02-21-2017, 07:31 AM
Cool to read. I'll stay away from them as I don't want to have a lens without EXIF. But for those caring less about that, they have some interesting items in their portfolio.
Quote:It's funny that their comment is based on the 55-200mm. This was the only zoom lens with a complete mechanical breakdown that I've ever experienced (jammed zoom ring). The 16-50mm felt like the 55-200mm prior of the jamming ( zooming produced a click noise in the middle range ).
The 18-135mm has no proper zoom stop at 135mm (two samples).
A higher decentering ratio compared to other manufacturers.
There's also the famous rattling when "shaking" a Fujinon (some of them) - although you may argue that those lenses could have a 2nd use for making music or something ... chakka ....
As mentioned no repairs - just exchanges - what does that tell me ?
I, for one, always start praying when buying a Fujinon (also Tamron, Pentax - I gave up with Tokina).
Quote: But, other than that the Fujis were a 100%? B)
Quote: I wouldn't expect these aluminum lenses to be anything but reliable, there's not much going on in them, take away the AF motor and any OS, here, they have even eliminated auto diaphragm mechanisms.
Lens dropping on the floor is a statistical study, you need to drop a hundred lenses to get any real insight into a lens's resistance to shock.
In Barcelona I had someone opened my lens bag trying to steal my camera (Samsung GX10/ Pentax K10) the camera with lens attached fell on to concrete pavement....it survived with nothing other than a scratch on the lens-hood. Others drop their camera 1/2 meter onto a soft carpet and have to have both the body and the lens rebuilt.
Quote:Excuse me JoJu but!........working just as before the "fall"!
A dent in the filter thread - that was all and it was working just as before the falling.
Quote:It's funny that their comment is based on the 55-200mm. This was the only zoom lens with a complete mechanical breakdown that I've ever experienced (jammed zoom ring). The 16-50mm felt like the 55-200mm prior of the jamming ( zooming produced a click noise in the middle range ).
The 18-135mm has no proper zoom stop at 135mm (two samples).
A higher decentering ratio compared to other manufacturers.
There's also the famous rattling when "shaking" a Fujinon (some of them) - although you may argue that those lenses could have a 2nd use for making music or something ... chakka ....
As mentioned no repairs - just exchanges - what does that tell me ?
I, for one, always start praying when buying a Fujinon (also Tamron, Pentax - I gave up with Tokina).
Quote:Re: 55-200: Maybe you were very unlucky? I wish lensrentals would publish some statistics by manufacturers in terms of lens reliability since they have the data to do it. It's very difficult to gauge the quality of a maker objectively with only few anecdotal stories from users here and there.Customer service unfortunately doesn't depend of the brand but of the dealer, sigma service is excellent everywhere but here, canon service used to be great, now as the expert repairs guy at Canon has started his own business nobody wants to repair at Canon unless it is free under warranty and even then if problem persists lenses are taken to the expert guy who seems to be doing pretty well
Plus, it might vary quite a bit depending on the class of lens, lenses themselves and usage patterns.
As far as centering quality goes, lensrentals (again) provided graphs showing the performance of many samples of the same lens. Of course, they only do this for Canon (and maybe Nikon) and only for very specific lens models. Again, it's difficult to gauge how good/bad a manufacturer is without any solid evidence.
As far as customer service goes, it's an entirely different matter. A lens can be good and customer service might sucks big time. Conversely a lens can be crap, but customer service is great.