Which brand for Nikon?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Guest, Jul 8, 2013.

  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Looking at e-Pay website for a Nikon 14mm wide angle lens; I see brands
    apart from Nikon such as Rokinin, Pro-Optic, Samyang, Bower, and Sigma
    (a few of which I have never heard of) as much cheaper substitutes.

    Anybody can give me any advice re these brands at all?
     
    Guest, Jul 8, 2013
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Guest

    Guest Guest

    for the most part, you get what you pay for.

    check dpreview for tests on some of the better ones (they don't bother
    with crap).
     
    Guest, Jul 8, 2013
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Guest

    Sandman Guest

    They're cheaper for a reason.

    If you can't afford Nikkor, consider Sigma or Tamron. Both offer good
    value for the money, but both still aren't as good as Nikkor.

    For a decent superzoom, the Tamron AF 28-300mm F/3.5-6.3 is a pretty
    good choice.

    For a short lens, the Sigma 28mm/1.8 is a really excellent lens.

    Tamron also makes a really good 70-200/2.8 that can easily replace
    Nikkors own.

    I have one Samyang, and it's the 8mm fisheye one. Not terribly satisfied
    with that one.

    For a shorter zoom, there's the Tamron AF 28-75mm F/2.8, but I don't
    have that one (I have the Nikkor 24-120mm/4)
     
    Sandman, Jul 8, 2013
    #3
  4. Guest

    RichA Guest

    Optically, the Rokinon and its derivatives are very good, close to the Nikon lenses at between 1/3rd and 1/8th the price. However, you do give up some build quality and AF. The other higher end after market lenses are a question. If the Sigma's or Tamrons are 1/2 the price of the Nikon's, they are worth looking at, but not if they are 2/3rds the price, unless AF is a must.
     
    RichA, Jul 8, 2013
    #4
  5. Guest

    otter Guest

    The Samyang, Bower, Rokinon 14mm are all the same lens, built by
    Samyang. Maybe Pro-Optic is too - not sure. This is a very sharp 14mm
    lens, but it is entirely manual focus and aperture. It has complex
    mustache distortion, but that is easily fixed with a lens profile for
    LR/ACR or similar apps.

    Let me just quote the summary from
    http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/532-samyang14f28eosff:

    "Samyang 14mm f/2.8 IF ED Aspherical UMC may be the surprise product of
    the season. It's very affordable yet performing up there with the very
    best big boys. However, it's not a flawless lens, of course. Its primary
    strength is an extremely high resolution across the image frame combined
    with minimal CAs. There're few if any lenses which can rival the Samyang
    here which is nothing short of sensational for such an low cost product
    (again - see the provided sample images if you question our findings).
    There's a tiny bit of field curvature but it's really not overly field
    relevant. The quality of the bokeh is also very decent for a lens in
    this class. The huge bulk-like front element can produce flare problems
    but we've seen a similar behavior with competing lenses including the
    all-mighty Nikkor AF-S 14-24mm f/2.8 ED. The biggest weakness of the
    Samyang is the rather extreme amount of complex barrel distortion
    (mustache style) which is difficult to correct during post-processing.
    If you're into architecture photography this will produce headaches.
    Another problem is the rather hefty light falloff at f/2.8-f/4 although
    that's rather typical for an ultra-wide angle lens. Our sample had a
    rather strange focus characteristic but once we were aware of the
    infinity focus setting (see the introduction) the real world results
    matched our lab findings.

    The mechanical quality of the Samyang lens is surprisingly high. Most of
    the main body is made of metal whereas you can feel the cost cutting
    measurements in the plastic parts (front cap) but even so the quality is
    very decent. To date Samyang lenses are purely mechanical beings -
    there's no electronic coupling whatsoever. The EOS version does not
    provide AF nor an electronically controlled aperture so the
    compatibility is limited to the camera mount. This may be something to
    get used to but it's probably an acceptable compromise regarding the
    fantastic value of the lens. Hopefully we'll see several more wide angle
    lenses by Samyang in the future - what about a small 18mm f/4 for
    instance ? :) "

    This was a review of the Canon version, but the Nikon version should be
    similar. Note that this is considered an ultra-wide angle lens for a
    full frame camera, but not terribly wide on a crop camera.

    I have one, and like it. It is certainly worth the cost. Manual focus
    is not that bad, even if using it handheld. Just set it on f/8, set the
    focus a little shy of infinity, and the enormous depth of field will
    take care of the rest.
     
    otter, Jul 8, 2013
    #5
  6. Guest

    David Taylor Guest

    FWIW: I have the Tamron 10-24 mm zoom, and I've been pleased with it.
    The coverage is good (so you aren't always changing lenses back to get
    that 24mm shot). The focus was a little temperamental on my D5000 (DX
    sensor), but much better (even though not perfect) on the D5200 (which
    has a more advanced focus sensor).

    I would consider Tamron again, and perhaps Samyang if I could tolerate
    lack of automation. Try one in your local photo shop.
     
    David Taylor, Jul 8, 2013
    #6
  7. Guest

    Mr. Strat Guest

    You'll be best off to save up your money and stick with the
    manufacturer's lenses. Over the long term, you won't regret it.
     
    Mr. Strat, Jul 8, 2013
    #7
  8. Why? I am not trying to start a war, genuine question.

    David
     
    David Hare-Scott, Jul 8, 2013
    #8
  9. Guest

    DanP Guest

    Nonsense. Manufacturer lenses cover a wide range in quality terms and some third party lenses offer better quality for money when compared with the original manufacturer's lenses.

    What I regret is buying the kit lenses.


