View Single Post
Canon L series: big "L" and little "l"?
Old 06-05-2006, 04:19 PM   #1 (permalink)
CatCynic
Aspiring Photographer

 
CatCynic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Member GG#: 50625
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 437
Comments: 0

CatCynic is offline IP: 220.253.39.227
  Reply With Quote

I've noticed that Canon seem to be developing two lines of lenses within the L series.

There are the traditional L series lenses: big, heavy, rugged, and dependable, like the 16-35mm f2.8L, 24-70mm f2.8L and 70-200mm f2.8L, plus the really big boys, like the 400mm f2.8L IS. I think of these as the "big L" series.

And then there are the newer L series lenses: a bit smaller, rather lighter, like the 17-40mm f4L, 24-105mm f4L and the 70-200mm f4L. These seem to warrant a new category designation: I have been thinking of them as the "small L" series, or maybe "L-lite". It's not an inappropriate term, because they are noticeably lighter. And that's not a bad thing - having walked around with a 5D+70-200 f2.8 IS, I know I'd have preferred the lighter weight of the 70-200 f4 (although I don't want to give up the IS).

The "L-lite" lenses are noticeably cheaper than their "big L" equivalents, but they don't always include the accessories that we see with the "big L" series: things like lens hoods and tripod collars may be optional extras, instead of being included.

Does anyone know if this is a conscious decision on Canon's part? Are they trying to produce two lines of L lenses? And is it limited to zoom lenses, or are there "L-lite" primes, too?
  View Public Profile Find More Posts by CatCynic