Much of the time we are content with the performance of a new lens of ours (i.e., the lens has largely met our expectatons) which is the way things should normally work. On occasion, we get smitten with a sense of letdown/disappointment if a lens falls short of what we've read about it and/or hoped to see. The latter does not neccessarily mean we got hit by that dreaded copy-to-copy lens variability, it is simply indicative of a discrepancy between our expectations and lens performance.
However, now and then it also happens that our new piece of glass delights from the first image we take with it ! The coveted WOW reaction ! The lens seems so much better than we thought it would (or should) be that we are getting tempted to buy yet another copy ! Just so as to multiply such unexpected goodness in our hands !
Here are my most distinctly "WOW reaction" lenses: EF-S 60 f/2.8 and EF 400 f/5.6.
I wonder what yours are ?
I was also WOWed by the 135L. Your read all these threads about it being magical and you think, "these people have to tell themselves that to justify the cost." Nope, that wasnt the case at all, the 135L is amazing.
85L did it for me. Shot wide open the subject just jumped off of the print. 135L did the same thing for sharpness - its the shapest lens I've ever shot.
70-200 f2.8 IS Wowed me when it tuned out to be almost indestinguishbly as sharp as the wowie 135 f2. Two great lenses, but I will never part with my 70-200.
Ahhh....the 135 L.......what an extraordinary lens any which way one looks at it.....from the IQ to its price ! (the reason mine did not WOW me because I was expecting the best and the lens delivered in full.
(A funny thing though......it is mostly my fear of not experiencing a WOW reaction commensurate to $3,900 which has been keeping me from acquiring the venerable EF 300 f2.8. Plainly, I can not afford not to have a huge WOW reaction to such an expensive lens.)
the 50mm 1.8 :-)
Sorry I dont have much money and the only lens I had used before was the kit lens!
I was kust wowed about the shallow DOF I could create.
Agree completely on the 135L and — Celcus, fear not — to an even greater extent the 300 f/2.8L IS. Not merely sharpness but color, contrast and bokeh — "Magic in a tube," to quote myself.
I'm inclined to include the 15mm f2.8 fish in this group, for different reasons.
And then there's the 400 f/2.8, regarding which you will definitely say "Wow" the first time you try to lift it... ;-)
ffur wrote:
the 50mm 1.8 :-)
Sorry I dont have much money and the only lens I had used before was the kit lens!
I was kust wowed about the shallow DOF I could create.
I think if one looks at IQ/$ alone, the WOW factor of the "wee one" should be just about peerless.
Interestingly, the two zooms that delight people often are 70-200 (any of the 3 siblings) and 100-400. I think the reason may be in expecting that sort of a high IQ in a prime, not a zoom.
petermendelson wrote:
Besides the 135L, the 24-105L has really exceeded my expectations. Aside from the IS and zoom range, the sharpness and pop I am getting is great.
- The 300 f/2.8L IS -- I knew this would be good, but I couldn't believe it when I saw the images -- this still happens to me almost every time I use it.
- The 85 f/1.2L -- I held out for a while feeling that this lens couldn't/shouldn't be worth what it costs. I finally justified to myself. After I purchased it and looked at the pictures, I thought what the heck took me so long.
- The 200 f/1.8L -- The only reason that I put this third is because I already had the 300 f/2.8L IS, so I fairly well knew what to expect.
- The 70-200 f/2.8L IS -- This was the "big" lens that I wanted. It looks much smaller now. I knew that it could be good, but I wasn't expecting the knockout color/contrast on a zoom.
- The TS-E 90 -- This lens really impressed me for many reasons. The sharpness, the feel, the ease of use on what I had thought would be more difficult. In the end, the pictures were just downright cool! This lens has made me want the 45 and consider the 24.
- The 35 f/1.4L -- Here is another lens that I just couldn't understand why it cost so much. My father ended up buying one, and I used it and used it and used it (I used it more than he did). Ok, it really was nice and worth it. The narrow DOF is nice on a wide, and the contrast is really good as well. I got my own.
- The 500 f/4L IS -- This is probably this low on the list since I don't use it as much as some of the others, but when I do, it really is a fantastic lens.
- The 135 f/2L -- I put this down here, since my expectations were higher to begin with. I can say that this is as close to a perfect lens as you can hope for. Every now and then I will read someone who wants IS on this. I think the odds are better that Canon would mess it up, so I hope they never touch it. The lens is about speed. It doesn't need IS.
70 200 is for me... 1st when i took it out of the box.... damn its heavy (got used to it now)... then testing the is another wow... and then... when i was checking the results another wow for this lens... luv this baby
Plainly, I can not afford not to have a huge WOW reaction to such an expensive lens.)