Canon EF 11-24mm f/4.0 L USM Lens

hashcake

hashcake

Gone to pot!
Messages
5,948
Name
Darran, Daz or ****
Edit My Images
Yes
Jessops have this lens listed at 2799!
Yes, I get that it is an EF lens and also being an L it is classed as a pro lens and that is primarily aimed at full frame DSLR users but we know that Canon L lenses also fit their crop sensor range.
What I am having trouble getting my head around is understanding how this lens can cost so much more than the likes of the new 100-400L mk2 to produce hence the retail price.
Obviously diameter wise the 11-24 uses more glass but as for the total amount of lenses use, would it be more than what is used in something like the 100-400L mk2?

I watched a programe a few years ago and it showed us why lenses can be quite expensive but even so...
 
I imagine it was a lot easier to design a 100-400 than an 11-24, so R&D costs, plus, it's canon, they charge what they want and I will be buying one later in the year when hdew have it for around the 2k mark
 
jonoooo125 said:
I imagine it was a lot easier to design a 100-400 than an 11-24
Click to expand...
That's a good point, they already had the 100-400 mark 1 so it was just a case of improving it whereas the 11-24 is a completely new lens.
 
Plus that price will come down after a short while. I have the 14mm Mk2 and the 17 TSE, 24 TSE, 16-35 Mk2 already but I like the sound of this. Have to wait and see what the rectilinear correction looks like.
 
Its optically, at that price, probably as good as it gets on a 35mm system. With this latest 50mp sensor it will need to be to make the most of it.

To be fair, I parted with nearly £1500 for a Zeiss 21mm, and if its as sharp as that lens in the middle accross the full frame into the corners accross the 11-24mm range, its a bargain
 
Last edited:
ST4 said:
Its optically, at that price, probably as good as it gets on a 35mm system. With this latest 50mp sensor it will need to be to make the most of it.

To be fair, I parted with nearly £1500 for a Zeiss 21mm, and if its as sharp as that lens in the middle accross the full frame into the corners accross the 11-24mm range, its a bargain
Click to expand...
Someone on here sooner or later is going to post lanscape photos using that lens with a 5DS and will end up robbing a bank :D
 
hashcake said:
Someone on here sooner or later is going to post lanscape photos using that lens with a 5DS and will end up robbing a bank :D
Click to expand...

What kind of landscape do you imagine at 11mm on FF? It will be spectacularly horrible. It is a highly specialised lens and unless you know exactly what you would use it for you shouldn't buy it.
 
Its the widest rectalinare lens isn't it? Presuming its as wide as possible atm with any system? apsc has 8mm (12mm equiv) and 12 was widest before with sigma
 
daugirdas said:
What kind of landscape do you imagine at 11mm on FF? It will be spectacularly horrible. It is a highly specialised lens and unless you know exactly what you would use it for you shouldn't buy it.
Click to expand...

Ah yes of course on a FF body it would trully be 11mm, I forgot about the difference when an EF lens is used on a crop factor body.
 
Its a similar price or perhaps a tiny bit more than the Nikon 14-24. Its an L lens aimed at pro landscape or architecture shooters. Its not really a lens aimed at your average shooter. Its fairly specialist.
 
antc said:
Its a similar price or perhaps a tiny bit more than the Nikon 14-24. Its an L lens aimed at pro landscape or architecture shooters. Its not really a lens aimed at your average shooter. Its fairly specialist.
Click to expand...
That's a fair point but there are plenty of users with cropped sensor bodies using the likes of the L 24-105, 70-200 and 100-400 lenses.
Granted they are not the price of this lens though.
 
Last edited:
hashcake said:
That's a fair point but there are plenty of users with cropped sensor bodies using the likes of the L 24-105, 70-200 and 100-400 lenses.
Granted they are not the price of this lens though.
Click to expand...

Thats true Darren, but 24-105, 70-200 (unless 2.8 version) and 100-400 aren't really what I would call the "pro L lenses" as such.

Yes they are L lenses, and yes they cost a fair amount of money. But I would class the pro L lenses as 70-200 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 16-35 2.8, 11-24 new lens, 200 f2, 300 2.8, 400 2.8, 500/600 f4 etc........all the ones I list there are all in a different price league to the ones you mentioned and are all aimed at the professional market I would say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top