Canon 'L' Lenses V non 'L' Lenses

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Russell, Apr 29, 2005.

  1. Russell

    Russell Guest

    I understand that the Canon 'L' lenses are optically very good. However, I
    can not see anything wrong with the non 'L' lenses (Normal USM).

    Is it that I don't have a trained eye? Or, is the difference more apparent
    when the photo's are blown up to large sizes?
    Russell, Apr 29, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  2. Russell

    TAFKAB Guest

    L lenses are usually better optically, but the differences go far beyond
    optics. I have the 28-135IS lens, and while it's a nice performer optically,
    it is not sealed well enough against dust, and I already have dust on the
    inner elements. This simply isn't good enough. I've shot the L lenses and
    this one under essentially the same conditions, and the L elements are clean
    and this (the 28-135) isn't, and that's too bad.

    Optically, they're close; mechanically, they're on different planets.
    TAFKAB, Apr 29, 2005
    1. Advertisements

  3. Russell

    Bill Hilton Guest

    I understand that the Canon 'L' lenses are optically very good.
    I have several really good "L" lenses (500 f/4 L IS is my favorite) but
    also have some non-L lenses that are very good optically, especially
    the 35 f/2, 85 f/1.8 and 100 f/2.8 macro. The two non-L zoom lenses
    I've owned were not as good optically as the "L" zoom lenses I replaced
    them with later, but then they cost about 1/3 as much as the L-zooms
    and were much lighter so they were good bargains.

    Nothing wrong with your eye.

    Bill Hilton, Apr 29, 2005
  4. Russell

    measekite Guest

    Could it be that maybe it is just your sepecific lenses?
    measekite, Apr 30, 2005
  5. Russell

    TAFKAB Guest

    Maybe, but I can't see how. They're all built the same, and the weather
    proofing, or lack of it is the same from lens to lens.
    TAFKAB, Apr 30, 2005
  6. Russell

    Matt Ion Guest

    There have been some links to reviews posted here before in response to
    this question... you don't have to look very close in a lot of instances
    to start seeing how much better the L glass is.

    Here's some more info...

    This one's got a great comparison of a 100-400mm L-series vs. the
    standard 75-300mm (same lens I've got):

    And this one compares the 17-40mm 'L' vs the 18-55mm "kit" lens included
    with the Digital Rebel:

    avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
    Virus Database (VPS): 0517-5, 04/29/2005
    Tested on: 4/30/2005 2:56:18 AM
    avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2005 ALWIL Software.
    Matt Ion, Apr 30, 2005
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.