Lens loyalty?

D

dogyakker

Suspended / Banned
Messages
163
Edit My Images
Yes
Looking round the forum I notice people have a canon this, Sigma that and Tokina thingy all in the same kit bag. I tend to buy just Sigma although i do have a Canon 50mm. I know that such and such Macro is considered better than so and so but is there any benefit in buying from one manufacturer?

I tend to do this in most things - all my canoes are from the same manufacturer generally. Am i limiting my choice for no good reason? I would love to hear peoples thoughts on this.

Also does that mean that these "sponsored" Togs who are filling there bags with Canon, Nikon, Tamron etc are limiting their shots potential or is it just that when it really comes down to it their PP skills can make up for lens inadequacies?

Food for thought?

Cheers,
Chris
 
I'm guilty of restricting myself to Canon's offerings....better the devil you know. I do expect that one day I'll give in to the urge to get a Sigma 105 though...it's only time.

Bob
 
I'm not loyal in the slightest. In an ideal world, I'd probably only buy Nikon but not being able to afford Nikon, I go for what I can get. I try to buy the best I can afford and that can be from any manufacturer.
 
IMHO its silly to limit yourself..all brands have their strengths and their weakness, the dogs and the optical gems.

Branding is irrelevant if the results are good.
 
I buy what i deem suits my needs i have a mix of sigma and canon.

I decide on what features are best for my needs. Price also is a factor!
 
I have Champagne taste's and a beer budget so I buy what ever suits the bill and does the job.

I would love to buy all the expensive fast glass that Nikon has to offer but I keep my eye on MPB secondhand stuff and get bits and pieces when I can, I am not too worried about sticking to Nikon I have sigma and Tamron in my bag and there all out perform my abilities so I have nothing to worry about.

If someday I win the lottery or something I will buy all the good stuff then hold my head in hands and realise I need a lot more skill to make them all sing.
 
i have mostly a sigma/canon bag, the sigmas were bought as the best i could afford and have no regrets bout them. if the canons were in budget then i would have went for them over the sigmas purely for the extra quality they supposedly have
 
I like Tamron - own a 17-50 2.8 DiII and a 90mm Macro. Happy with my Sigma 70-300mm and I have a Tokina 11-16mm 2.8 in the post.

Haven`t gone for a Canon lens yet as the alternatives seem to offer more for less money (or indeed more than Canon seems to offer at any price in a couple of instances). Having said that, I haven`t needed a long lens with IS, if so, I`d go for a Canon.

I guess I`d steer away from Sigma due to reports of poor QC, but I`m guessing that this may have been exagerrated somewhat of late.

Seems silly to stick with a given brand though. Always best to review all choices and find out which is best given your needs and bugdet.
 
i like canon so thats what i buy no real reason its just what i like :D
 
My bag is currrently all Nkon.
Everytime I look at a sigma thre is a post or two about their QC issues, so not got one yet. I know I can swap it but it's the hassle.
Thinking about the Tamron 90mm and the Tokina 11-16 but only after I get a 70-200 2.8.
 
DiddyDave said:
I just buy the best Nikon's for the job I want (err... and I have Nikon cameras too :lol:)

Though (when I can get it back from Dellipher), I do have the Tamron 90 Macro, which is ace

DD
Click to expand...

be easier to get a new one and say it is a christmas present:lol:
 
On My E-3 i only use ZD Glass with the exception of my Sigma 150m Macro.

However as that kit is in the process of being sold to fund my incoming D700 :D i am looking at all makes of glass.

I try and learn what is good and bad by the recommendations from other members and get the glass best suited to the job / budget.
 
i bought a sigma 30mm f1.4 earlier this year just couldnt get on with it i dont know why.so replaced it with a nikon 35mm f2.which immedietly seemed so much better as soon as i looked through the viewfinder [if slower].

i realise now i will only use nikon lens on a nikon camera even if it means haveing fewer lens.all my lens are sh i upgrade slowly as i go along when i see a good deal.

thats just me though ime sure others make good lens its just that i prefer nikon.....:thumbs:
 
I've tried to gradually change all my lens kit over to Nikon, but I've kept my Tokina 10-17 fisheye as Nikon don't do anything comparable and the 105mm Sigma micro, as I couldn't justify the extra for the Nikon version of a lens I wasn't sure I'd have any real use of. As it turns out it's so sharp it's made me reconsider my view of Sigma, so a 120-300 might end up back on my wants list,especially as Nikon don't do anything similar.
 
welly said:
I'm not loyal in the slightest. In an ideal world, I'd probably only buy Nikon but not being able to afford Nikon, I go for what I can get. I try to buy the best I can afford and that can be from any manufacturer.
Click to expand...

:agree:

I would love to be able to afford the nikon lenses but I cant.
 
Foggy said:
:agree:

I would love to be able to afford the nikon lenses but I cant.
Click to expand...

Even if you can afford them, its not always the best choice.

For example, I firmly believe that the Tamron 90mm or Sigma 150mm macro lenses are better than anything offered by Nikon.

The trick with non 1st party lenses is to buy wisely. But the price premium doesn't always give you any advantage, and sometimes you are paying for a name, not performance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top