do you use third party lenses?

[jann1033]

my macro lens worked for 2 days , is doing the same not focusing out of macro* and while they will fix it the csr told me i should only buy canon lenses, "80 % of photographers don't use any third party lenses"...told her i kind of found that hard to believe but wanted to take an unscientific poll to see how wrong or right she is.
so nothing to do with lens/brand bashing just do you use third party lenses?

*the good news, is i am feeling less and less guilty about replacing that lens

 

[WVDisGeek]

I would find it hard to believe as well. The fact that Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc. are out there making lenses to fit every DSLR under the sun, would lead me to believe that someone is using them, otherwise, they wouldn't be making them.

I have a couple older lenses that are third party, and one of my friends has a couple in his bag too. Even the Pentax 18-250mm that I have was made under license using Tamron technology and Pentax glass, so I guess it would be a hybrid third party lens (if there is such a thing!).

Don't forget the Sigma 30mm 1.4 thread on these boards. There seem to be a LOT of people not only using that one, but loving it!

 

[Gdad]

That statistic probably includes A LOT of people who buy a DSLR kit and never buy anything beyond that kit lens. I would not hesitate to buy a lens I wanted because it was a 3rd party- some are quite good. Lately I have been eyeing the Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 and the Sigma 50mm f1.4- not like I really need either one though.

While I do not have any in my kit right now I have had some in the past and had mixed results.

Sigma 30/1.4 - Loved it but sold to go full frame
Sigma 150/2.8 - Liked it for macro but irritated me as short tele- sold it
Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 - Returned after a few days - really bad IQ - probably a bad sample
Tokina 11-16/2.8 - Liked it a lot too but also sold to go full frame
Tamron 18-200 - Served me well for what it was- sold when I got the 18-200VR

 

[Code]

I own a Sony DSLR and have 6 lenses, and only one of them is Sony. There is very high value to be found in the combination of in-body stabilization and third party lenses. Great for me, bad for Sony, but oh well

I own all of the following third party, and love them all, but I'll also list any downsides:

Tamron 17-50/2.8 - stellar IQ, quick AF, build quality not great but passable esp. for the price (I cringe looking at C/N 17-55/2.8 prices, esp. since N has no VR)
Sigma 10-20 - I love this lens even more than I thought I would, though it took me a few tries to find a good copy.
Sigma 30/1.4 - My favorite lens. Nothing bad to say. I love it so much that I've owned it in two systems.
Sigma 105/2.8 Macro - also awesome IQ. I only MF for macro stuff, but AF is slow when used as a short telephoto.

The other two lenses I own are Sony 50/1.4 and Minolta 70-210/4. I plan on replacing the Minolta with Sigma 70-200/2.8 HSM when my wife will let me.. could be a while

 

[zackiedawg]

Gdad's got the idea - the reason you hear stats like '80% never buy 3rd party lenses' is because the enthusiast groups like us represent a fairly small slice of the overall DSLR sales pie. Professionals are also a small slice - the majority by far are folks who buy a DSLR as a camera to snap photos when needed - pure snapshooters who will likely never buy any additional lenses other than what came with their camera kit. And the few that do often don't know about third party lenses - they need another lens, they are shooting with brand x, so they look for brand x lenses. The camera is like an appliance to them - necessary, but just a tool like a toaster or a microwave.

To the enthusiast groups, the camera lovers, the professionals - cameras are more than appliances...and we spend more time to learn about lenses, understand specs, and shop around for all available lenses within the specs and price we are looking for. That opens us up to third party lenses as a viable option.

Personally, my lens collection so far is:

Sony 18-250mm (actually a Tamron lens licensed by Sony with some moderate changes)
Minolta 50m F1.7 (Since Sony bought Minolta, this qualifies as a 1st party lens)
Tamron 200-500mm (needed a big zoom, Sony didn't make anything to compare. Love it!)
Sigma 30mm F1.4 (most recent purchase, and so glad I did. Marvelous lens, much cheaper than Sony equivalent, and excellent image quality with great bokeh).

