Consumer versus

Consumer versus "Professional" Lenses

You can buy a 50mm lens easily for around $100-200. However, you can also spend 10x as much for the "same" lens. It's similar for your 200mm tele, 70-200mm zoom, or your 35mm wide angle. So what's the point here?

Let's look at an example. Three Canon telephoto zoom lenses. Two of them 70-200mm, one 55-200mm.


Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 USM $200 (approx.)	Canon EF 70-200mm f/4,0 L USM $800 (approx.)	Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L USM $1,600 (approx.)

The one with the widest zoom range is actually the least expensive one, however also the one which is slowest. Here, however, the differences are not as significant (it seems). The least expensive lens is a 5.6 or better, the next one (4x the price) is one stop faster. The most expensive lens only gives one additional stop for an extra $800! I forgot, the two expensive lenses are also greyish-white.

So why the difference in prices?

Lens speed is the obvious one. This is the most significant difference. Professionals are willing to pay a significant premium for that one extra stop (which can make the difference between making the shot and not making it).
Quality is the next issue. Significant here is the performance of the lens at its limits. An expensive lens can be shot wide open, and the result is almost as good as when stopped down. Less good lenses show significant drop in picture quality wide open (sharpness, flare, contrast). I.e., a 50mm/1.7 lens for $75 may not get you satisfactory results at 1.7.
Then there may be a premium to be paid for ruggedness of the lens. Professionals often "abuse" their equipment, and thus rely on better manufacturing quality.
Finally, professional lenses are made in much lower quantities (not mass manufacture) and therefore are more costly to make.

So, which one is the best to buy? You choose.