Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
What's the worst lens you have ever used ?
#11
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.   
#12
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
#13
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
#14
(03-19-2018, 07:31 PM)toni-a Wrote: This specific thread was posted in 2004, back then we discussed, gave opinions, shared our bad experiences, learnt things to avoid, some  lenses might have a bad aspect that can simply be a killer, or have reliability issues like AF frequent failures.
So this thread DOES have sense and it's not pointless, this forum has a moderator and he never objected such threads, to my knowledge. Is it too much to ask not to be called   stupid or get humiliated ?? Just read the forum rules that are crystal clear and follow them, nothing more

The good thing about this forum is the search function. There was one thread from 2010 asking about bad or good copies and how to recognize a bad sample. Which is an entirely different subject than "the worst lens". And makes IMO much more sense than to find individual worst lenses.

I doubt there was a Photozone.de back in 2004, but Klaus didn't clarify that point. Here it is said the eldest record date is elder than 11 years - but that's still 2007.

And how come that you were part in a discussion in 2004 - when your own registration as user is dated from 2010?

If you like to try to lecture me, you should still stick wit the true facts, not come up with "alternative facts". Please feel free to post a link of the discussion back in 2004...
#15
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.
#16
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.
#17
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
#18
Interesting but typical web bickering. Isn't it great.
#19
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.
#20
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!
Dave's clichés
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)