I'm looking to get a pukka lens for my digital, and wondered peoples opinions on the real difference between Canon 'L' series, and the standard, and much cheaper lenses. I have a 450 D, and 5D mk11
I'm going to need a wide, fast f1.4 at least. So in 'L' series that's over £1k, but in standard, about £3-400.
Who, if anyone has experience of using these for a comparison.
ta.
Yes there is a difference. Quite a noticeable one especially on your 5D with it being full frame.
Why not hire one from lensesforhire or Calumet first & try it?
no point spending the money on a 5D and then not getting decent glass.
its like getting a flash car with a puny engine.
do you really "need" a wide fast lens?
in my experience there's a difference but whether or not it's worth the extra £££ depends wholly on what you're doing with the output IMO.
An alternative would be to check out some older lenses and adaptors for EOS cameras - you can get really very, very good manual focus lenses for peanuts in comparison. I got an m42 Super-Takumar 50mm f1.4 for under £50! It's super fast and super-sharp, especially stepped down and for the money I'm not sure you could get better. Granted they're not auto focus but if you've got a couple of hundred to spare you can get some extremely good glass for a fraction the cost of a single L prime.
(oh, and manual lenses work extremely well with the slightly hamstrung HD video mode on the 500D)
I would kill for an L, thats how much difference there is. But handled well it seems that normal lenses can be shaken into producing similar results, it just hugely limits the times when it can be used. It's primarily the sharpness that I see the differences in, but bear in mind it could also be partly down to the photog being much more used to using the camera and better at it (hence good enough and paid enough to own an L).
I've noticed LOADS of chinese and japanese visitors with L lenses recently, are theyr eally cheap over there?!
Hire two lenses from lensesforhire, one L, one the equivalent non-L. Play around with them and try to see the difference in terms of using them and the quality of the photos.
Then buy the one which best fits your needs. Easy. 
What exactly are you using it for?
If you're after a Canon lens and 1.4 then your options are limited. If you are happy to buy from other brands then you'll immediately lower your outlay.
I've tried the 1.4 and 1.8 35 and 50mm's for portrait work on a 40d - they're pretty good and value is not bad - sharpness was excellent. 50+mm can be hard for general use though due to the crop sensor. However after using a 1.2 80mm on a 5d, it was simply amazing and I know what will be part of the next setup!
I hate to say though, I'm a bit confused why you'd buy a £1800 body and then look to possibly buy a cheaper lenses.
ok, thanks for your responses...
- woffle -
I have got quite a few nice old FD lenses, which i use on a video camera with a 35m adapter. They are great on the movie camera, but i bought an adapter for the EOS, and the quality of image was badly affected. So, which adapter are you using? (mine was a £30 Ebay cheapie)
- MrSmith -
I do need a fast lense, as i'm doing a shoot in coventry in the concrete jungle there. No lights, no flash, as we're doing a gritty photo/documentary piece.
- _leon_ -
I'm using the 5D11 for video mainly, and have only just got it. I'm using the lense from my old 450D for the meantime, as buying the 5D was enough outlay for this month eh!
- crazy-legs -
I'll do just that i think... give me a good idea of the difference.
Because i don't normally do editorial content, I've never needed the sharpness element. I mostly do web/motion stills content. These are going out at A4+ in B&W. proper press run.
thanks for all your responses.
Lee.
Fast car and crap tyres just aren't going to work, are they? The EOS 5d Mk11 is supposed to have excellent colour reproduction so why screw it up with a cheap lens.
If you are put off by the price, have a look at cheaper lenses from the L range. I bought a 70-200L f4 last year and it's awesome. Sharp, fast accurate focusing and light. I was looking at the f2.8 but couldn't justify the price tag and light isn't really a problem, IS is not that important either.
Next on the list is a 17-40L f4, I'd rather have an L lens at f4 than anything else at f1.2/4/8 etc.
The jump from kit lens to fixed was enormous- the jump to an L lens is just as big, in my opinion.
out of interest - why do some people use the spelling 'lense'? Is it just a camera thing?
so, i just rented some lovely 'L' glass...
50mm f/1.2 L
24mm f/1.4 L
85mm f/1.2 L
I cant wait til they arrive.
Thanks for everyone's advice.
I'd echo the above recommendation for the 17-40L.
Re: adaptor - I think you just have to watch out for infinity focus - some mounts are too wide and this throws all the focus out. I think there are some new mounts with programmable chips that not only use the in-camera focus confirm but also enables you to fine-tune this. Not tried one myself but the recommendations are to go for those made in Europe rather than those cheapies from Asia that often have the chip crudely glued down. My adaptors are made by kood I think.
It also depends on what mount you're converting from and to - the m42 is supposed to be one of the easiest to get right because the differences are so slight - it's (from memory) 1.5mm which is easy enough to manufacture to within decent tolerances - any less and you have to make stupidly thin adaptors, any more and the margin for error increases. FD to EOS isn't a good idea from what I recall, something to do with needing further glass between lens and camera which will obviously degrade the image. m42 to EOS is a matter of just converting the mount and placing the lens the correct distance from the sensor etc...
There are some seriously funky m42 lenses available - Helios do a great 85mm f1.7 (I think) that has amazing bokeh, makes for a fantastic portrait lens...
I do need a fast lense, as i'm doing a shoot in coventry in the concrete jungle there. No lights, no flash, as we're doing a gritty photo/documentary piece.
I'd be tempted to shoot on a relatively high iso for a grainy look if it's a gritty piece, you might not need something so fast (just an opinion)?
The 17-40L is a lovely lens, great contrast and saturation. At 17mm, the barrel distortion is pretty immense - but then, what isn't that wide on FF?
I'd say, on the whole, that an quality prime or L zoom on a DX format camera will out-perform a cheaper zoom lens on a 5D.
renting was probably the right thing to do, the af can be a bit slow on the 50/85 though, this may not be a problem.
don't know what i would personally buy if was looking for primes (i use the 45 and 90 ts-e's and 24-70 70-200 2.8 zooms on a 5dII)
i don't do portraits so the fast 80/50's are wasted on me and the 90 is sharper than either. probably just get the 24 tse next.
I run the 24-70 F2.8 L on my 5D, its a great lens and still pretty wide on a FF. Its good for all kinds of stuff too. Lots of samples of my Flickr (link is on my profile)
out of interest - why do some people use the spelling 'lense'?
AFAIK only lardman uses that spelling
and that's because I'm a dyslexic/uneducated/creative/fool.
x
There are some seriously funky m42 lenses available - Helios do a great 85mm f1.7 (I think) that has amazing bokeh, makes for a fantastic portrait lens...
Helios M42 58mm:
AFAIK only lardman uses that spelling
Actually I use it too, by accident a lot of the time, despite knowing how to spell lens and being educated and non-dyslexic 
I just seem to have an uncontrollable finger that stabs for the "e" on that word!
Of all my L series lenses my favourites are the 70-200 f2.8L IS and the 85 f1.2L Mk2 as they are razor sharp and versatile too. I use the 24-70 f2.8L and it is more more versatile than a prime wide-angle and still good value for money. I've hardly used the 400 f2.8L IS this year but hopefully that will change next year 
The 17-40L is a lovely lens, great contrast and saturation. At 17mm, the barrel distortion is pretty immense - but then, what isn't that wide on FF?
the 17mm ts-e
@lardman - what did you think of what you tried?
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
