Are there more problems with non-Canon lenses than with Canon?

I constantly read the forums and now that I am actually going to get a 30D and know that in time I will need and want additional lenses I have been reading more of the reviews and threads pertaining to lens problems.
It seems like the Sigma lenses are very popular and at a very good price point but they appear to be very inconsistent and I am always seeing "maybe you have a bad one".
In general it seems I see more of this with the third party lenses than with the Canon lenses. I don't have any stats so this is just the feel I get.
Does anyone else see this? I see that some are either very 'brand loyal' or choose to only buy Canon lenses for a reason.

Obviously some of the third party lenses sell and are popular due to pricing but when I keep reading about soft focus, slow focus and noisy auto focus I wonder if there is really something to be said for having Canon lenses on Canon cameras.

I've never seen any scientific tests published about quality of the lenses/faulty lens rates or anything like that. So all the stuff you read here is anecdotal and non scientific.

I can't speak first hand since I've got all Canon lenses. I would say that TeeWhy pretty much nailed it. The quality issues regarding other brands seem to be more anecdotal than anything. Every mfg has lemons. Look at some of the recent threads pertaining to the Canon 24-70 for example.

Every manufacturer has its fair share of not so good lenses that slip through quality control. The problem is that when someone complains about a canon lens the only fuss made is send it in for calibration (there are plenty that need to be sent back) and the complaining usually ends there as you cant blame it on compatability issues because its OEM.
Now when a 3rd party lens isnt performing as desired you speek up and someone says send it in for calibration, then you get another handfull of canon "purests" saying "you should have bought a canon or that you wouldnt have a problem if you bought an "L" or that 3rd party lenses are junk.

Each manufacturer has some great glass and some junk glass in every class from consumer, prosumer to professional including canon but it doesnt mean that any one brand is absolute junk or one is alweays the best. Do your research, pick the best reviewed lens in your pricepoint and if you get a bad copy send it back for replacement or calibration.

Let me count here, I am a recovering gear head and have bought in over two years
Canon 18-55, 28-90, 28-135, 50mm f1.8, 55-200, 70-200f2.8
Sigma 15, 10-20, 70-300, 50-500
Tamron 17-35, 28-75, 17-50
Tokina 12-24, 100macro
Lensbaby 2.0
Only thing that had focusing issue and softness was the lensbaby. And I still have that. Not one item had a problem.

Definately. Canon has a fairly big budget, which allows them to develop so much, in such a short time.

However, there are specialized companies, like Sigma, Tamron, Vivitar (prolly not one of the best), that spend most (if not all) their budget on a specific set of items - lenses. Some are great, some are not. It's all about price/quality. Some cheapo lenses are just as effective than others that are more expensive. Try some out, read the reviews, and then, make the jump.

I used to own two lenses, one was a 100-300mm Canon (4.5-5.6) USM, and it was great. Not the best build (i.e. not to L lens specs) but still not bad either. Didn't feel like it was going to fall apart...and took some great pictures. I also had a Canon 28-135mm zoom. Great lens, a little noisy, but still, had enough 'strength' and took good pictures.

Once you acquire more money, you can move up in the world of lenses. Just don't spoil yourself early on. I do suggest the 50mm 1.8 mkII, if you can swing it. It's a great lens for DLSR/SLR beginners, but the lens is so good, that many budding professionals have always used one. I don't own one, as the 50mm macro fits the bill, but man, do I love that little lens.

inthedeck wrote in post #2082760
I do suggest the 50mm 1.8 mkII, if you can swing it. It's a great lens for DLSR/SLR beginners, but the lens is so good, that many budding professionals have always used one.

Is that the lens that is termed the Nifty Fifty. I do keep hearing poeple talk about that lens and recommentd it as somethign of a 'must have'. Since the 30D has a 1.6 crop factor that is effectively an 80mm lens. I plan on doing some portrait work as I learn. Is this a good lens for that type of photography?

There may be a reason a Sigma is called a 'Siggie', a Tamron a 'Tammy' and a Tokina a 'Toki". But, a Canon is called a 'Canon'.

Yes...the nifty fifty. Can be had for around 60-80 bucks. Very good lens to start out with, even if you have the kit lens. 50mm (80mm effective) on a 1.6 body can yield some very interesting results. Plus, it's a prime, so it makes you 'think' differently about your shots. I would suggest it.

It has been my experience of nearly 30 years of photography that Canon is most reliable. The third pary lenses that I have owned have been problematic, whereas my Canon lenses have done quite well even under less than ideal circumstances. Now, that is just my experience and it may not be the same perspective that others would give you. All the lenses in my current kit are Canon and don't expect that to change.

Mark

well i dont have any canon Lens..I had a 70-200 f4L and it was great but I just sold it and got the sigma 70-200 2.8 and its great
all my lens are very very good and very pleased with them. Saved a good chunck of change against their canon counterpart

Are there more problems with non-Canon lenses than with Canon?

jr_senator wrote in post #2083067
There may be a reason a Sigma is called a 'Siggie', a Tamron a 'Tammy' and a Tokina a 'Toki". But, a Canon is called a 'Canon'.

You think people feel more affection for the 3rd party stuff then?

As TW says there is no data about reliability, etc. across brands so all this 'mine is bigger than yours' talk is hot air.

Thing is that no brand gives any shooter the ability to take an interesting shot and that is really what photography is about most of the time.

Mark_Cohran wrote in post #2083094
It has been my experience of nearly 30 years of photography that Canon is most reliable. The third pary lenses that I have owned have been problematic, whereas my Canon lenses have done quite well even under less than ideal circumstances. Now, that is just my experience and it may not be the same perspective that others would give you. All the lenses in my current kit are Canon and don't expect that to change.

Mark

i agree that canon has the least problems. i won't be PC here like most everyone else. you can decide for yourself where the rest fall.

sure, i know canon has it's problems too -- since the only lens that i've ever bought new with a defect was a canon.

but i do believe you have a better chance of a canon lens performing up to par right out of the box than any from the third parties.

canon does afterall make the cameras that use their lenses .

i do know we had a poll some time in the past and at least the perception was that sigma had the most QC problems.

ed rader

I have only used Canon lenses on the new equipment(bodies).
Years ago used some FD clones if you will on "A" and "T" series bodies.

Ironically the only problems I've ever had with lenses were with Canon lenses. Once it was the lowly kit lens, the other time it was a $1,000+ L lens (24-105L). I've owned four Sigma lenses and one Tokina lens and none of them had issues.