Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 22 Sep 2009 (Tuesday) 13:56
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Most hated lens you've owned and why!!

 
cjm
Goldmember
Avatar
4,786 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 25
Joined Mar 2005
Location: Calgary, Alberta
     
Sep 22, 2009 18:33 |  #16

I've hated so many lenses.

But the number one I hated was a 28-75 f2.8 from Tamron. It was terrible!


Christopher J. Martin
imagesbychristopher.co​m (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
int2str
Goldmember
1,881 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Mar 2009
Location: Fremont, CA
     
Sep 22, 2009 18:57 as a reply to  @ cjm's post |  #17

cjm, why? The Tamron is my 2nd favourite lens in my lineup (behind the 300mm) and would be lonely at the top if you included price/value...

My number one is currently my 70-200mm f/2.8 L. So much hype on this forum and my copy is practically useless at 200mm. Already been to Canon and back without much improvement. It'll go back again as soon as I can pick it up again without being disgusted...




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
midnight_rider
"Thrown under the bus."
Avatar
5,413 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Yonder by the crick, Ga
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:01 as a reply to  @ int2str's post |  #18

Canon 75-300 and 50 f/1.8 are about an even call for me.
They were both a serious waste of plastic. They would have made a lot better coke bottles than lenses.


I never, Not once claimed to read your post...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
webtalk
Hatchling
1 post
Joined May 2007
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:20 as a reply to  @ midnight_rider's post |  #19

The Canon 17-40mm f/4 L should not be an L lens. It's an overhyped and overpriced piece of crap. Thought I had a bad copy but all the ones I tried had focus issues. 17-20 range had vignetting and strong barrel distortion.

Replaced it with the 16-25mm f/2.8 L Mk II which is my favourite.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:26 |  #20

EF 28-200mm

Heavy for its size. Never really very sharp. Zoom creep like it's greased. Crappy Build.

Glad I sold it.


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
fiebru1119
Senior Member
Avatar
718 posts
Gallery: 5 photos
Likes: 70
Joined May 2009
Location: Orlando, FL
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:29 as a reply to  @ post 8691159 |  #21

canon 50 f/1.8

what good is a fast aperture if the lens wont focus properly in low light?

and 50mm in that "too long yet too short" category for me (on a crop).. but thats subjective


A7RIII | EF15/2.8 FE | 16-35/4.0LIS | 24/1.4L II | ZA55/1.8 | 24-105G OSS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
midnight_rider
"Thrown under the bus."
Avatar
5,413 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Yonder by the crick, Ga
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:38 |  #22

webtalk wrote in post #8691520 (external link)
The Canon 17-40mm f/4 L should not be an L lens. It's an overhyped and overpriced piece of crap. Thought I had a bad copy but all the ones I tried had focus issues. 17-20 range had vignetting and strong barrel distortion.

Replaced it with the 16-25mm f/2.8 L Mk II which is my favourite.

You have been a member of the forum for years and this is your first post.
You came out of the gate bashing a L WOW:lol:


I never, Not once claimed to read your post...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
midnight_rider
"Thrown under the bus."
Avatar
5,413 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Yonder by the crick, Ga
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:39 |  #23

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #8691546 (external link)
EF 80-200mm

Heavy for its size. Never really very sharp. Zoom creep like it's greased. Crappy Build.

Glad I sold it.

The magic drainpipe?


I never, Not once claimed to read your post...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bob_McBob
Member
213 posts
Joined Jan 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON Canada
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:45 as a reply to  @ fiebru1119's post |  #24

I've never owned a lens I "hate", but I can certainly make some critical observations about my current line-up.

16-35/2.8 II - I don't have a bad word to say about this lens. It works, and I love it.

70-200/2.8 IS - Heavy enough that I don't use it very often. I often find myself trying to cover the tele end with a 100/2.8 because of this, and in many situations where I need a longer focal length, the 100-400 is handier. There are some situations where the 70-200 is indispensable, though. If I had the money, I would pick up the f/4 version as well.