I'm looking to add either a Sigma 10-20 superwide or Tamron 10-24 superwide zoom to my collection soon - so my third party lenses are outnumbering my main brand lenses significantly! (and like Code, having Sony does make it easier and more budget conscious to buy 3rd party lenses since I don't have to worry about buying the more limited selection of VR/IS lenses - ALL lenses are VR/IS, even old used lenses and primes!

 

[WillCAD]

My first SLR was a kit put together by the dealer, with a Canon Rebel G body and a Sigma 28-80 lens. Since them I've bought 2 more Sigma lenses, and several Canons.

By and large, I like the Sigma lenses I have, though my latest Sigma, an 18-125, is much softer than any of my Canon lenses and I would prefer the Canon 18-200 EF-S.

I'm not a strict "brand loyalty" person, but if I have a good experience with a particular brand, I am much more likely to buy more of that brand later.

 

[PoohJen]

Hi Jan,
I really loved my first Sigma walk-around, and 18-125 - which I bought 2d hand on ebay!!! My zoom is also a Sigma. I wouldn't hesitate to look at their products when buying a lens.

I also have the 28-135 IS Canon (my main lens now - came as kit) and the nifty fifty by Canon.

My Sigma walk around got lots of hard use, doesn't extend/contract to full lenghths any more - I believe a trip to the sandy beach had something to do with that. Whichever lens I choose to use depends on the setting/need.

 

[boBQuincy]

No, in general I do not use 3rd party lenses. I do have a Zenitar 16 since I wanted a wide angle but was not in a position to spend the $$$ for a Canon. Now that I have a Canon 10-22 I very rarely use the Zenitar.

I prefer to use factory parts and accessories, whether it is Canon, GM, Honda, etc. I feel the factory engineers know more about the products they design than I do and unless there is a very good reason otherwise that I am better off using that which was designed specifically for the application.

It is not out of brand loyalty, but the idea that the parts/accessories will fit and work properly.

 

[Gdad]

We need a poll on WHY people have chosen 3rd party lenses.

• Cost savings?
• Availability / Delivery Issues?
• Brand X does not even make a XXmm fx.x?
• 3rd Party is Superior to Brand X's XXmm fx.x?

I can think of 3rd party lenses I have considered that fill all of these.

 

[oogieboogieman]

Well, I have a Sony DSLR system that I don't use anymore with a Tamron 28-75 sitting in a box. I guess you can say that I have third-party lenses. I don't use the Sony because I can't afford to shoot two systems!

Still looking at the Sigma 30mm for my Olympus system. I've heard that it would make an AWESOME Father's Day present. I wish the DW would just get the message!!!

 

[kaffinito]

I do think that that statistic is for folks who buy a DSLR and never need to go outside of the kit lenses or basic lenses for their cameras.

So far I have one third party lens, the Sigma 10-20. I got it based on the reviews, and have not been disappointed with the quality. Now if I could just figure out where to stand to get a decent shot with the darned thing I'd be ecstatic!

I'll probably end up with more if I can't get my "lens lust' under control.

 

[fitzperry]

That statistic probably includes A LOT of people who buy a DSLR kit and never buy anything beyond that kit lens.

This was my first thought as well. Either that or they are referring exclusively to pros who are able to invest in only the best glass, but I suspect even that number would not approach 80%. Two of the four lenses in my current kit are third party--Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 and Tokina 12-24 f/4. Bought both because I believed them to be a better value than the Nikkor equivalents, which I could not afford. While the comparable Nikkor lenses may be superior, I doubt that I'd see enough difference to justify the expense.

 

[boBQuincy]

We need a poll on WHY people have chosen 3rd party lenses.

• Cost savings?
• Availability / Delivery Issues?
• Brand X does not even make a XXmm fx.x?
• 3rd Party is Superior to Brand X's XXmm fx.x?

I can think of 3rd party lenses I have considered that fill all of these.

I see I am well in the minority here for sticking with OEM lenses but I am used to that.

I bought my Zenitar purely for cost savings. I really want a large aperture semi-wide lens and Canon does not make an affordable one for now (their 24mm f/1.4 is not affordable to me). The Sigma dirty thirty is appealing but I am hoping Canon will follow Nikon's lead and go after that market segment with a non-L 30mm f/1.4 or similar. If I bought the Sigma then Canon would announce theirs the next day.

