Your first L-lens...

[chengpenguin]

My 1st L lens - 135mm F2L USM: I never regretted my decision... it's a great prime lens for portrait and low light shooting. It's IQ is simply stunning!

After that, I bought 17-40mm F4L USM.

One reason why I chose them is because I saw myself going FF one day... and finally I did

 

[Xross.Fire]

hmm my 1st L was the 70-200 F4 L IS which i got after 2-3 months after getting my 40D. I remember stepping back a couple of steps so that I could use the L lens as compared to the kit 18-55 haha

And yes, the L lens did somewhat fuel the upgrade to FF too

btw, how's the 17-40 on the 5D? haha looking to get that lens sometime in the future

 

[Snoweagle]

looks like most has 17-40 as their first L lens. Me no different. Then got the other popular L lens...the 70-200 f4. 70-200 f2.8 too rich (and heavy for me). been using them on my 350 and now 50d. compared to the kit lens that came with the 350, the 17-40 is defintely a big improvement. too bad back then they didn't have such 18-200 as the kit lens. would have been a good travelling lens.

crumpler 7mil bag is good enough for my abv set up plus a flash.

using a spare 70L dry box passed to me by my dad.

The reason why 17-40 f/4 is becos it's the most value-for-money L.

 

[ShiNn]

My first L was : EF 17-40mm f/4L
cuz it was what i wanted. i traded in my tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 and topped up the difference for that. Since then i did not looked back n.....

got my 2nd L lens: EF 70-200mm f/4L
haha! it was such a great a lens. and no regrets on that. definitely! :thumbsup:

 

[iMac08]

my first-2470L. Got it for walkabout w my FF(after trading my 450D and tamron away)

2nd was 135L-great lens like most said.then decided to do some work out and got the 70200 f2.8 IS.

Now thinking of adding a 1740L(no cash to complete the 16-200 f2.8L holy trinity) but am thinking if i do need that 17-24 range and if 24mm is sufficient for my normal landscape use.

 

[Microscope]

Thank you all for the advices and your first Love L-experiences... I think soon i will be infected with L-virus...

 

[dimashp]

mine is the mighty 17-40mm. especially on cropped body =)
seriously the best ever L lens produced in terms of quality and money-wise

 

[Michaelavaloke2009]

hi, i'm a newbie w 40d. i bought a 24-105L last week. the quality and sharpness really different from the s-lens. i think of getting a Tamron17-50(less than $600) for potrait, any suggestion??

 

[calebk]

hi, i'm a newbie w 40d. i bought a 24-105L last week. the quality and sharpness really different from the s-lens. i think of getting a Tamron17-50(less than $600) for potrait, any suggestion??

Looks like you don't quite know what you want...if you want a good and affordable portrait lens, and your 24-105 already covers you for general purpose photography, why would you wana get a 17-50 on top of that?

Just save your money and get a 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8. I suggest you try the f/1.8 first.

 

[JoeJerry]

hi, i'm a newbie w 40d. i bought a 24-105L last week. the quality and sharpness really different from the s-lens. i think of getting a Tamron17-50(less than $600) for potrait, any suggestion??

What is s-lens? :dunno:
AFAIK, 24-105 is sharp lens and good for potrait too.

 

[Michaelavaloke2009]

Looks like you don't quite know what you want...if you want a good and affordable portrait lens, and your 24-105 already covers you for general purpose photography, why would you wana get a 17-50 on top of that?

Just save your money and get a 50mm f/1.4 or f/1.8. I suggest you try the f/1.8 first.

thanks for your advise. ya i just bought a 50mm f/1.8 this evening. i'm really new to dSLR so need to learn fr you guys.

 

[Michaelavaloke2009]

What is s-lens? :dunno:
AFAIK, 24-105 is sharp lens and good for potrait too.

hi, s-lens , canon standard lens:sweat:, not the L. ok i got your message. I'll try out to shoot more to perfect my skill and utilised my 24-105. i should stop buying for a while. thanks.

 

[nuanda]

50L for portraits, low light. great pix but a bit tight on cropped body.
24-70L for general walkabout. nice but heavy.

primes are much more forgiving than zooms due to aperture (thought DOF is v small), zoom for range is better bet as first L lens, plus better if you don't get too pampered by fast primes. haha.

 

[raptor84]

Had a film body.. first lesns was the 70-200 f/4for all my tele needs then later 17-40 for the other end. Only after these 2 that i bought my first non-L the 85/1.8:bsmilie:

 

[ThunderBolt]

My first L lens was 17-40mm. Sold it and bought a 17-55f2.8
My second L lens was 70-200mm

 

[Snoweagle]

50L for portraits, low light. great pix but a bit tight on cropped body.
24-70L for general walkabout. nice but heavy.

primes are much more forgiving than zooms due to aperture (thought DOF is v small), zoom for range is better bet as first L lens, plus better if you don't get too pampered by fast primes. haha.

If your 50L is tight on a crop body, then u should get the 35L.

 

[elmzarcega]

70-200 F/4 was my first L...
recently upgraded to F/2.8 ...

you wont go wrong having L lens....

 

[madbull]

no L lens yet, if i will buy, either 17-40 or 70-200mm.....

 

[Qazwer]

TS, my suggestion is to fully utilise your gears first before planning for upgrade.

But my suggestion is to go for L. I'd never regret buying and using them.

My vrigin L is a 17-40mm. Good, cheap, sharp and fast. It really make a good Ultra wide on FF.

 

[iRaphael]

heh. i don't own any L lenses yet, but if i do get one, it's gonna be the 35L.

superb quality. i borrowed it a few times and never looked back. works especially well for my cropped body. i love the colours it renders as well as how tack sharp the lens is wide open. i shot at f/1.4 for most pictures.