PDA

View Full Version : I've been infected........

rjpat
Dec-23-2005, 10:35 PM
with the dreaded L disease. My wife got me a 70-200 f4L for Christmas. I have only taken a few test shots but I am very impressed and I am doomed, lol.
Matthew Saville
Dec-23-2005, 11:17 PM
...I am very impressed and I am doomed, lol.

Heheheheh... Welcome to the "lovers of sharp glass" club! Now I'll step back and let some real "L pros" give you a proper welcome...

-Matt-
binghott
Dec-23-2005, 11:50 PM
i just bought my second L lens two days ago. the only thing more satisfying than buying and owning an L lens is buying and owning two L lenses.

i have a 70-200 f2.8L and just got a 17-40 f4L.
gus
Dec-24-2005, 12:42 AM
Welcome to Dgrin rjpat. It will get much worse...dont listen to andy as he keeps us all very sick with L envy. I have the 400 f/5.6 L & the 135 f/2 L and all i need now is the 16-35 L.
Matthew Saville
Dec-24-2005, 01:07 AM
Welcome to Dgrin rjpat. It will get much worse...dont listen to andy as he keeps us all very sick with L envy. I have the 400 f/5.6 L & the 135 f/2 L and all i need now is the 16-35 L.The 16-35 L? Don't do it, mate! Not unless you find it dirt cheap, that is. If any lens were to be cut from the "L" class, it might be that one... Well, it depend on which body you mount it to, I guess?

-Matt-
gus
Dec-24-2005, 01:11 AM
The 16-35 L? Don't do it, mate! Not unless you find it dirt cheap, that is. If any lens were to be cut from the "L" class, it might be that one... Well, it depend on which body you mount it to, I guess?

-Matt-

Seriously ? I have heard such good things about it..though never even held one let alone shot with it. 17-40 then you recommend ? Either way its a serious hit to the wallet.
John Mueller
Dec-24-2005, 04:09 AM
with the dreaded L disease. My wife got me a 70-200 f4L for Christmas. I have only taken a few test shots but I am very impressed and I am doomed, lol.
I been searching high & low for a vaccine:D
DavidTO
Dec-24-2005, 06:08 AM
Seriously ? I have heard such good things about it..though never even held one let alone shot with it. 17-40 then you recommend ? Either way its a serious hit to the wallet.


Hey, if the 17-40 is good enough for Marc Muench....(of course he's not as concerned with the lost stop of speed as you may be, since his landscapes aren't going anywhere....). I really like mine.
Andy
Dec-24-2005, 06:27 AM
..dont listen to andy as he keeps us all very sick with L envy.

Yabbut, don't forget the sleepers:

Canon 85 f/1.8 (not L)
Canon 50 f/1.4 (not L)
Canon 100 f/2.8 Macro (not L)

Two Ls very very good (and IMO reasonably priced): 135 f/2L and 200 f/2.8L

:wave
aero-nut
Dec-24-2005, 06:47 AM
Yabbut, don't forget the sleepers:

Canon 85 f/1.8 (not L)
Canon 50 f/1.4 (not L)
Canon 100 f/2.8 Macro (not L)

Two Ls very very good (and IMO reasonably priced): 135 f/2L and 200 f/2.8L

:wave

Thanks for pointing out that "not L" glass is usable too. :D I really like my Canon 10-22 f/3.5. Don't get me wrong...I'd love to have an L lens, just can't afford it yet.
Andy
Dec-24-2005, 06:51 AM
Thanks for pointing out that "not L" glass is usable too. :D I really like my Canon 10-22 f/3.5. Don't get me wrong...I'd love to have an L lens, just can't afford it yet.

The 10-22 is nearly-L - it's darn good. I've owned it. 3x :uhoh
rjpat
Dec-24-2005, 02:14 PM
Just had to post a pic, will put the rest of them in the people forum. .

http://rjpat.smugmug.com/photos/49441620-M.jpghttp://rjpat.smugmug.com/photos/49492807-M.jpg

Now it's working.
gus
Dec-24-2005, 03:24 PM
Two Ls very very good (and IMO reasonably priced): 135 f/2L

:wave

I really only used this lens to its ability the other night at the school concert. Its great to shoot square onto someone at such low iso's at f2...clarity like ive never seen before.

Its worth its weight thats for sure.
Red Bull
Dec-24-2005, 04:39 PM
Glad to hear you love the 70-200 f/4. I'll be opening mine tomorrow.:D
herion
Dec-24-2005, 05:38 PM
with the dreaded L disease. My wife got me a 70-200 f4L for Christmas. I have only taken a few test shots but I am very impressed and I am doomed, lol.

Another "L"coholic ... :cool I remember my first "L" - a 28-70. I progressed down the slippery slope to the 400/5.6 and thence to the 24-105. During my descent into the throes of the disease, I also got the 50/1.4, the 100/2.8 macro as well as some fancy-schmancy Sigma EX UWAs.

This doesn't include the tripod ballhead or flash...

Welcome to the club!!!!!!
ScottMcLeod
Dec-24-2005, 09:02 PM
The 17-35L isn't available new anymore from what I hear, but it's a more affordable version of the 16-35.

Does anyone know why it was replaced?

If there's no real negatives, it may be my first piece of L glass.
CalfeeRider
Dec-26-2005, 02:32 PM
Yabbut, don't forget the sleepers:

Canon 85 f/1.8 (not L)
Canon 50 f/1.4 (not L)
Canon 100 f/2.8 Macro (not L)

Two Ls very very good (and IMO reasonably priced): 135 f/2L and 200 f/2.8L

:wave

I've only taken a few shots with the 85 f/1.8 and was VERY pleased with it. I just got the 100 f/2.8 macro yesterday and will be giving it a try first chance I get.

Jack