Variation within lenses

[ShutteringFocus]

How much variation is there within lenses of the same type?

I've heard some people talking about "Be sure you test a few to get a good one" when talking about buying lenses. or "My copy is particularly sharp"

Is there really THAT much of a difference from lens to lens? I mean, for one thing, if you only have one copy of the lens how do you know its "particularly sharp?" And can you really shoot with say 4 of the same lenses in the store and then tell if there is a difference?

I'm sure you could tell if there was a manufacture defect in the lens. But if you buy one on-line and there is a manufacture defect, either the manufacture or the company you bought from should replace the lens for you.

But is there really a noticeable difference from lens to lens of the same type?

I find this hard to believe.

[Andy_T]

Reportedly, there is some variance in Sigma lenses.
Also, some users received bad samples of the Tamron 28-75/2.8 XR DI (that were promptly replaced upon reclamation).

With Canon L lenses, it should not be the case (although I've read at least one thread on the story regarding a 'Monday' 70-200/2.8 IS). I assume it will happen now and then with Canon 'consumer' grade lenses.

Best regards,
Andy

[Soumitra]

If u read few articles ( I dont remeber atthis point of time) even from the same batch you will have different quality of optics ( IN TOLERENCE) , I think 15-20 years back the difference was noticable even on inspecting Transparancies but now You have to seek help of Optical bench to find out the difference, All profesional grade optics would have very less difference but consumer YES you will find difference in every lens manufactured by the company like Zeiss too, Any way these days due to competition & stringent manufacturing process limits are observed, As soon as i remeber I will send u link for the same where all branded Normal lenses were tested which showed lot of difference from lens to lens in same batch so at the most we can say BEST WISHES & happy shooting regards
Soumitra

[CyberDyneSystems]

I've noticed however that on a certain other forum.. this concern over "sharp copies" of lenses has gotten rather... well .... predominant...

Some will, and have bragged about not being satisfied untill they the fifth copy of a lens!!! :shock:

I mean c'mon,. if the first three don't work for you then I would think it's time to move on... :rolleyes:

[Longwatcher]

The Canon lens with the most reported variation is the 75-300 IS.
There seem to be some good ones and some really bad ones. With very few in between.

Otherwise there will always be some variation, but whether or not it will be noticeable is questionable. It depends on the tolerance in testing. "L" glass will have less tolerance, thus there should be less variation. The low end lenses on the other hand have more tolerances, thus there will be more variation.

Even the cameras have some tolerance variation. Some work a bit better then others. And unless we could get everyone to bring their lenses and cameras to a convention somwhere, where a quick, but accurate test could be performed, we will never be able to figure out how much difference there really is. Even Canon doesn't know for sure, they just know the lens or camera met the tolerances set BEFORE it left the factory. it may lose it in shipping and is likely to lose it during use.

For trivia:
Sigma has a rep as having good tolerance between individual lenses, but not quite as good as Canon. I would trust their quality and have considered purchasing a lens or two from them.

Tamron has had a bad rep for tolerance among lenses, although they have been improving dramatically recently it seems. I will give them a few more years before I might trust them again personally, since I got a really crappy lens a few years back. But they do seem to make some good lenses now.

Can't speak to other lenses that will fit Canon as I have not heard enough to form a decent opinion.

[Tom W]

Yes, there are variances, just as there are with any physical product. The level of manufacturing tolerance is what dictates how much variance is permitted to make it to market. Obviously, the tighter the tolerance, the more product will get rejected (if all other variables are equal) so that better QC will result in a higher manufacturing cost.

Are the differences significant? Depends - in the digital age, we have the ability to look at things on our screen that are greatly amplified from the original image on the sensor. We can see defects on a 100% crop of an image on our screen that would never be visible on a 11X14 inch print.

So, I guess I'd say that there are differences, but they are usually insignificant except for critical work or pixel peeping.

Also, remember that bad news travels faster than good news - the internet sometimes serves as a complaint amplifier, magnifying problems to many times their actual presence.

[Andy_T]

Can't speak to other lenses that will fit Canon as I have not heard enough to form a decent opinion.

Hmmm. Cosina, Quantaray and Phoenix lenses are among the most consistent of those.


.


.


.


They are all 'Poop', no variance :lol:

Best regard,
Andy

[Tom W]

Oh, and I have to add that many times, a percieved defect is the result of some influence outside of the test - everything from user error to inequal comparisons to foggy conditions to a shaky photographer are pinned on a lens when the lens is, in fact, fine.