Do you HAVE to Buy an L Lens?

[lightning]

Personally, I've always this strong conviction that I'm not talking to a photographer but a equipment collector who ran out of reasons to give when they start talking about build.

Other than working photojournalists (they throw their lenses around, drop the lenses, don't cap lenses, etc), I've yet to meet a single photog who talks about build and are actually in situations to make use of it.

I use to own 2 non L EF lenses(Efs 18-55 and EF 28-200)...and they failed on me twice on both lenses. Both lens cannot zoom after dust got into it (still not talking about lens flare). And another occasion, 2 screws drop out from the internal of the 28-200 and Jam my mirror at Hong Kong Disneyland. After those incident, I never dare to trust the non "L". Every since 2 years ago, if I need to shoot on a oversea trip, I will only trust the "Ls".

Recently I went to cambodia, and shot at one location where the dust is so fine that even my 24-105 starts to sweek after a while due to dust. I cannot imagine if I use a non-dust resistant lens in that situation. My face was red(not because I was shy) and my camera turns pinkish and lens filter has to be cleaned constantly to get clear shots.

 

[Klose]

Once you start making prints to sell your photos. You will realise there is a need to use an L lens. All the flaws from cheap lenses start to show up at S10R. I print at 30" x 40" :sweat:

 

[Kit]

so I guess those who can't afford L lenses can only stay at home and take pictures of their toes then.......

 

[Danntbt]

You can make do without but not without compromises when you have specific needs......or even without specific needs....so basically if you are wondering whether you need it, then you don't need it. Quite likely you will know when you need it.....

 

[lightning]

so I guess those who can't afford L lenses can only stay at home and take pictures of their toes then.......

Face it photography is an expensive hobby, too me is the extreme ends, if just want to take some photos here and there, stick with PnS, you want to dive into DSLR, be prepare to spend.

 

[Kit]

Face it photography is an expensive hobby, too me is the extreme ends, if just want to take some photos here and there, stick with PnS, you want to dive into DSLR, be prepare to spend.

Thats really just your view on it and it doesn't represent the majority.

 

[Tsangstudios]

Assuming you have already establish your style and no longer a newbie, do yourself a favour get a L lense. You deserve it, pat on your back for all the blood seat toild and tears to hone your skills..

If you do professional work and charging a decent amount you owe it to you client to use L lenses.

 

[artyboy]

to put things in perspective, L glass is not the only option. some 3rd-party F/2.8s would certainly perform much better than kit lenses with variable apertures (or may i dare say equal or better to L glass). and not all Ls are created equal - im sure you heard abt the 100-400 and 28-300 Ls. its not just abt lens "class"/labelling, its the end results that matters most. but for ordinary non-critical photo-taking needs, you don't need L glass. esp if you are not making any enlargements.

 

[lightning]

Thats really just your view on it and it doesn't represent the majority.

So are your opinions. :bsmilie:

 

[iRaphael]

i guess it really depends whether you NEED one based on what you do.

Ls are able to withstand more 'damage' but i'm sure others can do (with lots of gaffer tape and camera armour. LOL.)

i guess for the majority of us, we want to use Ls but we can't afford it and thats why we don't have it.

face it, if Ls cost dirt cheap, we would have ALL bought Ls.

and the only reason stopping us is the price tag.

 

[kairospix]

not unless you are a professinal and you need the highest quality for production prints

but then again a skilled photogrpaher can make (Ansel Adams once said you make a photo not take one!) a great photo even with a pin-hole camera

so it's not the equipment but how you use it to produce great shoots!

it's better to spend more time shooting and trying and learning then thinking buying expensive equipment can improve your shots greatly - usually they just mkae things more convenient but not necessary make you a better photo maker!

 

[unseenshadows]

not unless you are a professinal and you need the highest quality for production prints

but then again a skilled photogrpaher can make (Ansel Adams once said you make a photo not take one!) a great photo even with a pin-hole camera

so it's not the equipment but how you use it to produce great shoots!

it's better to spend more time shooting and trying and learning then thinking buying expensive equipment can improve your shots greatly - usually they just mkae things more convenient but not necessary make you a better photo maker!

I agree. As an amateur I'm definitely not ready to spend that kind of money for camera equipment, to fund a hobby. Especially so because I don't even earn my own keep.

 

[kairospix]

I agree. As an amateur I'm definitely not ready to spend that kind of money for camera equipment, to fund a hobby. Especially so because I don't even earn my own keep.

haha wise move bro! very very wise move!

 

[Hexlord]

Thats really just your view on it and it doesn't represent the majority.

Well let them spend money blindly lar, its their choice anyway

Its not how much money you spend on your equipment, but how you make full use of whatever that is available to you.

 

[zerartul]

This topic is really weird. Do you have to buy a L Lens will depend mainly on your budget. If you can afford it of course get the best. But life isnt always so nice so usually one will settle for second best. On the other hand there are non L lens that are really good by third party like the Sigma 1.4 and Tamron 90mm Macro. Even Canon themself make fantastic non L grade lens like 85 1.8, 50 1.4, EFS 17-55 F2.8 and 100mm F2.8 Macro. So weather you need L lens or not I guess in the end is personal preference lol. BTW I sold my 70-200mm F4L L glass away cause I dont find any use to it and choose a 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM over the 24-105mm F4L IS USM because it has a more useful range and better aperature considering Im using a crop sensor camera. However if I have chance to buy another L glass, definitely getting the 70-200mm F2.8L IS USM.

 

[paradigm]

If Canon produces a L lens quality lens at dirt cheap price, I will definitely get ... too bad, cheap and good are usually mutually exclusive ...

 

[zj2000]

If Canon produces a L lens quality lens at dirt cheap price, I will definitely get ... too bad, cheap and good are usually mutually exclusive ...

well not really...

50 1.8
85 1.8
18-55is
24-85

actually most of the consumer primes are not bad.... unless you're talking about build then i have nothing to say....

 

[Redsun]

but but
for 1 series
no other choice for wide lens am i right?

 

[iboey]

Yes it compulsory to buy L lens. If not you better change your system. :bsmilie::bsmilie:

 

[Redsun]

Yes it compulsory to buy L lens. If not you better change your system. :bsmilie::bsmilie:

no cheap alternatives:cry: