Is a "L"ens Overkill for my 450D

R

rabaroo

Messages
324
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi all

starting to look down the slippery slope that is L lenses; for two reasons really:

1. lots of good things said about them etc.
2. a feeling I get that some of my pics are not quite "right" at the moment.... is it the lens, or is it the cameraman???

Anyway to address #2 I am loaning an L lens soon - which will be a good experience; but I suspect it will lead to an equipment overhaul....

therefore, without getting into the realms of changing bodies; as my 450D is more than capable (Even if i would like a 50D!) - will an L lens be overkill for the 450D???:thinking:
 
A friend lent me his 70-200L for a couple of weeks last year, once I gave it back the lenses I had just didn't cut it so I had to go get my own!
 
Not at all! If anything it will enhance your 450D and help you make the most of its capabilities. I am sure that there will be alot of people agreeing with me but is far better to invest in good glass than a good body, unless you can afford both! L glass will vastly improve the sharpness of your images and when the time does come for you to upgrade your body you wont have to buy better glass to make the most of the Body.

I would recomend looking at the sigma EX Lens's as they are also highly rated.
 
sidxms said:
which ones are you looking at?

I'd totally reccomend one btw
Click to expand...

There are currently 2 on my hit list.....
16-35 f2.8
24-70 f2.8

The latter comes with a very strong recommendation from a mate; and even the first one he says is awesome.....

both pitching about the £1k mark each at the moment; so a considered purchase - hence why trying one out first!

ultimately I guess then the plan would be to get a telephoto- but thats out in the future - the 55-250 will just have to do till then, but i need to replace the kit 18-55 with something soon, so the 16-35 is currently in front by a nose!
 
chris_tim said:
L glass will vastly improve the sharpness of your images
Click to expand...

that is EXACTLY what I am trying to do - dont get me wrong even with my 18-55 I have taken some (what I consider to be) stunning pictures which are very sharp, but as I take more and more pics I start to feel that inherantly the kit lens lacks something.....

I'm hoping the lens and not the cameraman is at fault! -

going away in May to the lakes and the coast; originally was going to leave the 18-55 at home while I have a 16-35 on loan; but what I might do is take some "real world" comparison shots so I can evaluate rationally when I get home
 
Not overkill at all, get the glass first, then upgrade the body when yo start to find the limits of that with the better glass.
 
Overkill..... Not at all, have the 24-70, and love it, is a great lens. As said upgrade the glass now and it will out live your current body and the next ;)
 
What are you hoping to use the lenses for, a walkabout lens, portrait lens, landscape lens?

The 24-70mm lenses is really a portrait lens (on your camera equivalent to a 38-112mm lens), where as the 16-35mm is more a landscape lens (on your camera equivalent to 25-56mm lens) due to the crop factor of your camera.

Are you intending to upgrade to a full frame camera in the future or stick with a smaller sensor, you might want to consider the canon 17-55mm EF-S f2.8 which is about £800 if your not thinking about a 5D or 1D series camera.

Peter.
 
Would agree with all the above, buy the best glass you can afford. There are also some non L lens out there which give very good results aswell :thumbs:
 
pete.rush said:
What are you hoping to use the lenses for, a walkabout lens, portrait lens, landscape lens?

The 24-70mm lenses is really a portrait lens (on your camera equivalent to a 38-112mm lens), where as the 16-35mm is more a landscape lens (on your camera equivalent to 25-56mm lens) due to the crop factor of your camera.

Are you intending to upgrade to a full frame camera in the future or stick with a smaller sensor, you might want to consider the canon 17-55mm EF-S f2.8 which is about £800 if your not thinking about a 5D or 1D series camera.

Peter.
Click to expand...

I am after both really - the priority I think for the moment is for a landscape type lens - as I've already got a 28-105 which appears to be a decent enough quality to do as a walkabout..... I had considered the 24-70 L as a replacement for that, and I think that would probably suit my walkabout needs too....

WRT switching to full frame..... who knows; maybe!? - I guess while I'm spending plenty on new lenses; I may as well go that bit further and future proof myself if I ever do get to move to a FF camera?
 
The bokeh on most L lenses is simply sublime, sharpness colour and contrast are so optically correct too.

Some L lenses are less sharp than others (refering to a Photography Monthly article a couple of years ago on 70-200 glass), but generally they are the best you can get.

As mentioned above, some Canon lenses are L in all but name. The 70-300 is one where I've seen superb results straight out of camera...
 
Go for it, I borrowed a friends 24-105L last summer and hated giving it back the differnece compared to what I was used to was amazing. I still cant afford L glass so I'm 'making do' with a new sigma 18-50 f2.8 EX and a 70-300IS which as markta says is superb:D
 
I got my first DSLR in March 2007, a Canon 400D, and within 6 months, after a lot of gnashing of teeth and sleepless nights, replaced the 'kit' lens with a 24-105 as my 'walk about' lens. Never regretted it, (particularly as I see how much they are now :eek: ) and now it's rarely of my 50D.

Pete
 
I got my first DSLR in March 2007, a Canon 400D, and within 6 months, after a lot of gnashing of teeth and sleepless nights, replaced the 'kit' lens with a 24-105 as my 'walk about' lens. Never regretted it, (particularly as I see how much they are now :eek: ) and now it's rarely off my 50D.

Pete
 
Before you buy, maybe just check the Exif data on your pictures and see which focal lenghts you've been using. 16-35 and 24-70 are a wonderful combination, but really designed for full frame. For me, using a crop camera, I would be forever swapping lenses around the changeover point. I use EF-S 10-22 and 17-55 f/2.8, which suits my style better, and they can both hold their own against L glass.

I can't see myself ever going full frame now - crop is just so good. And in the future, the gap is going to narrow further. You really have to have a special 'need' for full frame on a regular basis, apart from just the theoretical quality thing. Unless you print really big all the time, you're never going to see that and the downsides of size, weight and cost are considerable.
 
Good class will always improve IQ.

I have a lowly Nikon D40 and using good glass it produces fantastic IQ compared to kit glass.
 
HoppyUK said:
Before you buy, maybe just check the Exif data on your pictures and see which focal lenghts you've been using. 16-35 and 24-70 are a wonderful combination, but really designed for full frame. For me, using a crop camera, I would be forever swapping lenses around the changeover point. I use EF-S 10-22 and 17-55 f/2.8, which suits my style better, and they can both hold their own against L glass.

I can't see myself ever going full frame now - crop is just so good. And in the future, the gap is going to narrow further. You really have to have a special 'need' for full frame on a regular basis, apart from just the theoretical quality thing. Unless you print really big all the time, you're never going to see that and the downsides of size, weight and cost are considerable.
Click to expand...


Hi. Thanks Hoppy for raising this, I suppose it brings an interesting point I hadnt fully got my head around just yet......

I use EF-S lenses on my 450D, so I have a 18-55mm, a 28-105mm and a 55-250mm...... Now as I understand it those focal length figures relate to the 450D and other crop sensors, where in fact the "true" focal length is 1.6x all of the figures given above (in old money!)

When/If I buy an L lens, which is an EF I believe so compatible with Full Frame Cameras; say I went for the 16-35...... is that 2mm wider than my current 18mm??,

I dont think I'll have a need to go FF at the level I am at; maybe up to the 40/50D territory (or perhaps a later model in a few years with better ISO capability)......
 
rabaroo said:
When/If I buy an L lens, which is an EF I believe so compatible with Full Frame Cameras; say I went for the 16-35...... is that 2mm wider than my current 18mm??......
Click to expand...

If my maths are right (and they may not be :lol:)

The 16-35 on the 450 would act like 25 - 56
Your 18mm on the 450 would act like 28 -

But remember the EF will work on a FF camera and be 16-35 again, whereas the EF-S lenses are not compatable :thumbs:
 
andyred said:
If my maths are right (and they may not be :lol:)

The 16-35 on the 450 would act like 25 - 56
Your 18mm on the 450 would act like 28 -

But remember the EF will work on a FF camera and be 16-35 again, whereas the EF-S lenses are not compatable :thumbs:
Click to expand...

So what were saying is that the focal lengths quoted on the lens barrel are always done in FF equivalent? - so 18mm on a EF-S lens is still the equivalent of 18mm on a Full Frame Lens (accepting that EF-S isnt FF compatible?)
 
rabaroo said:
So what were saying is that the focal lengths quoted on the lens barrel are always done in FF equivalent? - so 18mm on a EF-S lens is still the equivalent of 18mm on a Full Frame Lens (accepting that EF-S isnt FF compatible?)
Click to expand...

Correct :)

With cropped cameras, in the case of your camera, you'd multiply whatever focal length used by 1.6 to give effective focal length (on any lens EF-S or EF mounts).

On a full frame camera, the focal length is exactly that as given/zoomed into (EF lens only, as FF won't accept EF-S).
 
Check out the link below, but basically a 16-35mm lenses is still a 16-35mm lens on a cropped sensor, however, a proportion on the image is lost due to the smaller sensor. The sensor has the effect of framing the image with a 1.6 magnificantion factor (canon), so on a small sensor camera the 16-35mm lens frames the image like that of a 25-56mm lens would capture on a full frame camera. There are advantages and disadvantages of using wide angle lenses on small sensor camera

from cambridge in colour

CROP FACTOR & FOCAL LENGTH MULTIPLIER. Be warned that both of these terms can be somewhat misleading. The lens focal length does not change just because a lens is used on a different sized sensor-- just its angle of view. A 50 mm lens is always a 50 mm lens, regardless of the sensor type. At the same time, "crop factor" may not be appropriate to describe very small sensors because the image is not necessarily cropped out (when using lenses designed for that sensor).
Click to expand...

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top