What fixed (normal) lens is best?

[bellimages]

I own these three Canon lens (see below). I'd like to purchase a normal focal length "macro" lens. From what I see in Canon's lineup there are none offered in the "L" series. Any idea why? I've always invested the extra bucks to get the best quality lens.

16-35L f 2.8
24-70L f 2.8
70-200L f 4.0

[DarkPenguin]

What?!?

[Er1kksen]

Usually L lenses are exotic for some reason due to large apertures or something of that sort... there are non-L macro lenses from Canon that are probably sharper than many of their L lenses, I believe one was the 60mm macro, and there were some in the 100 to 150mm range as well that are quite good.

L doesn't necessarily designate the highest optical quality, or you could make a cheap 85mm f5.6 and call it an L lens. It might not be the most useful lens ever built, but it could be very, very sharp... there are non-L lenses that match L lenses optically, the difference is in things like speed and versatility.

[DarkPenguin]

I own these three Canon lens (see below). I'd like to purchase a normal focal length "macro" lens. From what I see in Canon's lineup there are none offered in the "L" series. Any idea why? I've always invested the extra bucks to get the best quality lens.

16-35L f 2.8
24-70L f 2.8
70-200L f 4.0
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=177601\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

L series lenses are as much about build quality as they are image quality. There are non L's with the same image quality.  Not so the build.