Best non OEM lenses

A good article of alternative lense choices for DSLR owners for coming black friday :D

http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7613711074/dpreview-top-picks-stand-out-third-party-lenses

Thanks! Interesting reading!!

I have become a big fan of Sigma. The recent remake of their line has produced some truly remarkable lenses rivaling the best the OEM's can offer and offering some they don't.

Dave

Tokina gets good reviews on their UWA's as well. That 11-16 is considered one of the best out there right now. (Plus no Canikon premium price tag)

Sent using a small piece of fruit.

I like my Tamron 18 - 270.

I have historically considered Tokina, Sigma, Tamron in that order when looking at 3rd party lenses.

Tokina's 11-16mm f/2.8 is a killer lens and in my view, none of the manufacturers offer any lenses near it.

Sigma has gone up a notch in my comfort level after purchasing two Sigma lenses last summer; the 17-50mm f/2.8 and the 8-16mm f/4.5~5.6

Before I purchased those lenses, I read an awful lot of negative reviews about them, so much so that it made me hesitate. But after reading other reviews about the premium quality of the 17-50mm f/2.8, I took a chance and bought one.

And I have been really happy with it. Perhaps there is some truth to different lenses having different quality, or perhaps Sigma's reputation is mostly due to offerings in the past, I don't know.

And I bought the Sigma 8-16mm as there is no wider non-fisheye lens you can buy for a cropped DSLR. That extra 3mm over my Tokina is significant.

I now use the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 when I am inside buildings, museums, cathedrals, etc. where the fast f/2.8 comes in handy, but now use the Sigma 8-16mm for all outside wide shots.

Of course, both lenses are about the same size and weight, so I would rather only take one or the other on vacation.

And the Sigma 8-16mm is just a work of art - including that bulbous front glass element.

So for at least the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5~5.6 and the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, none of the camera manufacturers make anything like them. And for the 17-50mm f/2.8, both Canon and Nikon make a similar 17-55mm f/2.8, but from DxOMark testing, neither of the camera brand lenses can touch the Sigma in quality.

And how about the new Sigma 17-35mm f/1.8? That is a unique lens. It listed for around $700 last Aug when it first made it to market, but now it is over $900 - probably due to high demand.

Thing is, the camera manufacturers only give cropped lenses lip service, and mostly their offerings are consumer-grade lenses. If you want premium cropped lenses, you all but have to go to the third party.

Depends on what you're after. Price? Tokina/Sigma/Tamron. Optics? Zeiss.

The Zeiss ZE 15/2.8 and the 100/2 Makro are at the top of my shopping list, above any other Canon glass at the moment. Hope to bag both of them in time for our Alaska cruise in July.

I very recently purchased my very first 3rd party lens, a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS. So far I'm extremely happy with it. I'm now considering purchasing a super telephoto zoom for my wildlife photography and am looking at 3rd party lenses as Nikon's 80-400mm VR is just way over my budget. I'm eagerly awaiting Tamron's recently announced 150-600mm to become available and will seriously consider that one.

I very recently purchased my very first 3rd party lens' date=' a Sigma 17-50 f2.8 OS. So far I'm extremely happy with it. I'm now considering purchasing a super telephoto zoom for my wildlife photography and am looking at 3rd party lenses as Nikon's 80-400mm VR is just way over my budget. I'm eagerly awaiting Tamron's recently announced 150-600mm to become available and will seriously consider that one.[/quote']

 

 

I purchased the "BIG MA" 120-400mm Sigma lens last year. It is a very good lens, but when pushed to between 300-400 it gets soft. Like most of the 3rd Party lenses, they are good, but when pushed they still lack some sharpness, especially during overcasts or cloudy situations. So I broke down this year and purchased the NikonAF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR. (new one) and immediately the color and sharpness was immediate. Best telephoto lens at that focal length that I have ever used. Going on a cruise in October and place to take this heavy glass, as in Belize we plan to take a river boat ride to some Mayan ruins and that would be an excellent lens to use taking wildlife on the riverbank......very excited to use it.

 

I feel fortunate I was able to purchase the lens, as it is expensive, but certainly glad I did. Here is another idea for NIKON shooters, that works great. Purchase the 70-200mm F2.8 VR ED lens and the 1.7X Tele-convertor, this will provide you a maximum reach of 340mm with 2 f stops, but the lens itself is such a high quality, and if you are using a D800, well you are really out ahead, as you can safely crop 5X on top of that...I shoot Aviation Photography, and yes have used the 200-400 NIKON super lens, but compared to the new 80-400mm Well I will take the later any day, the 200-400 EXCELLENT lens, to darn big, heavy and not worth 7K in my opinion for the amount of time you use it for situational photography.

