Metal or plastic mount?


Status
Not open for further replies.

versionsix

New Member
Feb 17, 2006
94
0
0
Hi all, I walked into John yesterday and they offered me two pieces of information/advice. (i'm rather new to the dslr world. just got a d70)

1) the glass used in lens with a plastic mount can never be better than the glass used in a lens with a metal mount

2) for zooms that go up to 200, tamron and sigma make better lenses than nikon. (ie. 28-200G nikon is not recommended compared to the sigma and tamron equivalent)

could someone enlighten me with regards to the two above statements? (ie, are they true and why?)

cheerios
samuel
 

espn

Deregistered
Dec 20, 2002
21,899
0
0
Planet Nikon
Muahaha... try Cathay la...
 

versionsix

New Member
Feb 17, 2006
94
0
0
so it's not true?
 

alechim

Senior Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,728
0
0
Redhill
in my opinion, it does not matter so long the barrel is non reflective...
 

mikerfns

New Member
versionsix said:
2) for zooms that go up to 200, tamron and sigma make better lenses than nikon. (ie. 28-200G nikon is not recommended compared to the sigma and tamron equivalent)

cheerios
samuel
This statement (pure bull***t btw) is usually made by someone who has a vested interest in selling you Sigma/Tamron lenses.
 

mikerfns

New Member
versionsix said:
Hi all, I walked into John yesterday and they offered me two pieces of information/advice.

1) the glass used in lens with a plastic mount can never be better than the glass used in a lens with a metal mount
Find somewhere else to get your advice. The quality of optical glass in a camera lens has absolutely NOTHING to do with the lens mount material.

These jokers are lying to you. :nono:
 

drektster

Member
Aug 28, 2005
149
0
16
Well, i think plastic is a cheaper alternative matrerial for a lenses.

if i am buying a low end kind of lenses i would not bother if the mounting is of metal or plastic.

but if the lenses is costing me a bomb. then perhaps a metal mounting is important to me.

i dun want to sent my lens for repair just becos of a boging lining there.
 

S11loop

Senior Member
Feb 11, 2005
3,530
3
38
Pasir Ris
i think this is full of crap .... :bsmilie:
 

billpepsi

New Member
Jan 2, 2005
1,269
0
0
The 3rd Rock
Did you hear it from Samuel (the boss son)? of his assistant?

versionsix said:
Hi all, I walked into John yesterday and they offered me two pieces of information/advice. (i'm rather new to the dslr world. just got a d70)

1) the glass used in lens with a plastic mount can never be better than the glass used in a lens with a metal mount

2) for zooms that go up to 200, tamron and sigma make better lenses than nikon. (ie. 28-200G nikon is not recommended compared to the sigma and tamron equivalent)

could someone enlighten me with regards to the two above statements? (ie, are they true and why?)

cheerios
samuel
 

versionsix

New Member
Feb 17, 2006
94
0
0
i heard it from this slightly plump indian guy, don't know who he is. after all, i'm rather new to the world of dslr and lenses so i didn't dare to shoot back and just quietly walked out. hahahhahaha.... thanks guys for all the TRUE advice. cheers
 

billpepsi

New Member
Jan 2, 2005
1,269
0
0
The 3rd Rock
versionsix said:
i heard it from this slightly plump indian guy, don't know who he is. after all, i'm rather new to the world of dslr and lenses so i didn't dare to shoot back and just quietly walked out. hahahhahaha.... thanks guys for all the TRUE advice. cheers

Only deal with Samuel.

But, which lens do you intend to get? may be the guys here at CS can help you out.
 

Artosoft

Senior Member
Aug 31, 2005
3,710
0
0
Tanjong Katong
Not all elements on lenses is made from glass. Sometimes it is made from plastic. Or element made from combination of glass and plastic.

Lenses maker may say it is due to save weight on lens or special purpose of element which can not be achieve by using glass only, which is true sometimes, but of course the hidden agenda is to save cost :bsmilie: .

Regards,
Arto.
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
did you hear them wrongly? it doesn't seem right that they are giving such advices. sometimes when we are tired we only hear parts of a sentences here and there then join them up in our heads.

I think he is trying to say plastic lens elements can never be better than glass is it? then it got linked to plastic elements usually come with plastic mounts? :dunno: i wasn't there.. just guessing.

The mount has totally nothing to do with the lens construction. Though the logic might be right to say that plastic mounts are usually cheap lenses and cheap lenses cannot be good. :dunno:
 

versionsix

New Member
Feb 17, 2006
94
0
0
i'm looking for a zoom that takes me to at least 200mm. i've read on forums here, ken rockwell and dpreview that the 55-200 is not that great whereas the 28-200G reviews have been mostly positive. wasn't that keen on the 70-300 cos 70 seems a bit long for me as a walkaround lens.

So then I was shopping around for the 28-200 and one of the places was john. walked in, asked if they had the lens and they said they don't carry it and wouldn't recommend it cos i should be looking at sigmas and tamrons for that range.

so i mentioned that i heard good things about the lens and that the glass was good for that price then they said but it has a plastic mount, how can that glass compare to the glass in metal mounts?
yeah, so i guess they associated the plastic mount to cheap lenses which is associated with poor glass, like what yanyewkay said.. heh. sorry if this post is a bit drama mama.

now i'm aiming for a not too expensive wide angle. any suggestions?
 

yanyewkay

Senior Member
Sep 22, 2004
3,924
0
0
Cons digger.
aahh... i see where the interpretation went wrong now...
 

alechim

Senior Member
Aug 8, 2004
1,728
0
0
Redhill
I think what he meant as "glass" is the whole lens itself...it is quite common to describe a lens as glass...

And if what lens you asked, you can get the nikkor 18-200 VR
 

gadrian

New Member
May 24, 2003
1,242
0
0
44
Singapore
www.snauzzer.com
versionsix said:
Hi all, I walked into John yesterday and they offered me two pieces of information/advice. (i'm rather new to the dslr world. just got a d70)

1) the glass used in lens with a plastic mount can never be better than the glass used in a lens with a metal mount

2) for zooms that go up to 200, tamron and sigma make better lenses than nikon. (ie. 28-200G nikon is not recommended compared to the sigma and tamron equivalent)

could someone enlighten me with regards to the two above statements? (ie, are they true and why?)

cheerios
samuel
1) hmm.. the Nikon 28-80 was a pretty good lenses.. and the current 18-55 and 28-200 are good too. I have a 28-200.. and it produces stunning images.

2) cannot totally agree with this statement. BUT.. the Tamron 28-200 XR was a good lens, in comparison to what Nikon had to offer at that time.
 

longkangman

Senior Member
versionsix said:
Hi all, I walked into John yesterday and they offered me two pieces of information/advice. (i'm rather new to the dslr world. just got a d70)

2) for zooms that go up to 200, tamron and sigma make better lenses than nikon. (ie. 28-200G nikon is not recommended compared to the sigma and tamron equivalent)
LOL, very interesting theory.

Should try the 18-200mm from nikon and compare with the rest you will know the different. :)
 

markccm

Deregistered
Jan 25, 2003
2,095
0
0
Asylum, Ward 4444
Visit site
Dennis said:
Hahaha best theory of all. So your paper $2 is not worth as much as your plastic $2. :bsmilie:
now that's a thought.
hahaha....

oops.. OT liao, wait tio PM... :sweat:
 

Status
Not open for further replies.