Beginner Canon Lens Hierarchy, easy to explain to me ??

[tonybassplayer]

Hi, after a lot of reading on here and research on ebay etc I think I have decided on my next upgrade in April to be the Canon 60D but I see so many comments that the standard lens are of relative poor quality ( and I do mean relative ) and most people commenting seem to almost instantly upgrade.

Can anyone give me a bit of an insight in to the hierarchy levels and what the different designations mean ?

I must add that I will probably be looking to keep things relatively minimal and not looking for lots of prime lenses at first or long zooms but knowing what to buy or avoid would be good.

Many thanks

Tony

 

[Nawty]

There isn't one really, it's just that some are better than others.

However, Canon have "L" lenses which are their top of the range full frame lenses - they are identified by a red ring at the front of the lens.

The red ring is seen as a sign that a lens will be great quality and that is generally true but there are some exceptions (don't know specifics as I'm a nikon guy...)

 

[pete.rush]

The kit lens ie 18-55mm has gone through 5 changes with the latest being the STM version. This is the best of the bunch, but still an entry level lens that most people upgrade. You have the 17-85mm lens which probably sits just above the kit lens, advantage is its useful focal range, but the 15-85mm which replaced it, a much better lens. As with most things, the price goes up, the better the lens is in most cases. Then you have a bunch of 17-55mm 17-50mm lenses from Canon Tamron and sigma that offer f2.8 with varied lenses in between like the sigma 17-70mm, then you have the full frame lenses like the 16-35, 17-40, 24-70 and 24-105mm lenses that offer better optics and better build, but you're paying for those features. It really depends on your budget and what you are willing to pay. There are also some brilliant prime lenses to choose from, most buy the 50mm f1.8 as its inexpensive and takes reasonable shots, although build quality very plastic.

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/

 

[hashcake]

I would imagine that more or less the same applies to most DSLR manufacturers but as the Canon L lenses from the 70-200 onwards have white bodies, these obviously stand out and a lot of people will have seen them over the years.
'Consumer' lenses are generally a long way off from the IQ quality that L lenses produce although there are exceptions likes the Canon EF-S 17-55 IS f2.8 which is a very sharp lens that many compare to L lenses.
Personally I don't see the point having a decent XXD series Canon body and only sticking with consumer lenses otherwise imho it would be better to stick to a cheaper XXXD body (it's like having a nice poweful sports car and putting on cheap tyres to me)
I would pair a 60D with a 24-105L IS lens as a general walkabout lens and you can pick up a good used one for around £400 in the classified section.
EF-S lenses are designed to only fit the crop bodies but EF lenses fit them as well as fullf frames bodies and all the L range are EF lenses.
If never used a Sigma lenses and my only experience with Tamron was with an 18-270 VC lens that I used with a 450D and as I was happy with it as far as consumer lenses go and a 17-50 f2.8 VC which is a very sharp lens imho but I found the range too limiting as a walkabout lens.

 

[Phil V]

...
'Consumer' lenses are generally a long way off from the IQ quality that L lenses produce although there are exceptions likes the Canon EF-S 17-55 IS f2.8 which is a very sharp lens that many compare to L lenses.
Personally I don't see the point having a decent XXD series Canon body and only sticking with consumer lenses otherwise imho it would be better to stick to a cheaper XXXD body (it's like having a nice poweful sports car and putting on cheap tyres to me)
I would pair a 60D with a 24-105L IS lens as a general walkabout lens and you can pick up a good used one for around £400 in the classified section.
...

I'm sorry I have a cold...
But the above is twaddle, the 24-105 (not very wide, very long) on a crop body is an odd choice of focal length, the 17-55 IS is the crop std zoom for serious photographers, there's a reason it costs as much as it does, it might not be an L but it performs like one.

 

[odd jim]

I'm sorry I have a cold...
But the above is twaddle, the 24-105 (not very wide, very long) on a crop body is an odd choice of focal length, the 17-55 IS is the crop std zoom for serious photographers, there's a reason it costs as much as it does, it might not be an L but it performs like one.

Agree with this. I love the 24-105, it's perfect on my 6d, as it's designed as a wide angle FF zoom. Put it on a crop and it's not wide angle anymore ergo, probably not suitable for a general purpose cropped zoom (though you will still get lovely images from it of course). But I don't use it on my cropped bodies. Let's not get tied up in the "consumer" argument, they're all consumer lenses, even L lenses (the general public can buy them, then they're made for the 'consumer'!)

There are plenty of cropped / EFS only lenses that are far better suited to cropped bodied cameras than FF / L Lenses, the above 17-55 f/2.8 and the 10-22, 15-85 etc etc. smaller, lighter, the right focal lengths, less expensive and in the examples above, as good IQ as the FF equivalent.

 

[simonbarker]

Peter pretty much nailed it on the head, a lot of the newer crop lenses included in the kits are getting replaced within a very short time span and there's nothing wrong with them but they don't hold value when you've got an upgraded version being thrown at you every year or so.

So to answer the op generally L means it'll be a good lens, weather sealed, well built and a high level of performance but there's plenty of lenses that aren't L which also perform to a high standard they just might not be as fast or their build quality is worse. The nicest thing about Canon is the range of good glass you have available, plenty of choice for whatever focal range you want and usually price range too.

 

[Brachytron]

I find the Canon lens hierarchy easier to understand than Nikon's (but then I am a Canon man).

Basically:

EF-S lenses will only work on the crop bodies quality is good (a couple are excellent including the 17-55mm f2.8 mentioned above). Focal lengths are matched to the sensor size to give sensible working ranges - the 17-55mm is equivalent to 27-88 mm in full frame terms. Prices are also sensible for the intended market.

EF lenses are designed for full frame cameras and will work on the crop bodies, however the focal lengths will not be the best. For example the 24-105mm EF lens will be the equivalent of 38-168mm on a crop which is probably not wide enough for a standard lens.

L series EF lenses are premium quality, designed for full frame but will work on crop too. Quality is the best you can buy and the price reflects this.

If you are upgrading to a 60D (why not 70D?) my recommendation would be the 15-85mm EF-S. It has a great range for a standard lens and very good quality. For a telephoto, you could then get 55-250mm EF-S or if you are feeling flush the 70-200mm f4L

 

[odd jim]

Edit, read the post properly, Doh!

Yes the 55-250 EFS is a great little telephoto, wish I still had mine!

 

[Jonnybrad2001]

You'll also generally note the better mid range lenses have a gold ring on them e.g. 10-22mm EF-S, the aforementioned 17-55 F2.8*, 50mm F1.4 etc, though I'm sure someone will probably point out a duffer in the range the disproves this argument.

*Lenses such as this one are actually better than "mid range" but it isn't full frame so will never get the full blessing of a red ring from Canon.

 

[odd jim]

You'll also generally note the better mid range lenses have a gold ring on them e.g. 10-22mm EF-S, the aforementioned 17-55 F2.8*, 50mm F1.4 etc, though I'm sure someone will probably point out a duffer in the range the disproves this argument.

*Lenses such as this one are actually better than "mid range" but it isn't full frame so will never get the full blessing of a red ring from Canon.

The gold ring just designates it has USM focusing.

 

[woof woof]

Hi, after a lot of reading on here and research on ebay etc I think I have decided on my next upgrade in April to be the Canon 60D but I see so many comments that the standard lens are of relative poor quality ( and I do mean relative ) and most people commenting seem to almost instantly upgrade.

Can anyone give me a bit of an insight in to the hierarchy levels and what the different designations mean ?

I must add that I will probably be looking to keep things relatively minimal and not looking for lots of prime lenses at first or long zooms but knowing what to buy or avoid would be good.

Many thanks

Tony

Just like to add... You could also consider Canon EF fit lenses from Sigma and Tamron.

A good upgrade to a 18-50mm f3.5-5.6 could be a 18-50mm f2.8 and if you want one there's a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8, a Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 and Canon's own 17-55mm f2.8.

I don't think that the Canon was out when I got my Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 but even if it had been I'd probably still have gone for the Tamron or the very similar Sigma as they're cheaper and more compact.

On the L thing... I'm pretty sure I read somewhere once that Canon will never put the L badge on non full frame lens which is a shame IMVHO. Anyway, regardless of what the badge says I think that any of these three lenses will offer a worthwhile upgrade from the kit lens. Keep in mind that they're all APS-C only lenses and can't really be used on a full frame 35mm equivalent camera.

 

[hashcake]

the 17-55 IS is the crop std zoom for serious photographers, there's a reason it costs as much as it does, it might not be an L but it performs like one.

I had already more or less said thay by saying that many compare it to L lenses.
There are quite a few 7D users who use the 24-150L, granted it will loose the wide angle on a cropped body but still produces pin sharp photos and I believe that is why it so popular with people who use cropped bodies.

 

[hashcake]

Let's not get tied up in the "consumer" argument, they're all consumer lenses, even L lenses (the general public can buy them, then they're made for the 'consumer'!)

I could have used the term 'budget' but I feel as though the term wrongly reflects things when talking about EF-S lenses as prime examples the 10-22 and 17-55 do produce top notch photos.
The fact remains that lots of cropped body users do use quite a few of the EF lenses, the focal range for the 100-400 is hardly the same on cropped body as it is with a full frame but that still doesn't stop the popularity of it.

 

[odd jim]

I could have used the term 'budget' but I feel as though the term wrongly reflects things when talking about EF-S lenses as prime examples the 10-22 and 17-55 do produce top notch photos.
The fact remains that lots of cropped body users do use quite a few of the EF lenses, the focal range for the 100-400 is hardly the same on cropped body as it is with a full frame but that still doesn't stop the popularity of it.

Yes, and this is why crop only lenses generally are the shorter lenses - the benefits of EFS and crop only lenses don't really work with long lenses. About 250mm is the limit really.

 

[corpy]

Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM......ideal walk about lens for a 60d , I found you get what you pay for with These lens i.e. Cheap kit lens are ok glass wise but lacking build quality up to L series usually built like a tank ,weather proof and top notch glass .

 

[hashcake]

Canon EF-S 15-85mm f/3.5-5.6 IS USM......ideal walk about lens for a 60d , I found you get what you pay for with These lens i.e. Cheap kit lens are ok glass wise but lacking build quality up to L series usually built like a tank ,weather proof and top notch glass .

For some reason I thought the 15-85 was cheaper, I must have been thinking about the 17-85 which if I remember correctly was the kit lens with the 40D. The 15-85 is in a similar price bracket to the EF-S 10-22 and 17-55 so I would expect the IQ is as good as those two as well.

 

[hashcake]

Yes, and this is why crop only lenses generally are the shorter lenses - the benefits of EFS and crop only lenses don't really work with long lenses. About 250mm is the limit really.

Ok, humour me here..
If that is true why do we see some amazing photos taken with a 100-400L using a cropped body on here?

 

[odd jim]

Ok, humour me here..
If that is true why do we see some amazing photos taken with a 100-400L using a cropped body on here?

I don't think you've understood my post.

I said that EFS long lenses (over 250mm) don't exist, as the benefits of creating a small light EFS lens don't work at long lengths, as long lenses need lots of glass due to the physics involved, which is why you don't see, for example, an EFS 300+ mm lenses.

I didn't say anything about long EF lenses not being used, or used well on crop bodies!

 

[hashcake]

I don't think you've understood my post.

I said that EFS long lenses (over 250mm) don't exist, as the benefits of creating a small light EFS lens don't work at long lengths, as long lenses need lots of glass due to physics.

I didn't say anything about long EF lenses not being used, or used well on crop bodies!

I misread what you originally said, point taken.

 

[tonybassplayer]

Excellent reading and lots to look at over the next couple of months. One thing that seems quite apparent though and is reinforced through the site is that the need to buy a "deal" with camera and lens is really not the way to go as that almost instantly takes you down the upgrade route.

A chain is only as strong as the weakest link is the saying that's most appropriate I believe.

 

[tonybassplayer]

If you are upgrading to a 60D (why not 70D?) my recommendation would be the 15-85mm EF-S. It has a great range for a standard lens and very good quality. For a telephoto, you could then get 55-250mm EF-S or if you are feeling flush the 70-200mm f4L

The 70D looks to be quite a lot more. Is it worth the difference ?

Lots of 60D's available used at the moment which I guess pushes the price down.

 

[simonbarker]

The 70D looks to be quite a lot more. Is it worth the difference ?

Lots of 60D's available used at the moment which I guess pushes the price down.

Not really, as far as I recall the major selling point of the 70d over the 60d were improvements to focus (especially for video?).

 

[LCPete]

I don't think you've understood my post.

I said that EFS long lenses (over 250mm) don't exist, as the benefits of creating a small light EFS lens don't work at long lengths, as long lenses need lots of glass due to the physics involved, which is why you don't see, for example, an EFS 300+ mm lenses.

I didn't say anything about long EF lenses not being used, or used well on crop bodies!

I've wondered about this before, why there isn't any larger telephoto EFS lenses
it must be because the larger telephotos need big front elements in the lens so there's no advantage in having smaller rear elements for the smaller crop image circle?
Someone correct me please if I've misunderstood

 

[odd jim]

Yeah that's pretty much it I think.

 

[tonybassplayer]

Just been re reading and the penny has just dropped with me with regard to the pricing variations of some of these lenses.

It would seem that if the lens maintains the same maximum apperture size throughout it's range then the performance is enhanced therefore they demand a higher price.

Am I on the right track ?

 

[odd jim]

Just been re reading and the penny has just dropped with me with regard to the pricing variations of some of these lenses.

It would seem that if the lens maintains the same maximum apperture size throughout it's range then the performance is enhanced therefore they demand a higher price.

Am I on the right track ?

Not just that but yes, that involves more money!

Basically, the more expensive lenses, generally, will also have better optics and build. You get what you pay for with this hobby, but sometime you get gems which don't cost much and punch well above their weight.

 

[cmcm789]

Hi, after a lot of reading on here and research on ebay etc I think I have decided on my next upgrade in April to be the Canon 60D but I see so many comments that the standard lens are of relative poor quality ( and I do mean relative ) and most people commenting seem to almost instantly upgrade.
I must add that I will probably be looking to keep things relatively minimal and not looking for lots of prime lenses at first or long zooms but knowing what to buy or avoid would be good.

Tony I upgraded from a 450 to the 60D for the better ISO range and handling, and faster frame rate as i regularly take photos of races (runners). I started with the kit lens 18-55 IS and 55-250mm IS.

After upgrading the camera i then got a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non-VC to replace my kit lens. It is much better indoors and in low light for taking family photos. The image sharpness of my lens is excellent and much better wide open than the kit lens. For landscape etc where you are using f5.6 to f8, theres no noticeable difference between the kit lens and the Tamron.

Next i upgraded to a 70-200 f4L for the faster focusing for sports shots. The L lens is slightly faster than the 55-250mm and images are only marginally better. I have kept the 55-250 as it is a fantastic lens, light, sharp, great IS and excellent value for money. I also have a 50mm f1.8 but haven't used since buying the tamron.

The flip out screen is great on the 60D and i use it quite often for landscapes. I don't do video, so the only thing i would have on my wish list for an upgrade would be better autofocus which i believe the 70D and 7D have. Other than that, it's a great camera.

