03-19-2018, 07:51 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-19-2018, 07:56 PM by goran h.)
I can´t see it is a problem to write about anything with some relation to Photography in this forum. Some threads here are of no interest for me, but have a meaning for others. I have no right to stop or destroy a thread that doesn´t suit me (but someone else try to do that).
But ...I think it is a problem when a person is criticised (and sometimes insulted) for everything he writes. It is necessary to have respect for every person on the forum.
I will just say this, but not start a war here, so I find no meaning for any further discussion.
Back to the discussion I think the worst lens I have used optically speaking is Sony 16-50 however nobody gets it because he wants a good lens it's selling because it's tiny and has 16mm
The Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8 USM L - because every single damn copy I tested was substantially different and that at this price point.
Chief Editor - opticallimits.com
Doing all things Canon, MFT, Sony and Fuji
FWIW photozone was well there in 2004, I am one of the oldest members here, the forum software was changed in 2010 and the valuable data was removed.
The worst lens I've used was the Minolta 18-70 kit zoom. I got it with the old 7D camera (my first DSLR) because I had to shoot with something until I got a better lens and eventually sold it for peanuts.
Canon's own 18-55 (non-IS) comes second. Thankfully it wasn't even mine.
I tried a really horrible lens once, the Canon 75-300, but I prefer to think that doesn't count since I never used it for any extended periods of time.
Actually, none of the lenses I ever got by choice could be construed as "horrible" - I learned early on that getting bad gear "just until I can afford something better" is not a valid strategy (from the financial standpoint) because they're a total writeoff (you have to give them away for free or keep them because nobody wants to buy them). Better to find a loaner somewhere.
Well I have owned and extensively used Canon 18-55 and 75-300 and they gave me plenty of keepers, but that was on 6MP sensor, now I know how bad they were surprisingly the new kit 18-55 is very decent nothing to do with the old one
Interesting but typical web bickering. Isn't it great.
03-20-2018, 10:40 AM
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2018, 10:50 AM by goran h.)
My worst lens from the film time was the Pentax 28-70f4. It was unusable at apertures larger than f8. This lens was recommended by a couple of lens testers, so I learned to be sceptical to lens tests. Maybe the lens was decentered, but I had never heard about that.
The worst lens from the last years is the Panaleica 15/f1.7. I tried two samples and both had severe decentering.
I've always found that even a mediocre lens that focuses accurately and isn't de-centered produces decent results stopped down.......
I guess I'm so over the moon when I get a a properly focusing/functioning lens little things like CAs (solvable) and flare seem more like nit-piking!
Are there any really poor lenses these days? ....looking at the cheapest new lens that I've ever bought......the AF-P 18-55mm VR and is Nikon's cheapest lens.........none of the older AF-D series zoom lenses can match it!