Lens which you regret buying it

[enzeru21]

Haha Anthony dont tell me you are going to emphasize the theory of the worthlessness of 3.5-5.6 aperture lenses because they cost over 200SGD lol.

is there any lens other than the 50 1.8 that is less than $200??

anyway thats his own opinion la.. some people die die want f 2.8.. some are okie with f4.. some with f 3.5-5.6..

 

[diver-hloc]

My 1st non kit lens - Sigma 18-135mm f3.5-5.6....

 

[Anthony Lee]

Haha Anthony dont tell me you are going to emphasize the theory of the worthlessness of 3.5-5.6 aperture lenses because they cost over 200SGD lol.

No, because they cost more than 1K. To pay any lens more than 1K, it has to be worth the money, otherwise you will lose plenty when you try to sell it. Most buyers of 2nd hand lenses are usually experienced photog and they know what to pay for in such a lens. Most bought it because of convenience of the wide zoom range and knew nothing about lens and lens IQ. In the hands of experienced photog, it may be different. I don't minced my words because I speak out of experience. So don't take what I said as a joke.

 

[neech7]

is there any lens other than the 50 1.8 that is less than $200??

Yes. I paid $120 for the 18-55 IS, brand new.

 

[enzeru21]

Yes. I paid $120 for the 18-55 IS, brand new.

ooops ok, i forgot the kit lens too~! hahah.. :thumbsup:

 

[bullseyez]

Canon EF 24-70mm f2.8. :thumbsd:
It is very heavy, expensive and the picture not sharp when taken wide open at F2.8.
Swap this with EF24-105mm F4.0L IS and be happy..

Its heavy and expensive, but how can the picture not sharp? im quite happy with my 24-70, mayb i just found it not wide enough on a crop body. Hunting for wide angel now ^^

 

[Jeff Heng]

My regrets are:
1)18-55 (non IS) kit lens( IS version better)
2)17-40mmF4 (High price paid,great colors but sharpness does not stand out compare to 18-55mmIS)
3)70-200mmF2.8L (heavy seldom use...)

 

[IsenGrim]

hmm none. i guess.
but then again i only got 4 lenses.
sigma 24 f1.8, canon 50f1.8, canon 50f1.4, tamron 17-50 f2.8

my first lens was the tamron. been my wedding work horse till recently upgraded to 24f1.8 and 50f1.4

 

[pattanct]

Sigma 50mm F1.4

When I bought this lens straight away I did street photography and I am surprised when I downloaded the pictures... most of them is blurred.
I thought my hand is shaky.
Then I used tripod with timer and 2/5 of the shots are still blurred.

I Google this and it will required calibration but sometime still doesn't work so I decided to replaced with different brand of lens. Luckily the shop agreed.

Sorry for the Sigma fans.

u have a bad copy...

 

[mao-sg]

For canon i have only 1740L and 100mmmacro，i very happy with this 2lens，very sharp。now want get ef50f
1.4 or sigma501.4,but saw many bro regret with ef501.4, I lost my choice...

 

[nottipiglet]

I regretted buying the EF 70-200 f/4L IS. It's a beautiful lens in all aspects... and the output is stunning, but... I find it to be on the heavy side... and I think it's a bit too expensive to be used as a travel lens. So, I sold it off and got the EF 70-300 IS. Happy with the decision. :bsmilie:

 

[driveanegg]

I dont regret per se....

But I do wonder what on Earth possessed me to buy the lens when I bought it .... :bsmilie:

 

[pattanct]

i have the following lens bought & sold...

Due to upgrade
1) 28-105
2) 55-250
3) Tamron 12-24
4) 70-200 f4
etc...

Dissatisfied
5) 18-200
6) 28-70 f2.8
7) 16-35 f2.8
8) 17-40

 

[renzokuken]

none for me so far

18~55 for walk about and wide angle shots
55~250 for those moments when you don't want to walk right infront of your subject and spoils the natural expression, concerts, candids etc etc
50mm f1.8 for low light and bokeh-licious background isolation

only wished that my lens have bigger apertures, and not having front rotating elements when focusing

after reading the entire thread
have no clue what some of you are ranting about seriously

50mm f1.8
cheapest prime, $100+ for a f1.8? come'on what's there to complain seriously?
and btw this lens is sharp, definitely sharp, but if you think i'm being bias toward my own gear
take a look at the MTF chart done by photozone.de

anything above 1550 is rated "Very Good"
anything above 1850 is rated "Excellent"


55~250
superbly sharp from 55mm~150mm and at 250mm, Image Stabilization
which lens can provide you with the reach , and being relatively sharp and being priced at $380?
i will never be able to get this:

with any other lens priced at $380

and by pushing this lens to the 250 zoom range you can get decent bokeh as well

don't blame these lenses please :nono:

 

[ahboy168]

Then, why did you buy it in the first place, especially when it's more than 1K? Tell us, so that other newbies will learn.

Being "Lazy" & "kiasu" at that time, wanted 1 len cover as much range as possible.
I pay much less than 1k lar ...

 

[litlefiter]

Sigma 50mm F1.4

When I bought this lens straight away I did street photography and I am surprised when I downloaded the pictures... most of them is blurred.
I thought my hand is shaky.
Then I used tripod with timer and 2/5 of the shots are still blurred.

I Google this and it will required calibration but sometime still doesn't work so I decided to replaced with different brand of lens. Luckily the shop agreed.

Sorry for the Sigma fans.

u should have given the sigma another chance by exchanging for a new one. Heard really amazing things about it..

 

[jasonlm]

u should have given the sigma another chance by exchanging for a new one. Heard really amazing things about it..

Agree with you. But when they attached the 17-55 on my camera and took some few shots. I can't removed it anymore!

 

[Entertainer]

yes.. which other cheap lens allows you to do this?

taken by a 55-250 IS on 450D

 

[litlefiter]

Agree with you. But when they attached the 17-55 on my camera and took some few shots. I can't removed it anymore!

haha, 17-55 is a really amazing lens. but the bokeh of the sigma 50mm also very good!

yes.. which other cheap lens allows you to do this?

taken by a 55-250 IS on 450D

agreed, even though i seldom use my 55-250, it gets me good shots when i want it to!

 

[doodah]

Let's see...

a) Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. Tested 4 copies. Atrocious AF. Stayed with Canon 17-85 IS which was replaced later with 17-55 f/2.8 IS.
b) Sigma 150 f/2.8 Macro. Sharp but too heavy. Stayed with Canon 100 f/2.8 Macro which was replaced later with its HIS sibling.
c) Tokina 11-16. Nowhere as extraordinary as what people think. Stayed with Canon 10-22.
d) Canon 70-300. Sharp but atrocious built (infamous portrait issue). Caused me many sleepless nights. Finally dumped it for the awesome 70-200 f/4 IS.
e) Canon 85 f/1.8. Too limited. A learning experience: primes for general photography are not for me.

I have nearly reached Nirvanaland as far as lens acquisition for my APS-C bodies is concerned. Maybe a Tokina 10-17 fisheye or Canon 8-15 fisheye in the future???