Is L lens over-rated?
- Thread starter apiwales
- Start date
- Status
I highly suspect it's user error. The composition is also likely to differ greatly and yours may seem better simply because your friend composed his shots badly.
Blame the person before blaming the equipment.
Nope... and I have no intention to. CZ may make good glass, but they cannot AF... which is a very important part of most 'L' lenses.
I remember those days when my dad would turn and turn his CZ lens over his Contax camera. Most of the shots he got were damn clear with good colours... but so what? By the time he achieved focus, nobody was smiling anymore.
They can also beg for AF, but they won't be getting it.
Zeiss is good, but it is a different ball game altogether.
Suddenly remembered that view years ago, a buddy - a canon fans said that L stands for Leica
Why only CZ or Leica?
I thought some compares 70-200 f2.8 L with Sigma 70-200 f2.8 HSM?
Or 24-70L with Sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM?
Or even some compares Tamron 17-50 with 17-55 (I know, this is not L, but some fans argued that 17-55 actually L in disguise)
From some samples above, Much reviewers favoured Canon, but some surprisingly choose the 3rd party...
And CZ can AF, but on another camp...
Haha... Well, I am loving my CZ sharpness and colors with AF now.. Seriously beats all the previous L lens I have used so far.. And the 17-55mm F2.8 IS USM which I have owned 3 copies previously
Canon L lens are among the best, that is within the Canon lens. As for comparing to the non-Canon lens, I cannot comment. I suppose Canon have their strengths in certain areas, while other brand's lens have their own strengths.
Ultimately, it is what value that $$$ you put into the lens you get that matters to you. If you find better value in buying a non-L for $500, so be it. If you find value only in a L at $5000, so be it. The world is not going to end just because you have or not have a L len.
Ultimately, it is what value that $$$ you put into the lens you get that matters to you. If you find better value in buying a non-L for $500, so be it. If you find value only in a L at $5000, so be it. The world is not going to end just because you have or not have a L len.
It is very subjective to manual or auto focus. There are times when auto focusing is required and produces better results. There are also time when manual focusing produces better results (F1, racing, macro etc).
End of the day, choose what suits you best.
Well, if we are comparing L, I feel only these 2 make L seems inferior. There may be others, but definitely not Sigma or Tamron. Sigma is good...but ... need to either find a good copy... or be prepared to head down to Redhill to calibrate lor...
To compare the Tamron version to the 17-55 F2.8 IS USM, I think its a insult to that canon lens. Owned the canon before, ditched it to get the tamron to save some $$, but ended up ditching the tamron after 1 wedding dinner. The sharpness, hunting, colors, simply cannot match up to the Canon...
That's true. I MF when I shoot macro. However, what I'm saying is, the lens needs to AF well to qualify as an L. Good AF is part of the 'L' branding. Good optics and good build are the other criteria.
i don't understand why a newbie *cannot* buy an L lens without snide comments being passed. it's one's money. whatever rocks the boat.
Is a $800k Ferrari really 4 times better than a $200k Mercedes? Is a higher spec BMW with low OMV more 'value for money' than a similar Mercedes with higher price but much higher OMV? Or is the MRT the best?
It all depends on your own purchasing power, your willingness to exercise that purchasing power, and what you want out of the lens be it speed, build quality, snob factor and what not.
to the TS, I would humbly suggest focusing inward on all these factors, above all else. whether it's L lens or CZ or Leica, it's not a competition!
Is a $800k Ferrari really 4 times better than a $200k Mercedes? Is a higher spec BMW with low OMV more 'value for money' than a similar Mercedes with higher price but much higher OMV? Or is the MRT the best?
It all depends on your own purchasing power, your willingness to exercise that purchasing power, and what you want out of the lens be it speed, build quality, snob factor and what not.
to the TS, I would humbly suggest focusing inward on all these factors, above all else. whether it's L lens or CZ or Leica, it's not a competition!
If you drive a Ferrari at 50km/h at the left lane... you will surely get snide comments from fellow road users. Sure... it's your money and you can do whatever you want with it. Yes, you get bragging rights... but you will also get snide remarks if you drive like grandma. Same thing. :bsmilie:
... and there's nothing really wrong with the snide remarks... just as there is nothing wrong with driving like grandma in a Ferrari. It's just how society reacts. You do certain things, you expect certain reactions.
Last edited:
17-40 is an f/4 lens. On an APS-C camera, f/4 does not give me enough bokeh to work with. f/4 is ok on an FF camera, but then if you put 17-40 on a FF, it's really an ultra-wide.
Actually, I dun really care about newbie or oldbird, not my money. It is not advisable if opinion is wanted, coz not sure if that is the right lens for newbie. I know of people using 5D, which I cannot afford, but dun even bother about post processing. That is the person's money so I just keep quiet.
haha
i guess snide remarks can equally be laden on some CSers with little constructive to say when questions are asked - equally spending more time on the forum does not make one a better photographer. :bsmilie:
acherli most F-car drivers *do* drive like grandmothers, cuz
1. got nothing to prove liao, and
2. if lose in driving, really no where to hide face. :bsmilie:
cheers!
i guess snide remarks can equally be laden on some CSers with little constructive to say when questions are asked - equally spending more time on the forum does not make one a better photographer. :bsmilie:
acherli most F-car drivers *do* drive like grandmothers, cuz
1. got nothing to prove liao, and
2. if lose in driving, really no where to hide face. :bsmilie:
cheers!
on which lens is good or bad, it's really horses for courses. IMHO it's best to stick to answers along the lines of 'what do you want from the lens' and 'what's yr budget' and advise from there.
when it comes to $$ type value judgments it seems the comments are usually coloured by own financial background be it good or bad, the kind of answers are not always as helpful.
- Status
Similar threads