    DanP
     
    DanP, Jul 8, 2013
    #9
  10. Guest

    MC Guest

    Not true. OK, so you buy the camera, it is nice to have complimentary
    kit. However, it is not always the case that the camera manufacturer's
    lenses are any better than the third party stuff. Also, the "brand
    leaders" will always add a premium to their lenses because they believe
    that if a customer is going to buy into a particular brand, then those
    customers are quite likely, and even happy, to buy their lenses,
    regardless of price, especially if those customers believe they are
    buying superior quality. However, the lenses by these "brand leaders"
    are not necessarily that superior and often the third party lens
    manufacturers have been known tol offer better quality at a far lower
    price.

    MC
     
    MC, Jul 9, 2013
    #10
  11. Guest

    PeterN Guest

    I think you were given well intentioned advice. If you look through the
    archives, you will see much discussion about 4rd party lenses. Some can
    be very good, and some can be lousy due to manufacturing issues. I have
    had a personal negative experience with Sigma, where Sigma was trying to
    claim their ill fitting lens was because of a Nikon manufacturing
    defect. (I admit though, that the person involved is no longer with
    Sigma.) OTOH, some of my friends and fellow members of my camera Club
    have had good experiences with Sigma, Tokina and Tameron. These are a
    lot less expensive than OEM lenses,. Depending on what you are shooting
    for, they may very well be fine for your purposes, I don't know if you
    are close enough to a camera store, where you can use your lens. Just
    from reading your post you have budget constraints. Have you considered
    purchasing a used lens from a place that will allow a reasonable return
    policy. In the past I purchased three of my Nikon lenses used, and after
    thirty years, they are still working ifne. (None are AF lenses.)
     
    PeterN, Jul 9, 2013
    #11
  12. Guest

    J. Clarke Guest

    If it's a manual-everything lens there shouldn't be problems, but third-
    party lenses with autofocus and autoaperture sometimes run into problems
    with specific models--the manufacturer of the lens may or may not fix
    them for you when that happens and may or may not charge for the service
    depending on the model and age.

    If you google "Sigma Nikon incompatibility" or "Sigma Canon
    incompatibility" you'll find some examples of the sorts of things that
    can happen.
     
    J. Clarke, Jul 9, 2013
    #12
  13. Guest

    J. Clarke Guest

    The latest version of the 18-55 Canon which is the kit lens for most of
    their line is also quite good optically, and from a reliability
    viewpoint would have to be pretty bad to be worse than the Canon 17-85
    (when you can find repair kits on ebay you know it's _bad_ and yes I
    have one and yes I have had to repair it).
     
    J. Clarke, Jul 9, 2013
    #13
  14. Guest

    otter Guest

    Well intentioned, maybe, but given by people with no direct experience
    with the particular 14mm lens in question, as far as I can tell. I'm
    talking about the Samyang 14mm, sold under all the other brands he
    listed except Sigma.

    Search the archives at sites like POTN, LL, and DpReview. You'll see
    the lens is well liked by many good photographers who could afford to
    spend more if they needed to. Comparisons show the Samyang has better
    resolution than many of the name brand lenses which sell for much more.

    As for other third party lenses, Sigma is kicking butt with it's new
    35mm 1.4 "Art" lens, and the Tokina wide angle zoom is pretty well
    thought of. The Tamron 24-70 f/2.8 VR is a close second only to the
    Canon 24-70 f/2.8 II, but at a fraction of the cost. In fact there are
    many third party lenses that out-perform their name-brand rivals.
     
    otter, Jul 9, 2013
    #14
  15. Guest

    Guest Guest

    the only advantage to the sigma 12-24 was that it was full frame, which
    doesn't matter on a d70. otherwise, it's a mediocre lens.

    the tokina 12-24 is a decent alternative, and even works on full frame
    at the longer end.

    the 11-16 wasn't out at the time the d70 came out. now there are
    several options in the ultra-wide category.
     
    Guest, Jul 9, 2013
    #15
  16. Guest

    RichA Guest

    It was a decent lens, good optics, good build. But because it isn't telecentric, it might not be as good as a common 18-55mm kit lens today.
     
    RichA, Jul 9, 2013
    #16
  17. Guest

    PeterN Guest

    That may well be true. I agree that there are some fine third party
    lenses out there. But, I have had personal negative experience with
    Sigma. The issue with many third party lenses is consistency, and
    failure to hold value if you want to resell. I have a Nikon 75-150 E
    lens, which is sharp as a tack, and quite contrasty. It's construction
    is rather cheesy. However, it is currently selling for about the price I
    paid for it.
    But in the end, it's the photographer who makes the picture, not the lens.
     
    PeterN, Jul 9, 2013
    #17
  18. Guest

    Robert Coe Guest

    : In article <>,
    :
    : > Looking at e-Pay website for a Nikon 14mm wide angle lens; I see brands
    : > apart from Nikon such as Rokinin, Pro-Optic, Samyang, Bower, and Sigma
    : > (a few of which I have never heard of) as much cheaper substitutes.
    : >
    : > Anybody can give me any advice re these brands at all?
    :
    : You'll be best off to save up your money and stick with the
    : manufacturer's lenses. Over the long term, you won't regret it.

    Third-party brands are useful while you find out how serious you're going to
    be about photography. Yes, the realization that your equipment isn't good
    enough, and that you have to move up to move on, is aggravating. But so is
    owning a pile of expensive equipment that you seldom use.

    If I could have anticipated my current situation seven years ago, when I
    bought my first DSLR, I might have done things differently. But digital
    photography has changed so much in the interim that I would probably have
    replaced most of my equipment by now anyway. I'm guessing it would have cost
    me more, not less.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Jul 20, 2013
    #18
  19. Guest

    J. Clarke Guest

    Personally if I had known then what I was going to be doing now, I'd
    have gone with a good bridge camera over my DSLR kit and put the
    difference in cost into lights.
     
    J. Clarke, Jul 20, 2013
    #19
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.