This is why Canon's L-series glass is expensive

[Octane]

Came across this recently.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OkWsk9rXpcU

Follow the related links to part 2 and part 3.

Of course, if you're an owner, you know the joy that this glass brings and the cost is insignificant.

H

[hotspur]

Thats interesting to look at.But the L lenses are worth every cent.after using the ones I have,anything else is like trying to take a photo through an old coke bottle.

There are some canon lenses that although not L,are basically the same optical quality.

The only complaint I have about canon L lenses,is not that they are expensive,(and the reality really is they are well priced),but having used the white one or bone colour or whatever they call it.Is that it stands out too much,I like to blend into the back ground taking photos, .personally,yes the white is nice,but in the field black would be more practical.After all they are just a tool to do a job and get a desired result.(but such a LoveLy tool!)

[Octane]

Hi Chris,

I know what you mean about the stark white. You can, however, get lens covers that come in a variety of different forms. From army garb to bright patterns.

H

[MrB]

Would love to watch those vids, need to get onto my ISP's support to sort out an issue I have with large downloads(and streamed video etc) hanging.
Got to watch the first 40seconds of vid 1 tho, just as it was getting interesting :rolleyes:

[Octane]

Keep trying, Simon. They're worth a watch!

H

[hotspur]

Yes,Humayan-I have sort of seen the items you refer to,in photography magazines,but really do not know much about them or where to get them,or how much.So if you have any links that may be useful,I'd appreciate that.

Also how,or do they work on L's that have the sliding hood,like 300 F4 prime,and 400 F5.6 prime,I have the latter,I using it for birding and wildlife.

I have been in the field with others,and they could observe me using the lens for birds etc,and really noticed how the game eyed that big white lens.

So some sort of cover would be really useful for both my white L's the other is a 70-200 F2.8,I use it for sports photography at the moment.

RE-L's,they are a joy to use,and have really made photography so much more pleasurable.

Interesting canon do make other lenses,and the optics are L grade,but the build is'nt L grade,I just got the 17-55 F2.8 IS,and this lens pulls away like a freight train-easily L quality optics,and focus in low light-wow-its quick!

But its priced like an L,but worth every cent-only had it a few days,but as useful and important as the L 400.For those unfamiliar with the Love of L,here is a sample pic I took with 400 L and 450D.
(straited pardolote)

Cheers Chris

[hotspur]

Forgot to say,that really is a useful link Humayan!,it has some other video as well,I like the portrait master class one.

And fancy working in those lens factories!,how amazing that would be to go for a tour!,but imagine working on those 600 mm lenses,you would want to get the jitters and slip with a flourite lens.

cheers

[multiweb]

That was very cool. :thumbsup: Makes your head spin to see all that's involved putting one of these together. Quite amazing really.

[avandonk]

Thanks for that H. My Canon 300mm F2.8L has been dewed on, rained on, covered with thick crusty frost and in very dusty places. All L lenses will not let moisture or dust in as they have 'O' ring seals.

Not only are they optically as good as it gets they are built to be used! I have never been worried where I take my L glass. There is no point in having something if you do not use it for what it was designed to do.

The only time I was really worried when a magpie used the lens as a perch. Fortunately the lens hood was on.

Tornado33 has a very early version of the 300mm F2.8L made in the late seventies that he bought from me. It was used in cinematography before I obtained it. The opening scene in 'Tootsie' was shot with a lens just like this? one (walking down the street). I tested it and it was just a tad not as good as my later 300mm F2.8L. In those days Canon selected the best versions to convert to the Arriflex coupling. They cost over 20k US in 1980! You must have all seen what both lenses can do with astro images.

If my more modern lens lasts as long as Tornado33's version it should do me past the ton. For what it does it is worth every cent and more.

Bert

[sejanus]

I have a 200 f/2 and it and the camera body (1ds mk3) were dropped completely under water for about 1/2 second - both are still fine :) though I had canon pull them apart to check.

[Analog6]

The pale colour definitely keeps them cooler in the hot summer conditions up here, my black lenses (16-35 and 24-105L) get red hot, whereas the 100-400 stays coolish. The quality is jusy unsurpassed - I'd never use anything else on the Canon body (I have used my L lenses on 20D, 30D, 1DMkIIN and my current 1DsMkII).

[leon]

Thanks H, I have seen that before, but it was worth another look.

Leon

[Jen]

:eyepop: i sooo would love one of those ;)

[Chillie]

Keep saving Jen.

[bloodhound31]

Watched all three videos, and I am sure there are more there that will certainly be worth the time spent.

I must be very nerdy because they were absolutely riveting!:screwy:

Thanks H.:thumbsup:

Baz.

[sejanus]

For casual use there are some cracker non L lenses that are extremely good. I have L lenses for my job but if I wasn't make money from my gear they'd be hard to justify.

The only L lens that I really recommend to amateurs is the 135mm f/2 - not that expensive but incredible optics.

[bloodhound31]

As you can see by H's images, he is not an amateur....:thumbsup:

For someone like me however, I would say that's a fair statement....:sadeyes:

[sejanus]

when I say amateur I just mean someone who is not full time earning money from the gear. not related to skill level.

[Octane]

I do run my own little wedding photography business so the gear has paid for itself. : )

H

[hotspur]

Nothing wrong with someone turning there hobby into a paying concern like Humayan has done,and still keeping it has a hobby as well.Those lenses are in a class,that while they are professional grade-there is no reason anyone wanting a go at taking better quality photos should have to justify them.

Personally,I feel its a waste of my time going into the field,with gear,that you feel might let you down-there is nothing worse.Believe me-I have had many unusual hobbies,that call for kit,to be of such a standard,that you want it to give you cofidence.Various pursuits such as rifle shooting/hunting,metal detecting,are some of the things I have done before photography hobby.and on those occasions,I always had gear that ended up paying for itself,not that that was my intention,but a nice bonus.It was more a joy to use it and not have it fall apart and enjoy the moment of whatever I was doing.

Some of my friends have fishing boats,and they dont feel the need to justify those,and they cost a bit more than a few L lenses,and they have rego and bait,so the costs keeping going.

Now I am into a bit of photography,the L's are worth every penny,I can concentrate on composing my photos and doing what I need to do to enjoy the moment.the best thing about buying quality kit is that if you decided to move on you can always get a good return on those items,I have owned and used rifles,metal detectors,etc and looked after them,and sold them when no longer interested,and got 3/4 of my money back after years of use.

So really those L's are in the same league,there not dear,they are well priced,and easily justifiable.;)

[Garyh]

I must admit I love those L series lens, they do empty one`s piggybank, but they perform brilliantly and they hold there value well for resale. I only have 2 primes but would love some zooms for general use..
I would love to buy some more and was hoping to grab one in Bangkok but no go..
Like Chris mentions the efs 17-55 f/2.8 IS gets real good reviews and I would love to have one! and a 70-200 /f2.8 would be real nice as well.