Quality of cheap branded lenses vs kit lenses
Discussion
I'm currently putting a christmas list of lenses together. The Minolta D5 comes with an 18-70 kit lens which seems quite able. I'm looking to go for a telephoto but don't want to break the bank. I've seen Minolta 70-210 F4 on ebay, and have heard fairly decent comments based on its performance. I'm hoping It should be possible to find one for less than £100.
I know it's a balancing act for manufacturers to supply kit lenses cheap enough to make it worthwhile for them but also with enough quality to make it worthwhile for the consumer. How does a kit lens compare with an equivalent 'budget' model from any of the lens manufacturers? I've seen that some lenses can be bought for £60 ish brand new depending on model etc. Would even these cheap models be better than supplied kit lenses?
I know it's a balancing act for manufacturers to supply kit lenses cheap enough to make it worthwhile for them but also with enough quality to make it worthwhile for the consumer. How does a kit lens compare with an equivalent 'budget' model from any of the lens manufacturers? I've seen that some lenses can be bought for £60 ish brand new depending on model etc. Would even these cheap models be better than supplied kit lenses?
IMHO
Photographic equipment is like Hi Fi - you pay £100 and it'll do the job, spend £500 and it'll sound good, spend over £1000 and it'll sound great. But 10 times as good? Not a chance.
Cheap lenses do the job, they tend not to be that fast, so won't work well in dim conditions, they also tend to lose focus at the edges - and of course they are less robust.
You get's what you pays for.
The way I approach every purchase in life now, is either buy the cheapest, or buy the best I can possibly afford. I've never yet regretted buying the best (in Hi Fi, lenses or cars!)
as I say... IMHO.
Steve
>> Edited by GetCarter on Sunday 30th October 10:03
Photographic equipment is like Hi Fi - you pay £100 and it'll do the job, spend £500 and it'll sound good, spend over £1000 and it'll sound great. But 10 times as good? Not a chance.
Cheap lenses do the job, they tend not to be that fast, so won't work well in dim conditions, they also tend to lose focus at the edges - and of course they are less robust.
You get's what you pays for.
The way I approach every purchase in life now, is either buy the cheapest, or buy the best I can possibly afford. I've never yet regretted buying the best (in Hi Fi, lenses or cars!)
as I say... IMHO.
Steve
>> Edited by GetCarter on Sunday 30th October 10:03
The term 'kit lens' can be misleading. Sometimes they can be relatively low quality lenses added to the body to help it sell, but not always. For example the Nikkor 18-70mm AF-S D ED supplied as a 'kit' lens with the D70 is by all accounts above average.
If you are happy to spend £99 on a telephoto, I don't think you will be unduly concerned by a kit lens IYKWIM
Try one, and if one day you decide it's not good enough for your needs, just trade up.
Overall it's more sensible I think to buy the body + kit lens rather than body only + a different 'budget' lens as pro rata bodies cost more.
>> Edited by simpo two on Sunday 30th October 17:14
If you are happy to spend £99 on a telephoto, I don't think you will be unduly concerned by a kit lens IYKWIM
Try one, and if one day you decide it's not good enough for your needs, just trade up. Overall it's more sensible I think to buy the body + kit lens rather than body only + a different 'budget' lens as pro rata bodies cost more.
>> Edited by simpo two on Sunday 30th October 17:14
GetCarter said:
The way I approach every purchase in life now, is either buy the cheapest, or buy the best I can possibly afford. I've never yet regretted buying the best (in Hi Fi, lenses or cars!)
That's also my outlook. I haven't regretted it, either.
If you want to spend less money, perhaps you should look at second-hand prime lenses. I prefer my f/4 300mm and f/1.8 50mm to my other lenses in all but wide-angle applications. Though primes are less convenient than zooms, they allow you to take much better looking shots, IMHO. It's also harder/more expensive to find a good zoom lens. Take the F-mount situation, where the cheapest good telephoto zoom lens from Nikon is the f/2.8 80-200mm lens for about $900, and by that point you may as well get the VR version for $1500 (and it's white, too!); I got my f/4 300mm for $550.
GetCarter said:
The way I approach every purchase in life now, is either buy the cheapest, or buy the best I can possibly afford. I've never yet regretted buying the best (in Hi Fi, lenses or cars!)
That's also my outlook. I haven't regretted it, either.
If you want to spend less money, perhaps you should look at second-hand prime lenses. I prefer my f/4 300mm and f/1.8 50mm to my other lenses in all but wide-angle applications. Though primes are less convenient than zooms, they allow you to take much better looking shots, IMHO. It's also harder/more expensive to find a good zoom lens. Take the F-mount situation, where the cheapest good telephoto zoom lens from Nikon is the f/2.8 80-200mm lens for about $900, and by that point you may as well get the VR version for $1500 (and it's white, too!); I got my f/4 300mm for $550.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff