Cosina is nothing more these days than, as they say in the manufacturing industry, a jobber. They manufacture, to others specifications, cameras and lenses under other peoples brand names. This neither makes them good or bad. It makes them a business.
They do also manufacture some items under their own name and sell them. This is nothing new at all. Kind of like Nikon. I hear several people talk about Nikons having Sony sensors. They don't have Sony sensors. They have Nikon sensors that are designed by their engineers. Sony is given the job of producing those sensors to Nikons specifications. Sony is prohibited from using any of Nikons proprietary technology in their own sensors unless licensed to them from Nikon and since Sony has entered into the digital market vicea versa.
To the OP, the difference between a $39.00 Cosina lens and a $300 Canon lens is materials, design and quality control in manufacturing. A $39.00 lens will not have a lens that costs $100.00 to grind to precise specification and polish it to near perfection. Nor will it have $30.00 worth of the finest coating materials or even $10.00 of the finest spun metal for lens bodies.
For $39.00 you get plastic bodies and mechanisims, cheaf AF motors and lenses that are mass ground and polished. They may even be optical plastic instead of the highest quiality optical glass. The coatings are thin soft and on one side of the glass. The difference will be in the viewing after the photos are taken.
When you are dealing with SLR's be they film or digital, Glass is all important. Any accomplished photographer can take a D40 or Rebel with top quality glass and produce images with outstanding resluts. No one, not even the famed and fabled such as Ansel Adams, Annie Lebowitz, etc, can take a D3 or 1Ds MIII with a lousy piece of glass and do the same thing. It is physically impossible to get more out of the lens than it is capable of.