How many of us are Canon Lens Snobs?

[toiletliterature]

Hi guys,

I was just wondering, how many of you all use canon glasses exclusively? Cause i was just reading the 50mm f.18 prime and the 17-40 f4L and there were mentions of the sigma 18-50mm f2.8. It is much cheaper but i dont see many people talking about it.

I think the whole Canon camera so use canon lens must be best impression has lead me to not ocnsider 3rd party lenses at all. What do you guys think? esp the pros here. =)

[Jackals]

soon to be one.....

[txv611]

Not a snob. But third party lenses do have some compatibility problems. Focusing problem is one major one ... you just cant get quiet and accurate AF with these NON-Canon lens. I tried and I was very disappointed.

Do a search in the forum and you see will that some have had to send me in non-canon lenses more than twice becos of focusing errors. Recalibration of non-canon lenses can take more than 1 month, this is unacceptable for some professional users who cant afford to leave their lenses at the factory.

BTW, dun try to send in your non-Canon lens and your Canon camera to Canon service centre and tell them to check calibration. They will not touch your non-Canon equipments, let along test them together.

My friend had this focusing problem, contact the 3rd party lens manufacturer who denied liabilities and asked him to check his camera body. When he ask Canon, the canon people does not want to take in non-Canon lens and mentioned that a product cannot be checked when using with non-official parts. He never did got around solving the problem and sold his lens in the end.

Should one use 3rd party lenses? Up to individual but I reckon I would buy one with warranty at least, so that I do not have to pay for calibration cost should it be neccesary.

[toiletliterature]

Just because of the AF you avoid 3rd party altogether?

[n0d3]

Originally Posted by toiletliterature Just because of the AF you avoid 3rd party altogether?

Once you've tried out Canon's USM or Nikon's SWM, its hard not to. I haven't tried out Sigma's HSM so I wouldn't know.

But there are some lenses by Sigma/Tamron/whatever that are worth buying over their Canon/Nikon counterparts due to the mainly the price/performance. E.g. the 24-70mm by Sigma and so on. etc.

[jsbn]

Originally Posted by toiletliterature Hi guys, I was just wondering, how many of you all use canon glasses exclusively? Cause i was just reading the 50mm f.18 prime and the 17-40 f4L and there were mentions of the sigma 18-50mm f2.8. It is much cheaper but i dont see many people talking about it. I think the whole Canon camera so use canon lens must be best impression has lead me to not ocnsider 3rd party lenses at all. What do you guys think? esp the pros here. =)

The usage of 'exclusive Canon glass', 'exclusive Nikon glass', 'exclusive Minolta glass' shld never ever get in the way of good photos regardless of brands of choice.

To be honest, u dun invoke interest to another person (who's disinterested in photography or an ameuter/noob photographer) with the brand of equipment or 'exclusive glass usage'. Leave the marketing to the companies and the big name commercial photographers who earn a living thru their photos AND company product endorsements/sponsorships.

Let us concentrate on getting good photos instead and get the glass of the particular focal length you'll require to capture the scene regardless of brand.

U can be holding onto an 'all-Canon/Nikon/Minolta/Carl Zeiss/Sigma/Tamron/Tokina' lineup, but that doesn't guarantee u 120% success with excellent photos as the commercial full-time photographers had endorsed.

[fWord]

Yes, but I hope it's forgiveable that I'm using the kit lens only because I cannot afford the Sigma 17-70mm.

[kelccm]

Originally Posted by jsbn The usage of 'exclusive Canon glass', 'exclusive Nikon glass', 'exclusive Minolta glass' shld never ever get in the way of good photos regardless of brands of choice. To be honest, u dun invoke interest to another person (who's disinterested in photography or an ameuter/noob photographer) with the brand of equipment or 'exclusive glass usage'. Leave the marketing to the companies and the big name commercial photographers who earn a living thru their photos AND company product endorsements/sponsorships. Let us concentrate on getting good photos instead and get the glass of the particular focal length you'll require to capture the scene regardless of brand. U can be holding onto an 'all-Canon/Nikon/Minolta/Carl Zeiss/Sigma/Tamron/Tokina' lineup, but that doesn't guarantee u 120% success with excellent photos as the commercial full-time photographers had endorsed.

Having BRANDED equipments doesn't make you a better photographer.

[jsbn]

Originally Posted by fWord Yes, but I hope it's forgiveable that I'm using the kit lens only because I cannot afford the Sigma 17-70mm.

Well, there's no shame in using kit lenses.

Actually, I'm wondering if the quest for equipments had reached its zenith.

These days, I'm seeing, hearing and experiencing more and more ppl who snuff at kit lens provided and drool over ultra high-end equipment instead, even though the kit lens provides the proper focal length in which the new convert is interested to pursue in the speciality area of photography - like landscapes or portraits (Canon provides 18-55mm, Nikon provides 18-55mm / 18-70mm, Minolta provides 18-70mm kit lenses)

Plz dun misunderstood this as a flame at all newbies or the ppl here.

