 |
caleb! [deleted] says:
100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 Image Stabilization
24-105mm f/4.0 Image Stabilization
16-35mm f/2.8
and the lens on my beloved GL-1 camcorder
Originally posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
caleb! edited this topic 18 months ago.
|
 |
Same as you evermore, plus the 28-70 f/2.8 and the 400 f/5.6. Those plus the 10-22 non-L cover the whole range from ultra-wide to tele for me on my XT. I have a 30D on order and can't wait to try them on that.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Canon EF 16-35mm f/2.8L USM
Canon EF 24mm f/1.4L USM
Canon EF 24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Canon EF 35mm f/1.4L USM
Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM
Canon EF 135mm f/2L USM
Originally posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Johnny Blood edited this topic 25 months ago.
|
 |
I have two... The Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS and the 24-70mm f/2.8L. I have a couple of other lenses but they aren't the 'L' series lenses.
...the next L lenses would be the 16-35mm f/2.8, the 100-400mm and either the 24mm or the 35mm f/1.4's not sure, maybe both.
Originally posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
fensterbme edited this topic 32 months ago.
|
 |
35mm f/1.4L
70-200mm f/2.8L IS
300mm f/4L IS
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Wow these are all VERY nice, especailly Frannie1 collection.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
1. 24-105/4L IS
2. 70-200/4L
3. 300/4L IS
I've wanted the 17-40/4L for a while too, but it doesn't make a lot of sense on my 20D when I have the 18-55, which I seldom use. The 10-22 makes more sense for UWA.
I had a play with the 400/2.8L IS last month. Fantastic lens, and very impressive. Very heavy, too!
Originally posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Xenedis edited this topic 32 months ago.
|
|
Hey Jack Kerouac [deleted] says:
17-40 f4 L
70-200 f2.8 L
35 f1.4 L
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40mm f4 USM L
70-200mm f2.8 IS USM L
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
There's some nice glass mentioned so far.
Anyone have the discontinued 200/1.8L?
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40 f4 L
70-200 f4 L
Wish I could afford others!
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I have just the 17-40 f/4L. I'd like a tele next, and am undecided as to whether I should get a 70-200L variant or a prime.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
♪Mean Mister Mustard♫ [deleted] says:
17-40
135
TS-E 45 (L-ish)
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Photosam: depends what you want.
If you can afford it, go for both. :-)
What are you considering?
You cannot go wrong with a 70-200. They're all fine lenses. Re primes, I can thoroughly reccommend the 300/4L IS. Great for people photography, as well as, obviously, longer distance shooting. A joy to use.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I currently have two
17-40 f4L
70-200 f2.8L
I'm not sure what my next L will be...maybe a 24-70 f2.8L.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
24-70L. worth every cent imho.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Right now, just the 24-70mm f/2.8L
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
24-70L, 70-200L f/2.8 Non-IS, and 85 f/1.8 that deserves the red L ring.
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
70 - 200mm f/2.8 L IS
24 - 105mm f/4 L IS
Posted 32 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Just ordered:
24-105 f/4L IS
70-200mm f/2.8L IS
Should be here on Wed!
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40, 24, 135
Those of you who got the 70-200 f/2.8 (non-IS), what made you choose it over the IS version? and over the f4 version? the way i see it, the f2.8's got the weight of the IS but still lacks the weatherproofing. ... on the other hand, I guess it has the 2.8 aperture without the high price tag... [inner struggle ensues]
would love to hear your reasoning when you purchased. thanks!
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I went w/ the f/2.8 because I have been shooting in low light more and more lately and I want a fast shutter to stop action. I went w/ the IS because I see myself doing more hand held shots.
(and I'll be building up my biceps and shoulders with it too!)
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
@tsai tao: I thought the 70-200mm f/2.8L lenses (both IS and non-IS) were weather resistant?
Also that feature isn't a 'proofing' just some gaskets, etc. that help resist weather, this also only works when connected to a Canon 1D series body, so anyone else (RebelXT/350D, 20D, 30D, and 5D are all useless).
Why Non-IS, Price...
I have heard some people say that the non-IS version was slightly better in tests for optical quality although I doubt anyone could tell the difference in the real world. With that said the only reason I've ever heard anyone not go with the IS is because of the cost issue.
Slightly slower Focusing on the f/4 version of the 70-200mm lens:
If you go with the 70-200 f/4L version you will have a slower lens which might be an issue if you do sports photography and want to freeze high speed action. It will also focus somewhat slower as Canon lenses focus faster when an f/2.8 lens is connected.
... I bought the 70-200mm f/2.8L with IS, and I bought it used. Walked away with it for $1250 and it still has the full factory warranty (original owner never sent it in). Was such a good deal I almost cried.
Originally posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
fensterbme edited this topic 31 months ago.
|
 |
Canon 16-35mm f/2.8 L USM
Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM mmmmm IS...
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I have none but am fully willing to take any yo¨don't want off your hands. :-D
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
@fensterbme, thanks for the detailed response! appreciate hearing other points of view. and man, what a great deal on the IS version. [envy...] :)
btw, you're right about weatherproofing being useless if the body isn't, but i do recall reading somewhere that the 2.8 non-IS isn't weatherproof. regardless, i know this decision simply requires some more thought on my own part.
thanks to ZeeDesertRat also for your response, and sorry for the off-topic post.
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
70-200mm 4L
17-40mm 4L
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Tsai,
Absolutely no Canon lens is weatherproof, but the 70-200/2.8L IS has dust and water resistance. You're correct in that the non-IS version is not DWR (dust and water resistant).
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
♪Mean Mister Mustard♫ [deleted] says:
@Frannie1: I was eagerly awaiting your list! I knew it would put mine to shame.
Originally posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
♪Mean Mister Mustard♫ edited this topic 31 months ago.
|
|
@Xenedis. reading online forums since my last post made me realize that fact too -- weather resist, not proof. and thanks for confirming that the non-IS is not DWR. :)
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Wow, Frannie. Did you take incriminating photos of Bill Gates? ;)
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Actually, I plan on making this my main hobby when I retire.No, no little black books just an obsession I guess. 24f1.4,50f1.0,85f1.2,200f1.8,400f2,8M2IS,600f4IS,16-35f2.8,70-200f2.8IS,1.4Xand2X Canon Mk2 converters .
Originally posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Frannie 1 edited this topic 22 months ago.
|
 |
17-40 F4L
looking for a 70-200 L on the next months ....
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
85 f/1.2
400 f/5.6
100-400 f/4.5-5.6
300 f/2.8
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Jedrek, is that the MK 2 85 f1.2 ?
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
EF 50mm f/1.8
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS
...and all were worth EVERY penny!
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM
Originally posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
kentwill edited this topic 31 months ago.
|
 |
I just bought my first L lens on Friday, which also happens to be my first zoom lens. Coming from the 50mm f1.4, it is like a whole new W-I-D-E world.
EF 17-40mm f/4L USM
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
UTBSZ [deleted] says:
EF16-35mm f/2.8L
EF 24-70mm f/2.8L
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS
EF 85mm f/1.2L II
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
EF 17-40L f/4.
Wondering what to get long and/or bright. Macro too.
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
EF 180mm f/3.5L Macro USM but kinda slow compared to the 100 2.8 macro?
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
24-70mm f/2.8L (on it's way in the mail)
70-200mm f/4L
400mm f/5.6L
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
EF 16-35mm f/2.8L
EF 24-105mm f/4L
(non-L...)
EF 50mm f/1.8 (metal)
EF 100mm f/2.8 macro (great lens BTW, very bright
IMO)
Can't wait to purchase...
EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS
2x Teleconverter
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
It's the 85 MkI
i can't believe i forgot to mention the 16-35 2.8L - i'm getting rid of it though
Posted 31 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I have the following:
500 f/4L IS
70-200 f/2.8L IS
17-40 f/4L
Posted 30 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40 f/4L
I just got a 70-200 f/4L yesterday, woo! (Although I borrowed a 70-200 f/2.8L IS for a weekend a while back and wish I had (a) the money, (b) the arm muscles for it.)
I'm also lusting after a 24-70 f/2.8L to fill in the mid-range now...
Posted 30 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40 f4
70-200 2.8 IS
300 2.8
Posted 30 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
70-200 f/4L
200 f/2.8L
Posted 30 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40 f/4 L.
Tempted by the 24-105 f/4 L but my 28-135 IS will do for now.
Posted 30 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I am getting my 28-70mm f2.8 very soon. This is going to be my first L.
I would like to get a 16-35 f2.8 and the 70-200m f2.8 too.
Posted 30 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
EF-S 10-22 (non-L, but just as good -- does the job!)
24-70/2.8 L
70-200/4L
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
My only L, so far is the 400mm f/5.6. It's hardly been off my camera since I received it early this spring. Recently, I formed a 400mm f/5.6 group at: www.flickr.com/groups/24121876@N00/ Come on by if you have this lense or are interested in this type L lense.
