USM and L series lens

With the exception of my large zoom lens, all my other lenses that I use with my DRebel are kit lenses. I find myself using the USM filter quite often to bring out the details in my photos. Is this a result of the quality of the kit lens? Would I not have to use USM as much if I were using L series lenses?

Just curious...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjs1973

With the exception of my large zoom lens, all my other lenses that I use with my DRebel are kit lenses. I find myself using the USM filter quite often to bring out the details in my photos. Is this a result of the quality of the kit lens? Would I not have to use USM as much if I were using L series lenses?

Just curious...

---

"L" zooms vs consumer zooms=no contest. You'll still use unsharp mask a little simply because images straight from the camera tend to be soft, but the differences are night and day. When I get home, I'll try to post test pics with my 28-70 f2.8L versus my Tamron 28-80 consumer zoom. (i'm at work and lurking here between patients ;) )
Prime lenses on the other hand are pretty evenly matched. The "L" primes are usually one stop faster and sharper edge to edge wide open, have a slightly nicer warmth to their images, but 1-2 stops down, the differences start to disappear, and primes are a lot less expensive in consumer trim.
If cost is not an obstacle, by all means splurge and get "L" lenses, they're almost always worth it (sadly, some are not).

You'll always need to sharpen your digital images a little - especially if you resize them. You can increase the sharpening in-camera. But you'll get better quality images if you sharpen them individually.

Lens quality is very important, though. The difference between Canon kit lenses and the L lenses is huge. It's not just a matter of sharpness, though. Contrast, color, speed, and build quality are also what you're paying for with pro lenses. And even though you'll be able to see the difference between kit lenses and pro lenses, you'll still need to sharpen your images. That has more to do with the way your camera's sensor captures and processes images than the quality of your lens.

Thanks for the info guys. This is what I was expecting to hear. I never realized how unsharp, my images were until I started using USM. I better start saving for some upgrades. better lenses, better computer, better software.... :)

Thanks again guys.

PJ is absolutely right about build quality. I dropped my 70-200 f2.8L USM IS from my backpack (stupid me, I didn't secure my backpack before slinging it over my shoulder) last week onto pavement. I heard this sickening "thunkkkk" and there was my prize "L" bouncing and rolling across the parking lot. I picked it up, managed to separated the lens hood from the main body, and, lo and behold, 2 scratches, a cracked lens hood, and everything else was fine and dandy. I immediately did tests to check focusing and to see that the IS was still working. Razor sharp as always. You get what you pay for. I've dropped my EOS-1V a few years ago from a counter top with a 28-70 f2.8L on it, and NOTHING happened to it. Just amazingly tough cameras and lenses when you get to the pro level equipment.

isnt USM an acronym for Ultra Sonic Motor? my 70-200MM L says something like that....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mjm

isnt USM an acronym for Ultra Sonic Motor? my 70-200MM L says something like that....

---

Yes, but in photoshop terms, usm=UnSharpMask ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lionheart

PJ is absolutely right about build quality. I dropped my 70-200 f2.8L USM IS from my backpack (stupid me, I didn't secure my backpack before slinging it over my shoulder) last week onto pavement. I heard this sickening "thunkkkk" and there was my prize "L" bouncing and rolling across the parking lot. I picked it up, managed to separated the lens hood from the main body, and, lo and behold, 2 scratches, a cracked lens hood, and everything else was fine and dandy. I immediately did tests to check focusing and to see that the IS was still working. Razor sharp as always. You get what you pay for. I've dropped my EOS-1V a few years ago from a counter top with a 28-70 f2.8L on it, and NOTHING happened to it. Just amazingly tough cameras and lenses when you get to the pro level equipment.

---

Well, there's also no accounting for the decrease in quality of consumer-grade gear. I dropped my old EOS 650 with my old 70-210 F/4 on it. Slipped right off my shoulder and whacked onto the ground. I noticed no damage and no difference in the image until I was cleaning it later that day. An internal element was shattered around the edge of the glass, leaving little shards and bits all over the place. But I shot it for a month after and the images were almost the same. It suddenly quit registering that the lens had an aperture so I retired it, but man! The 650 was totally fine, only a few tiny scratches. They do make 'em like they used to...for a price...

I had that lens once. It was a push pull design as I recall. VERY sharp lens. Wish I still had it. It's one stop slower than my 70-200 f2.8L and not nearly as fast focusing, but it was light, and extremely sharp. They really don't make them like they used to unless you are willing to pay the price. Today's consumer lenses are so PLASTICKY it makes me want to scream. I paid 175 bucks for a used 50mm f1.8 MkI because I refuse to pay 70 bucks for the new plastic version. I want the old rugged version. It's even better built than the new f1.4 USM version. I just wrecked my f1.4 the other day. I was going to test the 1.8 versus the 1.4 but I bumped the front of the 1.4 against the door heading out now the lens won't focus, change apertures, nothing-I am so pissed, I cannot believe I paid 300+ bucks for a high end piece of plastic.