StreetShooter said:No.
Next question?
Seriously, after looking at my 4R prints, it makes no difference whether I use a cheapo lens or an L lens.
Pablo said:I have not played with L series lens ( just can't afford it right now)
But from what I have read, once you have one, there is no going back.
joezzz said:Yes it is expensive, but once you have it you will never replace it. Give it a try!
benny said:Really... Have you browse Clubsnap's buy and sell? It's slightly further down from the Canon forum....
Cheers,
generik said:But normally people will be quite reluctant to sell their good copies right? :think:
lwy said:
Images above are 100% cropped from my old 80-200mm f2.8, both at 200mm using f4 and f5.6 respectively. No PSing is done here. Worth it? In my opinion yes!
trucatus said:Friend uses 17-40mm L says barrel distortion very bad. I don't know what is it though...
fengwei said:Nice shots :thumbsup: But I'm sure the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 can get similar or better shots
As far as I know, the Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 EX APO (HSM for canon mount?) is one of the best lens Sigma ever made, it's quite compatible with its Canon/Nikon/Pentax competitors. Most of us won't tell the difference if using a L or a Bigma. And Sigma is lighter and much cheaper.
For other L lenses, I don't know. Heard a lot of "It's the guy behind the camera who makes the great shots", so I guess L or non-L, not a big deal to most users.
Cheers and happy hunting ...