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
85mm f1.2
17-40mm f4
28-70mm f2.8
100-400mm IS
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
All of them ;-)
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
24-70mm f/2.8
70-200mm f/2.8 (non-IS)
TS-24mm f/3.5
Originally posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
davidz edited this topic 29 months ago.
|
 |
Canon 16-35 f/2.8L USM
Canon 24-70 f/2.8L USM
Canon 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS USM
Canon 50mm f/1.4 (shoots as good as an L)
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
just got the 35mm 1.4 L... mmm
www.flickr.com/photos/copsey/183592816/
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
24mm f/1.4L
35mm f/1.4L
85mm f/1.2L
135mm f/2L
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
80-200 f2.8 L (an older lens, but I love it.)
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
What's the oldest L-series lens anyone has?
Does anyone have one dating back to the early days of EOS and EF lenses?
(If you have an L-series lens in FD mount, make yourself known too.)
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40 f4
24-105 f4
70-200 f4
200 f2.8 mk1
lusting after a 35 f1.4....nooooooooo
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40 f4 L
70-200 f4 L
Posted 29 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
16-35 f2.8
24-70 f2.8
70-200 f2.8 non-IS
Posted 28 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40 f4 L
24-70 f/2.8 L
70-200 f/2.8 L IS
Originally posted 28 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Declan! edited this topic 28 months ago.
|
 |
24-70 f/2.8 L
70-200 f/2.8 L IS
Originally posted 28 months ago.
(
permalink
)
lowmagnet edited this topic 22 months ago.
|
 |
24 1.4
24-105 4
50 1.0
70-200 IS
85 1.2 MK2
200 1.8
Originally posted 28 months ago.
(
permalink
)
miami fever edited this topic 27 months ago.
|
 |
16-35 f/2.8L
24-105 f/4L
70-200 f/2.8L IS
Originally posted 28 months ago.
(
permalink
)
mhuang edited this topic 18 months ago.
|
 |
17-40 f4 l usm
70-200 f4 l usm
300 f4 l usm
300 f4 l is usm
Posted 28 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-35
28-70
70-200 2.8 non is
500f4is
Originally posted 28 months ago.
(
permalink
)
rlw5663 edited this topic 28 months ago.
|
 |
17-40 f/4 , 300 f/4 IS
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
This is such a silly thread.
Somebody tell me what porpoise (sic) it fulfils?
Apart from extreme jealousy....
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
it lets people know what lenses other people have -- more than once I've seen a lens on here that I didn't know was available, clicked on the person and taken a look at the photos to see what that lens was capable of.
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
No @mhuang that's not what it does IMHO.
What it does is say:
"Look at how many expensive lenses I have bought!"
"I am very rich/now very poor and my partner has left me!"
"Please come over to my house and rob me"
If you wanted to look at the Canon L lenses available you could simply look here.
Now if you'll excuse me I'm off to polish my collection of every Canon L ever made... ;-)
Originally posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
de|me|tris: edited this topic 27 months ago.
|
|
@de|me|tris:LOL! I guess some people could say that too.
Man, all those years of browsing Canon's site and I never knew that page existed. How did you ever find it? Thanks for pointing it out.
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
♥ jenny loves photos [deleted] says:
24-70 f2.8
70-200 f4
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I've got the 17-40 f/4L, but I'm thinking to replace it with the 24-105 f/4L, to do less lens-swapping when travelling... only concern is the added weight (+200gr)
I'm by no means an expert photographer so any comment on my idea or the 24-105mm is really welcome.
I use my lens with a D60 (digital, 1.6x), and occasionally with a 650 (film).
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
Add me to the crowd that has a 17-40 f4 and 70-200 f4
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
patl, what do you use in between the two?
See my other thread for my problem... which lenses to choose, without loosing the short range of the 17-40...
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I also have a 50mm f/1.8 that I use. I would like overlap, but don't have the $$$ for the 24-105 or something like that at the moment.
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
17-40
70-200 2.8 is
300 2.8 (sold)
400 2.8 is
500 f/4L is
Originally posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
jerodharris edited this topic 27 months ago.
|
 |
All I have right now is 70-200 f/4L
I'll add a 17-40 f/4L to it soon I hope.
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Bought a 135/2L last week. Great lens.
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
just one ... a newly bought 400 mm f5.6 :)
cannot afford IS ones... :(
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
There's no IS version of the 400/5.6L. Next step up is the 400/4 DO, which has IS, but isn't an L.
Then there's the mighty 400/2.8L IS (and at 5.3kg, you need to be pretty mighty yourself to hold it for very long).
J.
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I'm using the 24-105mm/f4L IS USM. This lens rocks! For what I do (mostly walk-around, travel stuff, with the occasional portrait more recently), this lens is excellent. The images are super sharp and since I'm using it on a 5D, the detail pickup is truly awesome. My only beef is that there is noticeable vignetting at the wide end. Since I shoot in RAW, this is easily correctable in photoshop though, so no problems there...