I suppose it comes down to what you use your camera for (i.e. what tye of images). Do you feel your current set up is lacking anything??

 

[cmcm789]

Hi, after a lot of reading on here and research on ebay etc I think I have decided on my next upgrade in April to be the Canon 60D but I see so many comments that the standard lens are of relative poor quality ( and I do mean relative ) and most people commenting seem to almost instantly upgrade.
I must add that I will probably be looking to keep things relatively minimal and not looking for lots of prime lenses at first or long zooms but knowing what to buy or avoid would be good.

Tony I upgraded from a 450 to the 60D for the better ISO range and handling, and faster frame rate as i regularly take photos of races (runners). I started with the kit lens 18-55 IS and 55-250mm IS.

After upgrading the camera i then got a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non-VC to replace my kit lens. It is much better indoors and in low light for taking family photos. The image sharpness of my lens is excellent and much better wide open than the kit lens. For landscape etc where you are using f5.6 to f8, theres no noticeable difference between the kit lens and the Tamron.

Next i upgraded to a 70-200 f4L for the faster focusing for sports shots. The L lens is slightly faster than the 55-250mm and images are only marginally better. I have kept the 55-250 as it is a fantastic lens, light, sharp, great IS and excellent value for money. I also have a 50mm f1.8 but haven't used since buying the tamron.

The flip out screen is great on the 60D and i use it quite often for landscapes. I don't do video, so the only thing i would have on my wish list for an upgrade would be better autofocus which i believe the 70D and 7D have. Other than that, it's a great camera.

I suppose it comes down to what you use your camera for (i.e. what tye of images). Do you feel your current set up is lacking anything??

 

[cmcm789]

Hi, after a lot of reading on here and research on ebay etc I think I have decided on my next upgrade in April to be the Canon 60D but I see so many comments that the standard lens are of relative poor quality ( and I do mean relative ) and most people commenting seem to almost instantly upgrade.
I must add that I will probably be looking to keep things relatively minimal and not looking for lots of prime lenses at first or long zooms but knowing what to buy or avoid would be good.

Tony I upgraded from a 450 to the 60D for the better ISO range and handling, and faster frame rate as i regularly take photos of races (runners). I started with the kit lens 18-55 IS and 55-250mm IS.

After upgrading the camera i then got a Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 non-VC to replace my kit lens. It is much better indoors and in low light for taking family photos. The image sharpness of my lens is excellent and much better wide open than the kit lens. For landscape etc where you are using f5.6 to f8, theres no noticeable difference between the kit lens and the Tamron.

Next i upgraded to a 70-200 f4L for the faster focusing for sports shots. The L lens is slightly faster than the 55-250mm and images are only marginally better. I have kept the 55-250 as it is a fantastic lens, light, sharp, great IS and excellent value for money. I also have a 50mm f1.8 but haven't used since buying the tamron.

The flip out screen is great on the 60D and i use it quite often for landscapes. I don't do video, so the only thing i would have on my wish list for an upgrade would be better autofocus which i believe the 70D and 7D have. Other than that, it's a great camera.

I suppose it comes down to what you use your camera for (i.e. what tye of images). Do you feel your current set up is lacking anything??

 

[tonybassplayer]

I suppose it comes down to what you use your camera for (i.e. what tye of images). Do you feel your current set up is lacking anything??[/QUOTE]

 

[tonybassplayer]

I suppose it comes down to what you use your camera for (i.e. what tye of images). Do you feel your current set up is lacking anything??

I just want to ensure when I upgrade I make the right decision and spend my money wisely. I would rather spend more initially than having to sell and upgrade lenses etc too frequently. One area I am keen to get in to is live music photography.

 

[tonybassplayer]

Just been re-visiting this thread as at long last I have made my purchase ( 60D on ebay complete with double battery grip and the standard 18-55 and 55-250 lenses )

I am assuming they will be the most basic models and bid accordingly but any better will be a bonus

Looking forward to getting the camera and getting out taking more pictures