Which lens do you regret buying?

Which lens did you regret buying and why?

My regrets:

Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS -- I bought this one due to the hype. I thought it would be the perfect portrait lens for me. I replaced it with two primes : Canon 135mm f2 and Sigma 85mm f1.4 because they are lighter, faster, and easier to calibrate. I would get the 200mm f2 too, but I have to eat.

Canon 100mm f2.8 IS Macro -- I got this one to pull double duty: part-time macro and part-time portrait. I replaced it with the 180mm f3.5 Macro which is a better dedicated macro lens. And for portraits I prefer primes that can open up to f2 at least for more background blur, hence 135mm f2.

I don't regret buying any lenses. I've learned something from every lens I've bought and I've sold the ones I no longer need.

50mm f/1.8 (not the new STM)

One of those 28-300mm P.O.S. super zooms,

Hrm,

Ultimately, none of them really. Sure, I didn't keep them all. But I don't regret them since I learned something or enjoyed toying with them for a while. It's not like any lens is a total loss unless you break it and have no recovery option. Lately when I find I don't use a lens much anymore, and it collects dust, I go ahead and sell it. Haven't regretted that move yet. I mostly buy used gear, so it's not like I'm losing a ton when I buy something and then re-sell it later if I don't care to keep it long term. Cheaper than renting stuff. When buying inexpensive stuff like that, it's hard to regret anything really. If I bought a brand new $12k super telephoto and then never went out and used it, I'd be regretting that, and losing a few thousand on the re-sell. Luckily, or... unluckily, I don't have that problem!

I do however regret buying doubles of some vintage lenses just because I saw a deal... that was just silly of me. Sure, it's like $10 here, $20 there, but it adds up, and it's like... "really?"

Very best,

I just bought the Canon 20 F2.8 and I find it has quite a bit of vignetting. Much more than I expected.

A year ago I bought the 24-105 and sold it after a month or so. It didn't have the crispness that I expected. I know have the 24-70 and the 70-200 f2.8 mkii IS and heck, I love them

The 10-22mm when I was using a 60D. I only bought it because I didn't have a wide angle, and wanted to try it. Overall, I didn't find it to be a very good performer in the corners, which mattered to me, and I just didn't didn't like it enough to justify the cost.

vengence wrote in post #17706426
I don't regret buying any lenses. I've learned something from every lens I've bought and I've sold the ones I no longer need.

^ This!

InfiniteDivide wrote in post #17706466
^ This!

I have to agree with you. But really trhe one I sold, I mean the 24-105 f4 wasn't meeting nmy expectations. Oh, and the nifty fifty is about to go, too

Fortunately I didn't buy this lens, but I very nearly regretted renting a 70-200 F4 IS.

I was renting is for a vacation, hoping it would improve the image quality of panorama shots and some telephoto shots.
To start, the lens didn't do so good. Compared to my 85mm, it was a disappointing across the zoom range. It might be a bad copy, or something may have happened to the lens.

So that was 60 bucks lost. Well, you learn and move on .

Then the rental company called. They couldn't remove some spot on the front lens and may have to replace the front element. crap. I had insured the lens for this kind of thing, but that would still be another big loss. Emailed back to them how I used the lens. Company came back a couple days later, they had fixed the problem. .

So, nearly regretted that one!

I was never happy with my 70-200 f/4 non-IS. I upgraded to a 70-200 f/2.8IS and am much happier with it; I find that IS is a must on telephotos with the type of shooting I do.

When I originally bought into the Canon system, I got a cheap Tamron 70-300 and a Tokina 28-70. Both lenses have mechanically or optically degraded even though they've had only light and intermittent use. The moral for me is: no more cheap lenses. Even my old 24-70 mk I and 100-400 mk I have held up much better.

Sigma 35 f/1.4 ART.

Not a bad lens. In fact it's super sharp and well built. I just never use it. Got sucked in by the hype when it first came out and jumped. But I'm an IS junky due to hand tremors, and this lens has no stabilization. Also, I now have a Tamron 24-70 VC that covers that focal length; it's not quite as sharp, but more versatile.

Tokina 100mm macro: no IS, but what made it junk was the focus shifting.

Tamron 70-300...besides the variable aperture, the image quality beyond 200mm was not acceptable. The VC would cause the image to drift around when hand-holding, and the AF was erratic. If I did it over again, I would have opted for the Canon 70-200 f/4 at about the same price as I paid for the Tamron.

texshooter wrote in post #17706424
Which lens did you regret buying and why?

My regrets:

Canon 70-200mm f2.8 IS -- I bought this one due to the hype. I thought it would be the perfect portrait lens for me. I replaced it with two primes : Canon 135mm f2 and Sigma 85mm f1.4 because they are lighter, faster, and easier to calibrate. I would get the 200mm f2 too, but I have to eat.

Canon 100mm f2.8 IS Macro -- I got this one to pull double duty: part-time macro and part-time portrait. I replaced it with the 180mm f3.5 Macro which is a better dedicated macro lens.

If you still have the 70-200, let's make a deal.