Hoping to save up for a 70-200mm/f2.8L... and waiting for the reviews on the 50/1.2L coming out in November...
Posted 27 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-35 2.8l
28-70 2.8l
35 1.4l
135 2l
300 4l is
Posted 26 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
Photomotion [deleted] says:
17-40 f4 L
70-200 f4 L
24-70 f2.8 L on its way :))
Posted 26 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
|
I took delivery of my 70-200/2.8L IS and 1.4x TC today.
Currently I have five L lenses plus teleconverter.
24-105/4L IS
70-200/2.8L IS
70-200/4L
135/2L
300/4L IS
Posted 26 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I have:
- 24-70 2.8 L
- 70-200 2.8 L IS
on a 1Ds Mark II, 20D and D60.
As well as other non L lenses (but all Canon.)
Posted 26 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I have the following L lens in my lens kit:
17-40mm f4 L
24-105mm f4 IS L
70-200mm f4 L
300mm f4 IS L
400mm f5.6 L
Used on a 20D and 30D
Art
Posted 26 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
- 24-70mm f/2.8L
- 135mm f/2.0L
- 100mm f/2.8 Macro
- 70-200mm f/2.8 IS
Used on a 5D and 20D.
BTW - on my full frame 5D, I found that the 16-35mm f/2.8 was too wide at 16mm and gave me barrel distortion. I exchanged it for the 135/f2 and I'm much happier.
Posted 25 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
24-105mm f/4L IS USM
Originally posted 25 months ago.
(
permalink
)
DreamEmbracer edited this topic 25 months ago.
|
 |
My most versatiles is the 28-300mm zoom. It's awesome. It's also large and heavy, so I often don't go out with it.
My most-used is the 24-70.
I recently acquired the 35mm prime lens, which has rapidly become a favorite. I'm about to acquire the brand new 50mm.
After I purchased the EOS 5D, it became obvious that the USM series of lenses, although very good, were not sharp enough to bring out the qualities that the 5D affords. Switching to the L series was an absoute must -- and a winner!
Posted 25 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
-70-200mm f/2.8L IS (Best color and sharpness)
-17-40mm f4 L (Most interesting and unique pictures)
-24-105mm f4 IS L (Just all around useful)
Posted 25 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
35mm f/1.4 L
85mm f/1.2 L
135mm f/2 L
300mm f/4 IS L
Originally posted 24 months ago.
(
permalink
)
Richard- (a group admin) edited this topic 10 months ago.
|
 |
@archibaldimages: Do you have fullframe camera or 1.6x crop camera? I am just curious, because it makes so big difference on how 17-40/4L and 24-105/4L IS can be used.
My list is simply 17-40mm f/4L and 70-200mm f/4L on EOS 20D.
Statistics shows that 17-40mm was used at 47% and 70-200mm was used at 13% of the shots that I've bothered to backup to two hard drives, etc. within last two years.
I will probably replace the 70-200mm zoom with IS version in near future, but time will show when it will really happen.
I've also pondered whether or not I should replace 17-40mm with EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS, but due to all dust discussions in other forums, its not going to happen in near future.
Posted 24 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
17-40 f4 L USM
24-70 f2.8 L USM
70-200 f4 L USM
Posted 24 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
70-200mm f/4L -- had this one quite a while
400mm f/5.6L -- just got it in today
Posted 24 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
85mm f/1.2L; 16 years old secondhand copy, but works like a dream and it's insanely addictive tool for playing with DOF/handheld available light photos)
17-40L f/4 L; Nice wide-to-normal FOV lens for my 1.6x crop camera body. Nice AF, good image quality even wide open, solid build quality. Plenty of good points, with little drawbacks. (Well, there's some CA, it's somewhat flare-prone at night and 16-35 f/2.8L would be nice aperturewise, but I can live with both)
Posted 24 months ago.
(
permalink
)
|
 |
I have these lenses. The 24-70 is usually on my 1D and the 24-105 is on the 1Ds Mk II.
16-35 f/2.8 L
24-70 f/2.8 L
24-105 f/4 L IS
70-200 f/2.8 L
300 f/4 L IS
Originally posted 24 months ago.
(
permalink
)
pointnshoot edited this topic 14 months ago.
|
Canon L Lenses /
Discuss
Feed – Subscribe to Canon L Lenses discussion threads
Flickr Blog |
About Flickr |
Terms of Use |
Your Privacy |
Copyright/IP Policy | Report Abuse
|
Deutsch
|
English
|
Español
|
Français
|
|
Italiano
|
Português
Copyright © 2008 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Bookmark on Delicious