Anyone use those Canon EOS "L" primes?

When I had my 1vHS, I used the 35mm 1.4. It's everything a great lens should be (IMHO)....sharp, contrasty, pleasing bokeh, etc....dare I say comparable to the 50mm planar zm...not quite as good, but close.
 
I just use the zooms: 70-200 f/4 IS, 20-35 f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8. Would like to try the 135 L but it's hard to give up the flexibility of a zoom. They're all great but compared to RF lenses they're all big, heavy and extremely conspicuous.

Chris
 
I've taken some test shots with the 35/1.4, the images were fine: as above, good tonal range, sharp, etc but lacked the little extra something my 1966 and 1970 Summiluxes offer, and some of the special qualities of the older lenses such as my 1940 Summitar.
I'm curious how the Leica R lenses (eg, Cron and Lux) would fare on a EOS FF SLR; such as how close the IQ would be to the Leica RF lenses.
 
Yeah. I agree that the images I have seen are mostly digital... would like to see some shots on BW film.
 
Great weather sealing when attached to a 1D or 5D and as far as optical quality I would rank them up with the best. The only drawback is that they are large in size but on a 5D sized body (or larger) they feel fine.
 
35/1.4L Is one of the best Canon lenses around. Draws beautiful.
But .. ...expect a lot more distortion compared to a summicron, summilux or biogon!
 
I use the zooms also. Two examples of the 17-40 f4 L with cheap Fuji film....

4642911042_9761a9bf3d.jpg


4642905660_639a9131f5.jpg


I am just running a test roll of the same film through my new (to me) EOS 3, and then I'll try B&W.

Best regards,
RoyM
 
I can only compare my 35L to my 35 biogon.
The L is a very good lens but more distortion compared to the biogon and a crapload of purple CA wide open!
 
although don't even have Canon system, been lusting those nice L-zooms, e.g. 24-105 prices seem to come down. offer in local camera shop, new 24-105 for 889EUR. perhaps new versions coming ?

if Canon had smaller full frame body, would perhaps make the jump and just adapt my Nikkor primes for it.
 
I bought a Canon 1n body for the only purpose: to use 85/1.2L lens.
It's amazing.
I was planning to buy 50/1.2 as well but plans changed and I had to postpone the purchase.

Few pictures with the lens on film

10924995-md.jpg


and in color (film as well)

11173222-lg.jpg
 
Last edited:
jarski said:
although don't even have Canon system, been lusting those nice L-zooms, e.g. 24-105 prices seem to come down. offer in local camera shop, new 24-105 for 889EUR. perhaps new versions coming ?

if Canon had smaller full frame body, would perhaps make the jump and just adapt my Nikkor primes for it.
Click to expand...

The 24-105 is really nice, but distorts and vignettes a fair bit at 24mm. It seems to really be a 28-105 that was stretched a little too far... I love mine, but it is not without its faults.
 
The 50L is nice, but if you are on a budget it is well worth checking out the Sigma 50/1.4 which cranks out some amazing images -- beware that a lot of them have somewhat creative focusing though so it is important to try one you are able to return...

Also, the 85/1.8 is another inexpensive lens with superb image quality.

L is nice stuff (I have the 24-105, 100-400 and 400/5.6) but there are some non-L options out there that are well worth a look as well. :)
 
cmedin said:
The 24-105 is really nice, but distorts and vignettes a fair bit at 24mm. It seems to really be a 28-105 that was stretched a little too far... I love mine, but it is not without its faults.
Click to expand...

thx for info about distortion, have to Google more about it. but with prices coming down, would probably make the jump anyway :rolleyes: it seems very useful combo of both wide and tele & moderate aperture.
 
I use a full set of primes for my wedding work. That is 24L, 35L, 50L, 85L, and the 135L. All are wonderful. The 35 is my go to, great lens, but a ton of purple fringe wide open. The 24 is a surprise, really great lens. I have the Sigma 50 and used that for a year, then got the 50L. Had buyers remorse for a long, long, long time. But once I tamed the L I realized it is amazing. They are all big though, I always wish they were all smaller.
 
cmedin; said:
L is nice stuff (I have the 24-105, 100-400 and 400/5.6) but there are some non-L options out there that are well worth a look as well. :)
Click to expand...

As a 'new' 1D owner, I am intrigued: which ones do you mean?

Best regards,
Roy
 
Non L lenses worth a peek - 50mm F1.4, 85 F1.8 and 100m F2.8 macro

Excellent lenses, sharp, contrasty, great colors and cheap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom