do you use third party lenses?

[Groucho]

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....

One word (OK, one phrase): "automatic horizon correction" - a totally free benefit of having a stabilized image sensor. Fast + VR/IS/SR is the ideal setup, of course. I've had fun shooting my Nikkor 105mm lens with SR on my Pentax recently... although the latest version is, last I checked, the one and only prime available for Nikons with VR at any price. OK, back on topic.

Code - you mentioned Canon's F1.4 cost. To be fair, they do have the 50mm F1.4 which is well under a grand (but still a little pricey!)

Jann, I can't believe the Canon SR said that. I would have been pretty insulted. I don't believe that stat for a second.

Fact is, the quality third party lenses are often better that the OEM stuff, or offer options not available from the OEM. When they're not better, they're usually competitive and far cheaper. Let's say you want a 17-50 or so zoom for your DSLR... Tamron or Sigma will sell you a quite good one for, oh, $400 or so. Nikon wants $1,200, and that's without VR! Want a 24/28-75mm? Tamron's well-regarded 28-75mm usually goes for $350 or less last I checked, Nikon's 24-75 (still with no VR) is about $1,700. If you need 24-75, Sigma will sell you one for $600.

And that's for the most common type of advanced zoom lens there is. Once you get into oddball stuff... well, Canon doesn't even make a fisheye for their APS-sensor DSLRs. (I don't think they have any APS-sensor primes, do they? Nikon has brought out one or two that I can think of.) Nobody makes anything like a Lensbaby. The primes lenses in general from the "big two" are mostly decades-old designs, while Sigma has been slowly releasing brand-new modern prime lenses (including a fisheye.) All of the OEMs have at least a few lenses that are not as good as they should be and the third-parties often beat those. This is certainly true with macro lenses; third-party macros often are extremely nice. The best SLR macro yet made as far as I know is the recent Voigtlander 125mm F2.5. Third-party 105mm macros have beaten all the OEM 100-105mm macros. Tamron's 90mm is still very well respected in its various iterations. Companies like Voigtlander, Zeiss, Hartblei, and others are continuing to make ultra-high-quality third-party glass. Of course, those are, with very few exceptions, all manual-focus lenses.

And those are just the modern ones. If you do your research, you can find some very nice older manual-focus lenses with pedestrian brand names like Vivitar (especially the Komine-built ones and some of the Kiron ones). Speaking of cheap names, if you hunt around, you can find a brand-new well-received-and-quite-cheap manual-focus Samyang 85mm F1.4. There's a ton of interesting lenses out there, once you get out of the OEM catalogs.

To say nothing of using adapters... some people spend a lot of money on adapters or conversions to use Leica lenses on their DSLRs (I think you can adapt/convert them to any of the big 5 DSLR systems except for Sony.) Many use adapters to use a superior lens of a certain type with their body of choice.

As for the lenses being designed for the particular camera... remember that most of the lenses out there for all the systems are older designs that were built for film cameras, they had no idea they'd be used on digital cameras when they were designed. (The one exception being the 4/3rds cameras, which have 100% new lenses - which is probably part of the reason why their lenses are so well-regarded.)

 

[Code]

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

I'll refrain, but I do have a very annoying Hannah Montana song stuck in my head now

Code - you mentioned Canon's F1.4 cost. To be fair, they do have the 50mm F1.4 which is well under a grand (but still a little pricey!)

True, I was only talking about focal lengths around 30mm though, with the price of the Canon 28/1.8 being a pretty strong indicator that they won't be bringing out a shorter f1.4 at a price anywhere near the Sigma 30 price any time soon. Plus we know that 50mm f1.4 are cheaper based on designs that have been around relatively unchanged since the late 1960's (except, of course, the new Sigma 50mm).

 

[jann1033]

Jann, I can't believe the Canon SR said that. I would have been pretty insulted. I don't believe that stat for a second.

as much as i hate canon service , to be fair this was a non canon lens repair outfit

 

[Groucho]

I'll refrain, but I do have a very annoying Hannah Montana song stuck in my head now

I'm lucky - since our girl is only a month old, I, as far as I know, have never heard a Hannah Montana song.

True, I was only talking about focal lengths around 30mm though, with the price of the Canon 28/1.8 being a pretty strong indicator that they won't be bringing out a shorter f1.4 at a price anywhere near the Sigma 30 price any time soon. Plus we know that 50mm f1.4 are cheaper based on designs that have been around relatively unchanged since the late 1960's (except, of course, the new Sigma 50mm).

