Third Party Lenses: Pros and Cons
I am (perhaps) a bit unusual in that I have never owned a lens not made by the manufacturer of whatever caneta body I happen to be using.
I need to qualify that, a little bit, by saying I've used MFT Panasonic lenses on Olympus cameras. But that's a different ballgame.
So... do you third party lenses? If so what are the pluses and minuses?
I need to qualify that, a little bit, by saying I've used MFT Panasonic lenses on Olympus cameras. But that's a different ballgame.
So... do you third party lenses? If so what are the pluses and minuses?
I have a Fuji body and 2 Fuji lenses. One because it came as a bundle with the body, and i saved money; the other because I couldn't find any third party equivalent (27mm pancake).
My third lens is the Sigma 56mm f/1.4, which I bought instead of the far cheaper equivalent from Viltrox, because the image IQ is so much better, and at the same time it is also nearly half the price of the Fuji equivalent, which does not give noticeably better IQ.
My third lens is the Sigma 56mm f/1.4, which I bought instead of the far cheaper equivalent from Viltrox, because the image IQ is so much better, and at the same time it is also nearly half the price of the Fuji equivalent, which does not give noticeably better IQ.
Quote:
Quote:My third lens is the Sigma 56mm f/1.4
Exactly what I've recently been considering! Do you use it much, Malc? And if so, what for?
It's my 'go-to' lens for street. I use it more than the 27mm now...
I occasionally use third party brand lenses, often good value for money - though there can be potential pitfalls to consider.
One plus is that more get sold because they are usually offered in a range of mounts - whereas camera manufacturers lenses only fit their own lens mount. This usually results in more third part lenses being sold and thus lower priced.
A possible downside for Nikon, Canon and L mount FF ML photographers is that if a lens design would benefit from a wider bayonet mount (it does not always), the narrow Sony bayonet mount can limit optical performance.
Independent brands tend to get products on the market sooner - with 150-600 independent zooms being all there was in the focal length range for a few years.
Often but not always manufacturers lenses have higher resolution - sometimes at double the price. Interestingly Tamron are now officially co-operating with Nikon making some Nikon Z mount lenses at around half the price point of higher resolving Nikon near equivalent S grade lenses.
Is higher resolution always needed - you decide
While the top performing lenses from Nikon and Canon have up to about 70% more resolution in an MTF 50 test than Olympus and Fuji "crop sensor combinations" - I consider if a photographer cannot easily produce a good 20x16 inch print from most current Olympus and Fuji - maybe the photographers skill is suspect.
Still on resolution - MTF 50 tests usually score at least 15% higher on a 45 MP camera than on a 24 MP camera.
Older independent brand lenses do not always work on the latest cameras - and sometimes cannot even be updated - with some potential obsolescence. On the other hand Canon FD lenses from about 25 years ago do not work on EOS bodies - and Nikon "screwdriver AF" lenses do not AF on Nikon ML bodies.
Grays of Westminster recently tested a Z mount Voigthlander manual focus Z mount lens and found although good manual focus images could be taken via the viewfinder, focus peaking not working with this lens could be a limitation.
Summing up - with appropriate research - I consider independent brand lenses can be a viable option for many photographers.
One plus is that more get sold because they are usually offered in a range of mounts - whereas camera manufacturers lenses only fit their own lens mount. This usually results in more third part lenses being sold and thus lower priced.
A possible downside for Nikon, Canon and L mount FF ML photographers is that if a lens design would benefit from a wider bayonet mount (it does not always), the narrow Sony bayonet mount can limit optical performance.
Independent brands tend to get products on the market sooner - with 150-600 independent zooms being all there was in the focal length range for a few years.
Often but not always manufacturers lenses have higher resolution - sometimes at double the price. Interestingly Tamron are now officially co-operating with Nikon making some Nikon Z mount lenses at around half the price point of higher resolving Nikon near equivalent S grade lenses.
Is higher resolution always needed - you decide
While the top performing lenses from Nikon and Canon have up to about 70% more resolution in an MTF 50 test than Olympus and Fuji "crop sensor combinations" - I consider if a photographer cannot easily produce a good 20x16 inch print from most current Olympus and Fuji - maybe the photographers skill is suspect.
Still on resolution - MTF 50 tests usually score at least 15% higher on a 45 MP camera than on a 24 MP camera.
Older independent brand lenses do not always work on the latest cameras - and sometimes cannot even be updated - with some potential obsolescence. On the other hand Canon FD lenses from about 25 years ago do not work on EOS bodies - and Nikon "screwdriver AF" lenses do not AF on Nikon ML bodies.
Grays of Westminster recently tested a Z mount Voigthlander manual focus Z mount lens and found although good manual focus images could be taken via the viewfinder, focus peaking not working with this lens could be a limitation.
Summing up - with appropriate research - I consider independent brand lenses can be a viable option for many photographers.
On my Sony bodies I use Sony (and Zeiss Batis) as well as independent brand lenses. Sony doesn´t always offer the glas I want or their lenses are too expensiv. For example I like the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 Di III VXD G 2 (what a name) and I use it very often. It´s much cheaper and lighter than the Sony equivalent and it offers very good quality - for my requirements. In one sentence: I buy and use the lens I need and don´t really care, who made it (as long as I can afford it).
I shoot Canon and currently only have Canon lenses. However in the past I have owned a number of Tamron and Sigma lenses. In fact after getting my first DSLR in 2007 (Canon 400D), I purchased a Sigma 17-70 2.8-4.5. It was a big step up from the kit lens and it was my only lens for a good few years. It was pretty sharp and focussed well, despite the whiny noise of the motor!!
I think third party lenses are good way for users on a tight budget to get the focal lengths they perhaps couldn't afford with the main manufacturer. You just need to look at the lenses Sigma are turning out now to see that!
I think third party lenses are good way for users on a tight budget to get the focal lengths they perhaps couldn't afford with the main manufacturer. You just need to look at the lenses Sigma are turning out now to see that!
As well as modern Sigma & Tamron lenses I have a Tokina 100mm Macro Sony E fit and until recently a Nikon fit Tokina 17-35 mm both excellent quality.
I am very tempted by certain third party prime lenses I must say.
But to be honest, zooms are so versatile - especially when you are grabbing shots at events - that I hesitate. And manufacturers' zooms are fine, by and large, in terms of providing the results I need including for publication sometimes.
But to be honest, zooms are so versatile - especially when you are grabbing shots at events - that I hesitate. And manufacturers' zooms are fine, by and large, in terms of providing the results I need including for publication sometimes.
So tempted by this bit of Sigma glass:
LINK
Maybe someone will talk me out of it! 😀
The issue for me is always how much use will I make of it? This is, for APS-C, a portrait lens but I don't really do portraits other than candids. For other indoor use it may be a bit long. A dilemma.
LINK
Maybe someone will talk me out of it! 😀
The issue for me is always how much use will I make of it? This is, for APS-C, a portrait lens but I don't really do portraits other than candids. For other indoor use it may be a bit long. A dilemma.
Quote:So tempted by this bit of Sigma glass:
LINK
Maybe someone will talk me out of it! 😀
The issue for me is always how much use will I make of it? This is, for APS-C, a portrait lens but I don't really do portraits other than candids. For other indoor use it may be a bit long. A dilemma.
If the quality is the same as the Fuji version they launched, and which I have bought, then it is a superb little lens. I use it for street work in situations where I cannot get close enough to use my 27mm, and find that cropping does not present any problems at all.