I'm wondering if this digital era of high turnover rates of equipment had made ppl forget that the very soul of photography doesn't lie with the branding of the equipment but using the right tool for the right job and getting the photo which represents the scene which u're seeing/experiencing that particular moment and touching ppl the way u want to touch them.

[solarii]

Originally Posted by toiletliterature Just because of the AF you avoid 3rd party altogether?

I feel this statement is a little sweeping... I'm sure txv611 is just sharing his experiences on why he prefers original manufacturer lenses.

Honestly, I feel you should try out the individual lenses yourself and come to a conclusion. Its very myopic to judge lenses based on who makes them... each manufacturer has their fair share of both good lenses and problematic ones. You can't just junk them together and discuss them as a whole, which is what yr thread encourages people to do.

And as jsbn has mentioned, all to often, people get caught up in the equipment and neglect the photography. People should start focusing on soft skills instead of "whipping it out and comparing whose is bigger" which is what this thread, though thinly disguised, is really about.

[Stoned]

Originally Posted by txv611 Focusing problem is one major one ... you just cant get quiet and accurate AF with these NON-Canon lens.

Funny, my Sigma and Tamron lenses all AF perfectly. It's strangely coincidental that about 95% of Sigma and Tamron's clientele's lenses also AF properly. How bizarre.

[frostyIntrepid]

yup it does AF properly, just that the focussing speed is a little slow compared to original lenses.

[Garion]

I guess the general mindset is "If you can afford to buy it (top end original gear), why not?" Sometimes I think its just the 'feel good' factor of having such equipment, especially at events and stuff, the no. of ppl toting pro gear is staggering. A sea of white L and only a couple of 3rd party black lens (excluding Nikon, lol).

Sometimes when you flip thru magazines or books and discover the most amazing or award winning photographs being taken by the humblest or simplest of photo equipment, its a humbling experience, and makes one think twice about dumping all that hard earned cash on that next L lens.

[raptor84]

Quite true. Bust most of the good wildlife shots i see in mags were taken with 2.8 telephoto zooms /primes Majority of them tend to use the orginal equipment although i remember seing one very nice pic with a sigma 70-200 2.8 .

[cerebrus]

Originally Posted by toiletliterature Hi guys, I was just wondering, how many of you all use canon glasses exclusively?

Is a person with a 'toy' cam allowed to post here?

[solarii]

Originally Posted by cerebrus Is a person with a 'toy' cam allowed to post here?

Hmmm why not? Nothing exclusive here is there? Besides no one will know who u are and what u're using anyway...

[txv611]

Actually I do not quite agree about the part about dumping cash on "L" lenses.

Example: If I buy a 17 - 40L at the current market price of $1150, use it for 2 years and sell it for $900 - $950, my loss is only about $250 (I get to use a brand new good performance lens with very high resale value)

Now compare to buying a Sigma or Tamron and try selling it 1 - 2 years later, your loss is just as much and can often be even more then depreciation of the "L" lens.

My buddy bought an used "L" lens a year ago.... use it to shoot many nice pictures.... then he sold it last month (Sold in less than 6 hours) for $45 more than what he paid for then.

Another friend bought a 3rd party XXXXX lens, use it for 7 months, tried to sell it here unsuccessfully for 2 weeks.. until he lower his selling price to 65% of the new price. See the point ...?

Originally Posted by Garion I guess the general mindset is "If you can afford to buy it (top end original gear), why not?" Sometimes I think its just the 'feel good' factor of having such equipment, especially at events and stuff, the no. of ppl toting pro gear is staggering. A sea of white L and only a couple of 3rd party black lens (excluding Nikon, lol). Sometimes when you flip thru magazines or books and discover the most amazing or award winning photographs being taken by the humblest or simplest of photo equipment, its a humbling experience, and makes one think twice about dumping all that hard earned cash on that next L lens.

[solarii]

Originally Posted by txv611 My buddy bought an used "L" lens a year ago.... use it to shoot many nice pictures.... then he sold it last month (Sold in less than 6 hours) for $45 more than what he paid for then.

Either yr buddy got a really good deal or his buyer got a really bad one.

Ok ignore me...carry on. Such a thing does happen, selling used lenses at a profit.

Just feeling corny.... I had to say it for kicks.

[niki]

Quote: Is a person with a 'toy' cam allowed to post here?

to many of us here.. our cameras are our toys anyway.... haha.. some make a living outta it.. but people like me... press press.. make myself feel good.. hahaha..

[honda]

3rd party lens can be very good n can offer something the original lens maker dont offer eg many of the sigma lens. Try out the actual lens u are interested in. Eg sigma 18-50/2.8 focus very fast, faster than the canon primes without usm, but slower than the usm lens n is very accurate in AF. Buying a lens is an investment, the money is stored in the lens value til the day u want to sell it. Can u make better use of the money than store it in the lens?
Can u afford to?http://singaporephoto.blogspot.com