Is L lens over-rated?
- Thread starter apiwales
- Start date
- Status
Well most L lens are just awesome! Recently i purchased the 70-200mm L IS II lens and used it for F1 and the images wowed me. I am just a beginner at photography so dont expect any form of skill from me to be quite honest, how the images turned out was strictly due to the lens, and me pointing at the cars, thats all i did. On the contrary, i had a buddy that was with me and using a 70-200mm Nikon lens, with same settings and all, image just dont turn out as well as mine. Do you think its worth paying more for it, initially i thought the premium was too much, but after taking the plunge and seeing the results, it was more than worth it.
However lens like 100-400mm L lens, some people say it doesnt deserve the L tag, and some ppl say its just good enough to attain the L tag, depends on individuals, but overall for all L lens, they are superior in quality.
However lens like 100-400mm L lens, some people say it doesnt deserve the L tag, and some ppl say its just good enough to attain the L tag, depends on individuals, but overall for all L lens, they are superior in quality.
surely Canon wun be selling something that is over rated right?
besides, u can compare the built of the lens with those non L lens.
quality of the lens glass is also different.
besides, u can compare the built of the lens with those non L lens.
quality of the lens glass is also different.
Wow Adrian, you are a beginner and you already bght a 70 - 200L??? :bigeyes:
Haha, I rented one to try out for F1, it feels good to carry a "white rabbit" around. But I am still pondering on the question - if it's truly worth the money...but then again, if you choose the alternatives such as Sigma or Tamron of the same focal length, you may find a "L" is way to go, as pricing may be competitive. Wanted to get the Sigma 70 - 200 HSM II Macro OS , but it cost me $2.5K??? So why not save a little more to get the "L" instead??
Since you've popped this question, I am interested to know your opinion too. What do you think? :think:
I think the price is justified, we're paying for the amazing elements and glass within the barrel 
The Red Ring deserves a premium price!
The Red Ring deserves a premium price!I am an F1 nut...
that was my point exactly, the 70-200mm lens from other brands were just marginally cheaper, why not spend a little more and get an L and to be honest, i have got no regrets, in addition if i do decide to sell it in future (which i dont think so), it will definitely fetch a good resale price. But threadstarter, speaking of which, what is your opinion of the L lens though?
IMHO, yes, I felt its overrated at its price.Thats only me, as I do not have deep pockets. If L lens are cheaper by 15-20% , then I would say, the price is about right for its quality.
Last edited:
YES & NO...
yes, for those who just want to have an L even if that lens is NOT meant for their purpose...
no, for those who use it for that lens' purpose...
yes, for those who just want to have an L even if that lens is NOT meant for their purpose...
no, for those who use it for that lens' purpose...
Why r u seeking the opinion please ? Can you elaborate what you meant by SLIGHTLY
There is an entire range of lenses at different price points to cater to every one. Put it as simple, you feel it worth then you buy it!!
No one forcing you on gun point that you must buy a L lens
it's purely your choice.Different things are worth to different people. A small smile from your kid may be worth to travel 8 hours (forget about money part!!) to reach home every weekends!!
And finally, you wanted a verdict here ? :nono:
They do have better IQ ( at least from the little experience i have with a few of them ).
Over-rated or overpriced is up to individual perception.
Ryan
If any of you guys followed their early UWA zooms like the 17-35 f/2.8 and 16-35 f/2.8 MKI, these were not worth the money if you asked me. For almost 20 years, their TS-E 24 f/3.5 was the widest of its kind but that had problems which prohibited usage of the lens to its max potential unless you are ready to live with the shortcomings.
New L lens overrated compared to the price --- maybe.
2nd hand L lens that still works perfectly fine that is reasonably priced --- no.
2nd hand L lens that still works perfectly fine that is reasonably priced --- no.
I am an F1 nut...
But threadstarter, speaking of which, what is your opinion of the L lens though?
Hahaha, I guess it's a girl's thing to keep comparing and see what's the best in the market. If I can save S$800 and probably top up to get another lens, I will. It makes sense. But to pay $3.3K, i.e. for 70-200mm L f/2.8IS over a $2.5K, it's making me think twice even thrice. I have seen pics from a Sigma and i must say, the pics quality is as good, if not, slightly sharper than the canon.
Hence, in my opinion, TS, like what others has mentioned, what is YOUR reason for starting this thread??? You from Canon, doing a market survey??? :bsmilie:
- Status
Similar threads