 

I am very interested in reading more about the Tamron lens, but from many of the preliminary reports I am getting from people who are using this lens in the field, not very good results, too soft over 300, loses even more at 450+

 

My recommendation, if you are a Nikon shooter, save and just buy the Nikon lens, it really is superior glass, although expensive, you do get what you paid for.

 

Another lens I just purchase, and I feel it is remarkable is the Nikon 85MM f 1.4 Portrait lens. All I can say its Remarkably SHARP.... Another great lens.

My recommendation, if you are a Nikon shooter, save and just buy the Nikon lens, it really is superior glass, although expensive, you do get what you paid for.

The problem is, if you are a DX shooter, Nikon (nor Canon for that matter) really produce many premium DX lenses. The 17-55mm f2.8 is about it for both brands, with a possible nod to the Nikon 10.5mm f/2.8 Dx fisheye - it could be considered a premium lens also.

And in DxOMark testing, the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 has been shown to be superior to both the Canon and Nikon 17-55m f/2.8.

Thing is, for Dx shooters, the only time you really need to go with a Dx lens is in the wide angle area, as you can use many of the fine Nikon telephoto lenses.

But in the wide angle arena, to get the best lenses you have to go to the 3rd party. For example, the Sigma 17-35mm f/1.8 is quickly gaining reputation as the best Dx lens ever made, and neither Canon or Nikon make anything close.

Neither do Nikon or Canon have anything to match the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8.

And while it is not a fast lens, nothing Nikon or Canon make is as wide as the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5~5.6 - which is a non fisheye lens.

Thing is Canon and Nikon simply provide lip service for premium Dx/EF-S lenses. With a couple of exceptions, they are all consumer grade. To get premium APS-C lenses, you have to go to the 3rd party. I won't go as far as calling them professional lenses, but the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 especially is certainly a premium lens with a lot better build quality than the Nikon 10-24mm consumer-grade lens.

Of the 13 DSLR lenses I own,

two are Sigma:

8-16mm f/4.5~5.6

17-50mm f/2.8

three are Tokina:

11-16mm f/2.8

100mm f/2.8 macro

80-400mm f/4~5.6

eight are Nikon:

10.5mm f/2.8 fisheye

18-200mm f/3.5~5.6G

28mm f/1.8G

40mm f/2.8G micro

50mm f/1.4G

70~300mm f/4.5~5.6G

80-200mm f/2.8D

85mm f/1.8G

I always try to buy quality lenses, and while a couple of them in my lens farm are a bit iffy (especially the Tokina 80-400mm), I go with Nikon when it makes sense, but I am not afraid to go aftermarket if needed, especially for wide angle DX lenses.

awboater, I agree I do not shoot DX only APS-C (FX) with a Nikon D4 and D800, so my world is different and you do bringup excellent point. Thank you for bringing this up....;)

Years ago, I purchased the first Tokina AF lens for my Minolta 7000 AF Film camera (A 35-200) that I used a lot when I got it. It is still a great lens, but not as compatible as other lenses are now with the new DSLR's.

I bought a Sigma 18-200 for my Sony Alpha 100 and was not as impressed with it. It just did not feel as good as the Sony brand 18-200 which I already owned.

But non-OEM lenses are still quite good.

So I broke down this year and purchased the NikonAF-S NIKKOR 80-400mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR. (new one) and immediately the color and sharpness was immediate. Best telephoto lens at that focal length that I have ever used.

That is the telephoto lens that I would love to own. But at $2500, it just isn't within my price range.

Here is another idea for NIKON shooters, that works great. Purchase the 70-200mm F2.8 VR ED lens and the 1.7X Tele-convertor, this will provide you a maximum reach of 340mm with 2 f stops, but the lens itself is such a high quality

I considered this set up but I already own the 70-300mm & find that I need more reach at times, especially for bird photography.

The new Tamron lens is looking promising, especially considering the rumored price point. I can't wait to read the reviews.

3rd party lens manufacturers have come a long way in recent years. Many of their products are receiving excellent reviews.

I'm a Nikon shooter & always look to the Nikon lenses first, but I will not hesitate to research lenses from 3rd party manufacturers if they are offering what I need.