Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Lenses for my 20D

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
June 18, 2005 10:30:48 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Are there any difference in quality with Quantaray, Tamron, Sigma or other
brands VS Cannon? Quality VS price? Anything I should generally stay away
from. Thanks in advance for any comments and advice.

Robert

More about : lenses 20d

Anonymous
June 18, 2005 12:36:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Robert" <rlg@NO.premier1.net> wrote in message
news:zOOdnX6mv9rDvynfRVn-qQ@seanet.com...
> Are there any difference in quality with Quantaray, Tamron, Sigma or other
> brands VS Cannon? Quality VS price? Anything I should generally stay away
> from. Thanks in advance for any comments and advice.
>
> Robert
>
>
Generally speaking, Quantaray is a brand to stay away from, they are lenses
made to a price by either Tamron or Sigma, low quality and low price. The
are Ritz Camera's house brand. Tamron and Sigma both make some decent
lenses, some are as good as their Canon equivalents, like Tamron 90mm f2.8
Macro lens. Some of Canon's lower end lenses, like the 28-90 f4.5-5.6,
28-105 f4.5-5.6 (not the f3.5-4.5) and some others, can be pretty dire, too.
The way I look at it, if there's a lens that you'd use sparingly, but if you
need it, you really NEED it, look at Tamron or Tokina. If it's a lens that
you'll depend on, time after time, like I do with my 28-135 IS Canon, stick
with Canon. I bought a Sigma 17-35 f2.8-4 several years ago, because I felt
my sparing usage of this lens wouldn't justify the cost of the Canon 17-35,
the then current equivalent, which just barely out tested the Sigma. But,
with the advent of the smaller sized sensors on digital SLRs, I've found
myself using that lens more than I thought. Its limitations became very
obvious, and I've bought the Canon 16-35 f2.8, a much better lens.
Also, Sigma seems to have compatibility problems with Canon cameras that are
introduced subsequent to the introduction of the lens. Not all have this
problem, but why play roulette if you don't have to? Neither Tamron nor
Tokina have these issues, by the way.

--
Skip Middleton
http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Anonymous
June 18, 2005 4:45:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Opinions will be all over the map, but I rarely buy third party lenses due
to compatibility issues. Stick with Canon lenses. Also, I've had some truly
awful experiences with some brands, like Sigma, so I'll never buy another
Sigma product again. Maybe it's the "once bitten twice shy" effect, but I
owned three different Sigma lenses, and all three failed mechanically.

"Robert" <rlg@NO.premier1.net> wrote in message
news:zOOdnX6mv9rDvynfRVn-qQ@seanet.com...
> Are there any difference in quality with Quantaray, Tamron, Sigma or other
> brands VS Cannon? Quality VS price? Anything I should generally stay away
> from. Thanks in advance for any comments and advice.
>
> Robert
>
>
Related resources
June 18, 2005 7:20:24 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In general you get what you pay for. Quantary is Sigma and both have
serious compatibility problems. Phoenix is Vivitar, which is junk. Tamron
and Tokina seem to be pretty good for the price, but I quite frankly stick
to Canon lenses.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"Robert" <rlg@NO.premier1.net> wrote in message
news:zOOdnX6mv9rDvynfRVn-qQ@seanet.com...
> Are there any difference in quality with Quantaray, Tamron, Sigma or other
> brands VS Cannon? Quality VS price? Anything I should generally stay away
> from. Thanks in advance for any comments and advice.
>
> Robert
>
>
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 2:02:41 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Quantary I believe use both Tamron and Sigma. You get what you pay for, the
more expensive in both Sigma and Tamron are quite good. If you can't afford
the camera manufacturers lenses then they can be a good compromise.

"Tony" <tspadaro@nc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:YYWse.21694$td.1647439@twister.southeast.rr.com...
> In general you get what you pay for. Quantary is Sigma and both have
> serious compatibility problems. Phoenix is Vivitar, which is junk. Tamron
> and Tokina seem to be pretty good for the price, but I quite frankly stick
> to Canon lenses.
>
> --
> http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
> home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
> The Improved Links Pages are at
> http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
> A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
> http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
>
> "Robert" <rlg@NO.premier1.net> wrote in message
> news:zOOdnX6mv9rDvynfRVn-qQ@seanet.com...
>> Are there any difference in quality with Quantaray, Tamron, Sigma or
>> other
>> brands VS Cannon? Quality VS price? Anything I should generally stay
>> away
>> from. Thanks in advance for any comments and advice.
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>
>
>
Anonymous
June 19, 2005 2:11:30 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Robert" <rlg@NO.premier1.net> wrote in message
news:zOOdnX6mv9rDvynfRVn-qQ@seanet.com...
> Are there any difference in quality with Quantaray, Tamron, Sigma or other
> brands VS Cannon? Quality VS price? Anything I should generally stay away
> from. Thanks in advance for any comments and advice.
>
> Robert
>

You've bought an expensive body - don't stick cheap lenses on it. I have
bought one Canon L series lens for my 350D - so far, the 70 - 200mm f2.8.
The results as so good, so far away from the 28 to 105mm f3.5/45 I also own,
that the 24-70 f2.8 L series is on its way. I also own the EF 50mm f1.4,
it's quite good; and at less than half the price of an L series lens it is a
good buy (if you have a use for a 50mm lens).

You 20D will wear out/break in the next few years, your lenses won't. Buy
the best.

John
!