Anyone swear by 3rd party lenses?

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

The only 3rd party lens I own is the Tamron 60mm f/2 macro which I really like in terms of sharpness. However, It was recently dropped from about 1.5 feet onto the garage floor ( someone had unzippered a compartment on my bag ) With that one little bump, not even enough to leave a mark on the outside, required $200 worth of service to make it focus again. My canon 10-22 also fell at the same time, and is perfectly fine.

 

[shootermcgavin]

Wow I really like this shot, and I love my Tamron 18-270, it's better than my Canon 50mm 1.8 but this weekend I think I'm going to throw something else in the mix.. although after seeing the pic below I have been thinking about getting a 5d as my main camera, so many things to choose maybe it's better if I just buy everything and bet on the world ending in 2012.

I :heart: my Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 on the 5DmkII

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

I love my Tamron 18-270, it's better than my Canon 50mm 1.8

Better how?

 

[Overread36]

Sigma, Tamron, Tokina and a few other 3rd party lens makers are fully capable of producing lenses which are optically identical to or even superior to the likes of Canon and Nikon. They also make a selection of lenses which the big players don't produce; giving them not only good quality, but also new market areas where they are able to shine.

Generally speaking Canon and Nikon retain the edge just with build quality refinements, but many times for the average user the build quality differences really don't make that much a difference with regard to regular, normal use (esp at the pro end of the 3rd party series).

There are some 3rd party options which even beat their main rivels - the Sigma 50mm f1.4 is a prime example of a lens which fully beats the older design Canon; meanwhile options like the sigma 70-200mm f2.8 OS isn't able to beat the canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS L MII, but commands a lower price in the market.


In the end the best key is to work out the use for the new lens, then see the market options both first and third party; from there you can go on read reviews and try out in shops and the like to compare them against each other; taking into account specifications, costs and features. Be careful of reviews that review a lens on its own and keep mind to the date they are published - a lens that several years ago was "the best you could get" can quickly becomes something that is superseded by better market options.


As for myself, I currently use more 3rd party than own brand - a Sigma 150mm macro, 70mm macro, 8-16mm and a Tokina 35mm macro - all of which are top rate optics and certainly perform very well (and the 3 macros have to compete against the Canon 65mm macro in my bag, so they don't have it easy on the competition side ).

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

If it helps egg you on....here is a 100% crop from that image.

Wow I really like this shot, and I love my Tamron 18-270, it's better than my Canon 50mm 1.8 but this weekend I think I'm going to throw something else in the mix.. although after seeing the pic below I have been thinking about getting a 5d as my main camera, so many things to choose maybe it's better if I just buy everything and bet on the world ending in 2012.

I :heart: my Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 on the 5DmkII

 

[Ron Evers]

That is very good imagery Bitter. I looked up that lens & was surprised that it was not very expensive for a modern lens.

 

[Netskimmer]

I have a Tamron 17-50 2.8 and I love it.

 

[KmH]

Bitters image is more about being made by a full frame body, than the lens.

While some of the 3rd party lenses equal or somewhat exceed camera maker lens performance, forward compatiblity of the 3rd party lenses is always iffy because their electronics and camera communication protocols are reverse engineered. Most 3rd party lenses do not meet, or equal, camera maker lens performance. and build quality.

 

[GooniesNeverSayDie11]

These are the two biggest gripes I have with 3rd party lenses (and this doesn't go for EVERY lens, but the majority I have used )

1 - build quality
2 - slow/noisy focus.

The two positives though, are that they are often much lighter than their main brand counter parts, and typically much much cheaper. Often times you can get a faster lens as well.

For instance, the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 vs Canon 17-40 f/4. The Tamron gives you 10mm extra on the zoom, and 1 stop faster of an aperture and IS. However, its plastic, not sealed, not internal zoom, no full time manual focus, and the USM AF on the Canon is insanely fast. Also, the 17-40 will work on a full framed camera. So its a trade off. At the end of the day most of the 3rd party lenses are not going to surpass the L lens or top dollar Nikon counterparts, but on a budget, they certainly won't do a shabby job either.

 

[shootermcgavin]

Wow that is awesome!!! Who knows what I'll walk away from the camera store tomorrow with.

 

[Big Mike]

The Tamron 17-50mm is better compared to the Canon 17-55 F2.8 IS. Both are made for crop sensors only. The Canon is a fantastic lens but expensive. The Tamron has good IQ and it's less than half the price. Better value with the Tamron but the Canon is sitll the better lens.
I would suggest that it's a similar case when comparing most jigh end 3rd party lenses to top Canon or Nikon lenses.

 

[MissCream]

Sigma <3

 

[Ron Evers]

Bitters image is more about being made by a full frame body, than the lens.

I do not understand why Keith, a greater FOV yes but a crop out of the central portion I reason would still be as sharp.

 

[enzodm]

Waiting now for a Sigma 50-150/2.8, aimed at portraits. However, like Ron I'm a user of old lenses, of course all 3rd party at this point .

 

[dxqcanada5]

I have the discontinued Sigma 50-150mm f/2.8 and it is exceptionally sharp ... even wide open, which is the reason I got a fast lens. Well worth the price.
Great build with internal zoom and focus.
Though it would have been nice in FF, but then it would have been a lot more expensive.

I have had many 3rd party lenses ... and most were very poor IQ and build ... some are better, but they fill the price gap when you cannot afford the "good stuff".