100-400 - Autofocus is a little slow, and the IS should be updated to a more modern design, but this lens is just ridiculously useful in so many situations. I find the friction ring a little fiddly to adjust one-handed.

50/1.8 II - Slow focusing, noisy, plasticky, lousy manual focus ring. I still think it's reasonably good value, and always recommend it to new camera owners. I upgraded to a 50/1.4. One of the major motivations was that it was my only lens without FTM. I didn't like having to remember to flip the switch with JUST this lens.

50/1.4 - Not very sharp until you stop it down to f/2 or smaller, which is readily visible with a magnified live view. Also, not particularly great value for money compared to the 1.8. This lens should be upgraded to a more modern design with real ring USM. I don't regret replacing the 1.8, but I am annoyed that Canon charges so much just to get a half decent 50mm lens.

100/2.8 macro - My only complaint is that it doesn't have IS! I'll be upgrading to the new version in the near future. It will be even more useful as a general portrait lens.


"My fellow Americans, these are not the droids the nation is looking for."
5D Mark III - 16-35/2.8 II - 24-105/4 IS - 50/1.4 - 100/2.8 IS Macro - 70-200/2.8 IS - 100-400/4.5-5.6 IS

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shocksyde
Senior Member
Avatar
888 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 65
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Rockville, MD
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:53 |  #25

I love all of my current and past lenses as I love my children. Wait... I don't have any children. Or do I...?


http://lightwav.es (external link) | Instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FlyingPhotog
Cream of the "Prop"
Avatar
57,560 posts
Likes: 142
Joined May 2007
Location: Probably Chasing Aircraft
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:54 |  #26

midnight_rider wrote in post #8691633 (external link)
The magic drainpipe?

GAAA...

I was thinking Drainpipe but I meant 28-200...

Fixed It Above. :oops:


Jay
Crosswind Images (external link)
Facebook Fan Page (external link)

"If you aren't getting extraordinary images from today's dSLRs, regardless of brand, it's not the camera!" - Bill Fortney, Nikon Corp.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
shooter ­ mcgavin
Senior Member
Avatar
526 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Nov 2007
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:57 |  #27

The one I'm really trying to love now...
the 28 f/1.8. It sounds ideal on paper for my style of shooting, but for some reason we're not really getting along as well as I expected...I'm going to keep working at it though. Maybe it's just because the other lens I'm working with right now works SO well with my shooting (85 f/1.8 ). A lot of people have been hating on the 50 f/1.8, but it was one of my favorites on my 20d.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
kini
Senior Member
386 posts
Joined Jan 2008
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:59 |  #28

My in for service for the 8th time in 14 months Sigma 120-300. Can't focus on ANYTHING beyond 10 yards.

Manual focus, live view it's sharp at 300/2.8. AF it is hopeless. I hope and pray the UPS will lose it or crush it every time it's shipped. So far, no such luck :-(
Gene




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
darosk
Goldmember
Avatar
2,806 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Oct 2007
Location: Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia
     
Sep 22, 2009 19:59 |  #29

midnight_rider wrote in post #8691633 (external link)
The magic drainpipe?

There was a non-L 80-200 (external link).

It was pretty crap apparently, by the looks of it.


Tumblr (external link) | Facebook (external link) | Youtube (external link)
Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
midnight_rider
"Thrown under the bus."
Avatar
5,413 posts
Joined Apr 2008
Location: Yonder by the crick, Ga
     
Sep 22, 2009 20:05 |  #30

darosk wrote in post #8691748 (external link)
There was a non-L 80-200 (external link).

It was pretty crap apparently, by the looks of it.

WOW that does look like a P.O.C


I never, Not once claimed to read your post...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

3,247 views & 0 likes for this thread
Most hated lens you've owned and why!!
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is Cyndi
1007 guests, 244 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.