're right Will, I can see my next lens being the 100-400.

But the biggest problem I'm going to have with that (money aside) is getting the purchase past senior management. (er indoors)

Pete
 
i would think of selling all my gear for a long prime L or a 100-400 not my camera obviously :p
 
100-400L my first, bought this last year and has been the bees knees for me, next two I'm considering 24-105l another L. Retiral in 21 months with a good lump sum, so if things go right then I can order later in the year perhaps on a buy now pay next year sort of deal if theres any going.
 
24-105, 300f4, 16-35, would love a 300-2.8, but er indoors would have a fit
 
BertRoot said:
17-40 seems to get a bit of a slating in here but to me it is a cracking lens and a lot of the time I prefer it to my 24-105, maybe I just have a good one but it virtually lives on the camera for indoor portraits and such round the house.
Click to expand...

I would certainly not slate it a fantastic lens. if I could have afforded to keep it I would of but I was given the chance to swap it for a lens I needed more
 
17-40 was my first and i was hooked. The build and feel, and iQ of the L make it hard for me to chose others.

I have the 10-22, but as soon as I get FF, will change to the 16-35
 
Pete Gl said:
Yep, My first was the 24-105, rarely off my camera, but you're right Will, I can see my next lens being the 100-400.

But the biggest problem I'm going to have with that (money aside) is getting the purchase past senior management. (er indoors)

Pete
Click to expand...

Thats always the problem mate. Ive got my eye on something new, but dont want to let the boss know just yet.
 
My 1st was a 70-200F4, bought when I got my 40D. Recently added a 100-400.
 
EF 300mm f/2.8 - Now replaced with EF 300mm f/4
EF 135mm f/2
EF 17-40mm f/4
EF 70-200mm f/2.8
EF 24-105mm f/4
 
I got the 70-200 f4 about a week after picking up my 400D. Added a 24-70 when I got the 5D. Next will probably be a 16-35, or upgrading the 70-200 to f2.8.

puddleduck said:
The 17-40 isn't very good.

Frankly "L" is just marketing gimmick.

The non "L" 10-22 is a much much better lens. Not sure why Canon can do such good crop factors wides, but don't manage it in full frame.
Click to expand...

:thinking: 16-35 isn't all that bad as a wide zoom is it? Covers the same FOV as the 10-22.
 
Mine was a brand new 70-200 f/4 L which cost £100, which no-one was jealous about at all.

Picked up a 24-70 not long after for an absolute snip as well!

Looks like I got Lucky for an amateur!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top