Yup. Most fast primes tend to be very pricey... Sony included. I wish Pentax's 85mm F1.4 was still in production - used ones consistently go for over a grand. They do have a brand-new SDM-focusing weather-sealed 55mm F1.4 that sells for about $650, not that much more than Sigma's 50mm F1.4. They also have (according to pretty solid information) a brand-new 30mm F1.4 in the pipeline, it will be interesting to see how that performs (especially compared to the their own 31mm F1.8) and how much it costs. The big rumor, which is probably not true, is there's also a 50mm F1.0 coming soon. Probably not true, but a fun thought!

as much as i hate canon service , to be fair this was a non canon lens repair outfit

Whoops, sorry, I missed that. I blame you, putting up a thread like this that I had to read and reply to even though I was already way past my bedtime.

 

[Code]

Speaking of third party lenses.. does anyone watch Time Warp on Discovery Channel? Basically they have some of the best high speed cameras available and come up with all sorts of cool things to film in super slow motion.

Well, I was watching a recent episode the other day, and noticed something that made me chuckle a bit. They were showing how water droplets bounce on the surface of water indefinitely when vibrated, and I saw this and thought "hey that looks mighty familiar"...

It's a Sigma 105mm Macro, the same as I have in my camera bag.. so a $450 lens mounted on a Photron camera whose cost I could only find as "if you have to ask, you don't want to know". Pretty cool.

 

[DBL101]

All I buy are Tamron lenses. I look for good reviews and I can't see spending the money for a Canon lens.

 

[WDWFigment]

I have the Sigma 30 1.4 that everyone here loves, along with the Tokina 11-16. I got the Sigma after reading plenty of reviews from the Disney Photography community (for its dark ride performance) and regular photo reviews as well. As for the Tokina, I got the Nikon 12-24 first, then got intrigued by the Tokina, so I purchased it. After using both, I decided to kick the Nikon to the curb.

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.

I guess I don't quite understand this. Of course factory engineers know more about the products than you (or any of us). That supports the argument that we should buy lenses produced by factory engineers, rather than ones produced by ourselves. There are factory engineers at Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc., just as there are ones at Nikon, Canon, and Sony. Reverse engineering of lenses has come a long way, and the third party companies clearly understand how to put together a quality lens.

That still doesn't mean I understand how to put together a quality lens, but the logical solution to that problem isn't deferring to the OEM manufacturer. Rather, I should defer to whomever produces the best lens (best being a subjective combination of things I can discern: IQ, price, build quality, etc.). If you judge lenses by criteria that you can discern, the logical result is often that you buy a third party lens.

The same thought process applies to purchasing any third party products. There are so many good third party products on the market today (not just in photography) that I can't imagine limiting oneself to OEM products.

 

[The Sloan Ranger]

I can't always afford great Canon glass, so I have a couple of 3rd party lenses. I consider both to be great bang for the buck.

Sigma 24-60 & 70-200

 

[boBQuincy]

I guess I don't quite understand this. Of course factory engineers know more about the products than you (or any of us). That supports the argument that we should buy lenses produced by factory engineers, rather than ones produced by ourselves. There are factory engineers at Sigma, Tamron, Tokina, etc., just as there are ones at Nikon, Canon, and Sony. Reverse engineering of lenses has come a long way, and the third party companies clearly understand how to put together a quality lens.

That still doesn't mean I understand how to put together a quality lens, but the logical solution to that problem isn't deferring to the OEM manufacturer. Rather, I should defer to whomever produces the best lens (best being a subjective combination of things I can discern: IQ, price, build quality, etc.). If you judge lenses by criteria that you can discern, the logical result is often that you buy a third party lens.

The same thought process applies to purchasing any third party products. There are so many good third party products on the market today (not just in photography) that I can't imagine limiting oneself to OEM products.

I work for a major manufacturer of construction equipment. Our machines are popular and our replacement parts are expensive so there are many 3rd party parts available. Some are quite good, some are junk, *none* meet all the specifications of the original parts! Reverse engineering can be done well, I do it too, but the reverse engineers never have the original specifications to go on. Since they can only use what is readily available they can only guess what the OEM engineers were thinking.

Of course a lot depends on the complexity of the product but today's lenses have programming in them and that's tough to completely reverse engineer, one reason some 3rd party lenses don't work with a new model camera until the lens is reprogrammed.

When I refer to "factory" it is the OEM. Of course some 3rd parties make some good lenses, but most of the reasons for using them seem to be lower cost. I just prefer to use the ones designed by the company that made the camera if I can afford them.