 

[Code]

The Sigma dirty thirty is appealing but I am hoping Canon will follow Nikon's lead and go after that market segment with a non-L 30mm f/1.4 or similar. If I bought the Sigma then Canon would announce theirs the next day.

If you want it, why wait for something that may or may not happen? Who cares if it doesn't have Canon stamped on it.. can't think of anyone that owns it that doesn't love it, and I'm pretty sure we've got owners from every brand represented here. Plus no reason to believe anything Canon made at f/1.4 would be less than a grand based on the 24/1.4 and 35/1.4. They already make the 28/1.8 non-L, and even that's slightly more $ than the Sigma 30/1.4. Also, it even has a much longer warranty!

 

[Chikabowa]

I only have brand lenses, but that is because I rely on my equipment to perform heavily for me and I need it to work each and every time. With Nikon service and repair, it's just easiest to stay with brand (although I have to admit there is a part of me that just doesn't trust off-brand).

 

[jann1033]

Hi Jan,
I really loved my first Sigma walk-around, and 18-125 - which I bought 2d hand on ebay!!! My zoom is also a Sigma. I wouldn't hesitate to look at their products when buying a lens.

I also have the 28-135 IS Canon (my main lens now - came as kit) and the nifty fifty by Canon.

My Sigma walk around got lots of hard use, doesn't extend/contract to full lenghths any more - I believe a trip to the sandy beach had something to do with that. Whichever lens I choose to use depends on the setting/need.

funny, same thing happened to my old film body, salt spray gets ya everytime

i only have one third party lens and a tamron teleconverter since i sold my tokina fisheye but the teleconverter is great, the fisheye was a very good lens( just didn't use it a ton) and the macro was a hundred bucks new so not really complaining about that either ( and really not bad when it's working ). with my old film body i had 2 third party lenses i hated so steered clear from them for a while when i went digital but the tokina and great reviews/shots i seen from other such lenses have made me less nervous about them.

and since I seem to have a certain attraction for dog lenses , i figure the chance of me getting the 1 in a million rotten copy is high, no matter what the brand

 

[wenrob]

I haven't owned any "high end" Nikon lenses but I had the 18-200VR and still have the 18-105VR. Both nice and get general purpose jobs done. You'd think w/the VR I'd favor the 18-105 but nope, I prefer my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. When it comes to sharpness it wipes the floor with the Nikon. I wish it focused a smidge faster and I have to use my feet a little more but I consistently choose it over the Nikon(s) I have/had. And count me as another Sigma 30 fan, stopped down that baby is razor sharp. I have a feeling that once I learn to nail focus with a tiny depth of field it will hardly leave my camera.

 

[Gdad]

You'd think w/the VR I'd favor the 18-105 but nope, I prefer my Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. When it comes to sharpness it wipes the floor with the Nikon.

That does not surprise me at all. I would take a good fast lens over vr any day.

Cue In-Body IS camera users comments on my mark...3....2....1....

 

[WVDisGeek]

Cue In-Body IS camera users comments on my mark...3....2....1....

OK, here goes...

I do think the in-body IS is a benefit as ALL lenses, by default, become VR/IS/etc.

However, I will be the first to admit, based upon MY experience, the Pentax in-body IS does help, but not as much as Pentax claims. It may be 1-2 stops vs. 3-4, but it does help and it does work with EVERY lens.

Just trying to be fair!

 

[handicap18]

I have 4 3rd party lenses, 2 Sigma's and 2 Tamron's. I got them mostly because of cost, but they also are very good and high rated lenses.

Sigma 30mm f/1.4
Sigma 10-20mm
Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Macro
Tamron 200-400mm f/5.6

I got both Sigma's new and both Tamron's are used. I use the Sigma 30mm the most,

I also have 4 Nikkor lenses, 18-135mm, 70-300mm VR, 50mm f/1.8, 70-210mm f/4 (oh and I also have the Nikkor 18-70mm, but only use as a backup when the 18-135mm is out).

Most likely my next lens will be a 3rd party lens. I want a mid/standard f/2.8 zoom and the Nikkor lenses are WAY out of my price range.