What Is Your Worst Lens

I have the 75-300 III
'Nuff said

90-300mm f/4.5-5.6 non-USM, slow, crappy at any ƒ and focal lenght

Siggy 10-20: Soft at the edges, soft in the middle, never focusses correctly. Sigma looked at it and sent me another to replace it, its almost as bad. That said, my Sigma 50 1.4 is utterly superb as is my 150 macro. The 10-20 is so bad I can't even bring myself to sell it. Can't be bothered to send it in yet again so will leave it in a corner an try and forget about it

18-55mm kit lens.

Would love to replace this lens. A 24-105 maybe? I know they're usually used on full-frame bodies, but for my needs a 24-105 would be perfect.

My worst lens is the Sigma 70-300 f4.5-5.6, IQ is just **** and everything comes is washed out. Have to spend too much time in post to get something usable. Wish I had enough cash for a good long range zoom telephoto lens.

I love all of my lenses. For the applications I use them for, they're all wonderful.
Especially the three Tamron zooms I have are optically excellent and seriously underrated.

genjurok wrote in post #14941966
I love all of my lenses. For the applications I use them for, they're all wonderful.
Especially the three Tamron zooms I have are optically excellent and seriously underrated.

I have two Tamron's and love them both. Convinced a buddy to replace his kit lens with the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 and now he can't stop raving about it.

I think all of my lenses are good... Some are better in some respect, but I don' think any is worst... Does that make sense ??

I will also add the 75-300, esp. compared to the 55-250 which is really outstanding for the price. Sad to hear so much negative about the 50 1.4, since I upgraded to it recently! Other than the 70-300, my 50 1.8 is the worst because it completely broke in two pieces and I lost all AF after that. Too bad, it had amazing image quality.

chrismarriott66 wrote in post #14419847
Undoubtedly the lens I have just sold... the Canon 75-300 3.5-5.6 iii *non-usm* *non-IS*

I challenge any lens to be softer, noisier, slower, or generally more poop!

I hate this lens. I bought it when I bought my kit because I saw big focal length numbers and a low price and thought "what a bargain!". Seriously, my coworkers love to ask me if I used the lens this past weekend to see the look on my face, they can't understand how I could dislike one lens so strongly!

I have taken 8 photos with it, 6 of which I deleted, the other 2 I don't even really like that much.

Oh well, live and learn, now I'm hunting Ls...

Matt

Mine would be the Canon EF 17-40mm f/4L.
Just didn't do anything for me.
Ended up selling it and upgrading to a Zeiss 21mm.
Now that's a lens.

Sigma 17-35 and Sigma 75-300. Both developed faults outside of warranty.
Only have Canon lenses now

Canon 28-80 sucks pretty bad. I picked it up for $60 bucks though and it works most of the time

remotehuman wrote in post #14946459
Canon 28-80 sucks pretty bad. I picked it up for $60 bucks though and it works most of the time

Just to clarify, the 28-80 L doesn't suck, just in case anyone is thinking of getting one!

Sigma 24-70 f2.8..... Terrible backfocus. Thankfully, the micro-adjust on my 50D's helps.