|
|
Post by kiev4a on Jun 26, 2006 13:48:44 GMT -5
Although I used Nikons for most my shooting I'm not one of those who believes a lens has to have Nikkor on it to be any good. Besides, my pocketbook can't hadle the prices of a lot of the Nikkors.
Recently, I picked up an 80-200 Tokina f2.8 zoom for about 1/5 the cost of the 2.8 Nikkor zoom. The pictures produced by the Tokina are super IMO and I doubt there are many instances where the Nikkor would be noticably better unless one is blowing the negs up to 16 x 20.
I have been trying to get all my zooms down to f2.8. Today, I was thrilled when I was the high bidder on a near-mint Series I Vivitar 35-85mm f2.8 zoom in Nikon ai mount.--again at about 1/5 the Nikon cost.
Between the Tokia and the Vivitar I should have most situations covered with 2.8 zooms. I'm a happy camper, with a lot more money in my pocket than I would have if I was a Nikkor snob.
|
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Jun 26, 2006 14:38:22 GMT -5
I have to agree that there is nothing wrong with non manufacturer lenses and they can offer excellent preformance on par with manufactures lenses. A very good price to performance ratio is always a winner in my book. Enjoy your new zooms.
Bob Hammond
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Jun 26, 2006 15:09:00 GMT -5
Bob:
I'll be the first to admit there are some really bad non manufacturer lenses around, too. In many cases I think durability is the big difference between Nikkors and the after market lenses. If I was shooting for a living I probably would have a different attitude.
|
|
mickeyobe
Lifetime Member
Resident President
Posts: 7,280
|
Post by mickeyobe on Jun 26, 2006 15:48:12 GMT -5
I have never used the manufacturers' lenses. I have always been quite happy with Vivitar and Sigma quality.
The very worst lens I ever had was a 35mm f3.5 Simcoe, whoever they were. It was for my Exakta but was not part of my kit for very long. It was probably melted down years ago to make a coke bottle.
Mickey
|
|
|
|
Post by nikonbob on Jun 27, 2006 6:13:14 GMT -5
Wayne
There are also some dogs in the manufacturers lines and the build quality should be similar if comparing the pro line in one to the pro line in the other. I guess you just have to pick and choose in both. I have had good luck with Tamron SP lenses, a Tokina and a Sigma or two. The original Vivitar Series 1 lenses were built like tanks from what I have seen and perform very well. The biggest surprise was a Kiron 24/F2 that had amazing performance. It is really nice to have options.
Bob Hammond
|
|
|
|
Post by kiev4a on Jun 27, 2006 9:10:23 GMT -5
Bob:
Kiron made some great lenses, including some of the Vivitar Series I stuff. I've got the 80-200 f4 Kiron macro zoom and the 28-85mm zoom, both very sharp. Wouldn't trade my Tokina 80-200 f2.8 for anything and once had a 35-135 Tokina that was outstanding. Some other Tokina stuff hasn't been as good. Haven't had much to do with Tamron. Every so often I still run across pictures shot back in my Nikon F days with a 28mm 2.8 Sigma I had--my first WA. I was a really sharp aftermarket lens for those days. The Vivitar 35-85 2.8 zoom gets good reviews. Seems to be sort of a benchmark for other lenses in that range. Heavy, however, but I'm familiar with that reait having used Kirons:)
|
|
