Buying multiple identical lenses and keeping the best one... is this a waste of time?

[splproductions]

Is it a waste of time to purchase 2 or 3 copies of a lens, test them out at home, and keep the one that performs the best? (Returning the others). I just seem to hear too many lines like, "I got a lousy copy", or "Maybe you got a bad copy", etc. I'm not a total noob, but I'm not a pro, and I'm not sure I could necessarily spot a "lousy copy" other than if I had multiple copies to try out.

BTW - I'm talking maker glass - Canon or Nikon - not 3rd party stuff.

 

[Derrel]

That process is called "cherry picking".

 

[o hey tyler]

I wouldn't do this, but that's just me. Too much of a waste of time, and probably a large hit to the bank account (depending on what you buy).

It's not tough to assess a front/back focusing issue even as an amateur user, especially with the help of forum members. Issues with on-brand glass is pretty slim. I'd research the particular lens you're buying to see if there have been a lot of issues with that lens in the past year.

Do you have any glass in mind?

 

[sovietdoc]

It is a waste of time when you're buying lenses like 70-200 f/2.8L IS II USM

But if you're buying old 24-70 f/2.8L's it may be worth it. Some of those are quite the terrible, others can be pretty decent.

I wanna see you buy 3-4 copies of 800 f/5.6L IS USM..

 

[splproductions]

I just bought a 24-70L new about four months ago. I haven't noticed any issues with it, so I'm guessing it's fine. But that's what I'm worried about. Maybe someone more experienced would look at the images from my 24-70 and tell me I got a lousy copy based on their knowledge of the lens.

The glass I have in mind is the 50mm 1.4 and the 85mm 1.8. I already bought both of them, and they should arrive today.

I just don't ever want to find out down the road (once the return period has passed) that someone else's is noticeably sharper than mine, but I didn't realize it was supposed to be that sharp. (Or some other issue like CA, etc). I'd much rather just return an item to a dealer than have to send something in to Canon.

Maybe I'm worrying too much - just wanted to know if there is any reason to do this.

 

[Big Mike]

The one lens that comes to mind, is indeed the old 24-70mm F2.8 L...but I wouldn't worry too much about the others. Rather, I'd suggest you look into using the micro adjust feature (if your camera has it). There is a specific test chart/device that you can buy (rather expensive though), or you might look into other options. I seem to recall someone creating a (beta) software to automatically set the macro adjustment.

But really, don't worry too much about what other people think. Evaluate your own photos with your 'real world' photos. And even then, don't become too much of a 'pixel peeper'. An old-school test is to print out an 8x10 and hold it at arms length. If that looks good, that should be good enough for 98% of people.

 

[table1349]

For what you will pay in shipping you could probably do better by going to a good Photography shop, shoot the different examples they have on hand and pick the one you like. Our local shop has a computer with calibrated monitor set up for customer use for just those kinds of situations.

 

[KmH]

I used to do that with kart racing engines (10 engines at a time, to pick the 3 best from), but never felt the need to do it with camera makers lenses.

 

[sovietdoc]

But really, don't worry too much about what other people think. Evaluate your own photos with your 'real world' photos. And even then, don't become too much of a 'pixel peeper'. An old-school test is to print out an 8x10 and hold it at arms length. If that looks good, that should be good enough for 98% of people.

I am in those other 2% of the people.

 

[table1349]

For what you will pay in shipping you could probably do better by going to a good Photography shop, shoot the different examples they have on hand and pick the one you like. Our local shop has a computer with calibrated monitor set up for customer use for just those kinds of situations.

I used to do that with kart racing engines (10 engines at a time, to pick the 3 best from), but never felt the need to do it with camera makers lenses.

You used to go to a good Photography shop and try 10 kart racing engines? Wow, now that is a fuuullll service photography shop.

 

[bratkinson]

Looking at it as a merchant would, if I discovered someone was doing that, I'd stop selling to them. Period. Why should a merchant, or, 3 merchants together, each selling an identical item to Mr/Ms X, have 2 of them returned? They have no choice but to 'eat the loss' and sell it as 'demo'. Alternatively, they could send it back to the manufacturer and they 'eat the loss' on what is likely to be a perfectly good lens, and now sell it as a refurb.

In my book, what is/has been done is quite unethical. Do you order 3 identical new cars from 3 dealers, test drive each one for a week and return 2? It's no different, in my book. No matter what you call it, SOMEBODY is taking a loss. And, as mentioned numerous times on this site and elsewhere, each of the lenses one tries may all be on the 'high side' of tolerances, and your camera on the 'low side', or some other combination like that. Together, they may not make a pixel-peeper-perfect image when blown up to a wall-sized mural. And for that, you return it?

If you are so awful-concerned about getting a less-than-perfect copy, then get a camera that has MFA capabilities and learn how to use it. If the ONE lens you acquired still won't give the desired results, then send it back to the manufacturer, and they will set it right...for free!

 

[orb9220]

"each of the lenses one tries may all be on the 'high side' of tolerances, and your camera on the 'low side', or some other combination like that. Together, they may not make a pixel-peeper-perfect image when blown up to a wall-sized mural. And for that, you return it? "

Yep this article explains these kind of situations best. "This lens is soft" and other myths

And for those that are fine tuning lenses to bodies with mentioned buying multiple copies method. Why not buy a camera with fine tune lens ability. And save all the extra costs and labor involved?

I will buy a copy if it is bad and exchange it for another. But wouldn't buy 3 copies at a time kind of thing. As consider that unfair to other buyers and to the merchants selling it. But on the other side of the coin for people like me that don't mind buying used or refrub's it's a plus.

But it just might be me and my take on it. But way too many new to photography obsess way to much over pixel peeping and worried about lens performance with tripod static charts test pics and micro-sharpness pixel peeping. When just going out to shoot in real world situations and looking at the results. Any defective lens will pretty much rear it's ugly head soon enough.

If it ain't obvious to you by then. Well then just might Not be a problem with lens after all.
.

 

[Overread19 7]

Read the article posted on tolerances because that helps clear up most of hte misconceptions on this matter.

Secondly remember that the vast majority of people buy good lenses that work perfectly fine, they just never post about it. The ones that do post about it are the ones that have problems with them. So even "bad" lenses still sell a vast majority as good copies.

If you want a perfect working setup I would instead get the lenses you want and then send them along with the camera body(s) you have to the manufacturer for calibration. That will, of course, only work on same brand lenses and camera bodies each time. So if you've (for example) Sigma and Canon lenses on a Canon camera body setup you would be best to:

Send the canon lenses + bodies to Canon for calibration
then
Send the sigma lenses and Canon bodies to Sigma

That would give you lenses calibrated for the camera bodies that you use

 

[2WheelPhoto]

I used to do that with kart racing engines (10 engines at a time, to pick the 3 best from), but never felt the need to do it with camera makers lenses.

^^^that topic deserves its own pic thread

 

[amolitor]

A couple points, first of all lensrentals.com has a vested interest in minimizing the reality of variability in lenses. Not that they're liars, by any means. It's just there's a vested interest here, so the natural tendency even in a very honest person is to take one of the more extreme points of view that seem to be within the range of "true" and present that.

Second, Ctein sez that variability matters. Now, Ctein is many things, some good and some bad, but a careless scientist he ain't.

Personally, I don't care much about stuff like this, but I am not everybody.