Beginner Lens focusing between different brands

[SarahMarie]

Out of interest, do lenses that are different brands vary greatly in their performance or is it as much to do with the camera body itself?

For instance which would give the better performance in the 70-300mm range...a Canon, Tamron or Sigma?

 

[Gaz J]

Some are better than others but generally they are all pretty decent. I would think it would be a combination of lens motor, focus accuracy of the camera, max aperture of the lens itself and, in some cases, battery size and voltage that would make the difference. Canon 1 series cameras with the bigger batteries will focus Canon big telephoto lenses faster than the other Canon bodies but the difference is hard to detect in use. Although the 7DMkII has the smaller battery and is supposed to be as fast now.

 

[Nawty]

Out of interest, do lenses that are different brands vary greatly in their performance or is it as much to do with the camera body itself?

For instance which would give the better performance in the 70-300mm range...a Canon, Tamron or Sigma?

It isn't quite as simple as that, all brands are capable of making great lenses, all also make some naff lenses.

For example.

Tamron 70-300 is crap
Tamron 70-300 VC is as good, if not better than the Nikon equivalent (and better than the Canon).

 

[SarahMarie]

It isn't quite as simple as that, all brands are capable of making great lenses, all also make some naff lenses.

For example.

Tamron 70-300 is crap
Tamron 70-300 VC is as good, if not better than the Nikon equivalent (and better than the Canon).

Ah ok, so you'd steer clear of the Tamron 70-300mm if you had to? Is it just generally bad at focusing?

It is nice to know which lenses to avoid for future reference.

 

[Nawty]

Ah ok, so you'd steer clear of the Tamron 70-300mm if you had to? Is it just generally bad at focusing?

It is nice to know which lenses to avoid for future reference.

It's just generally bad. Slow to focus and it isn't sharp at all.

Lots of people have it as camera shops often do a "special deal" where you can get it for £100 or so when you buy your camera. But don't.

If you must buy a cheap 70-300 then the Sigma DGO is the one to get or the Nikon 55-200VR is a very nice lens, not as long but still very nice.

 

[chris malcolm]

I have lenses made by five different lens making companies. My fastest focusing lens is a thirty year old film era lens with a very old fashioned dependence on an in-camera focus drive motor which is generally regarded as obsolete and slow. I've upgraded my camera body twice on this collection of lenses. Each upgrade improved both the speed of focus and the accuracy of focus of some lenses, smetimes quite dramatically, and made no difference to others. In other words there are no reliable general rules, and a lot of the orthodox wisdom on the topic is wrong.

 

[Phil V]

What's fastest a Ford or Volkswagen?

Lens brands are like car brands, they each have a budget range a mid range and a top range.

The best Sigma is loads better than the cheapest Canon, but when it comes to the best Sigma vs the best Canon, things get closer.

 

[SarahMarie]

What's fastest a Ford or Volkswagen?

Lens brands are like car brands, they each have a budget range a mid range and a top range.

The best Sigma is loads better than the cheapest Canon, but when it comes to the best Sigma vs the best Canon, things get closer.

Hmm...I see your point. The reason I asked initially is because I mainly use my Tamron 18-200mm lens. Some shots I take are really sharp focus and other times, even though the camera focuses on something and it looks like its clear in the viewfinder, when I come to view it on the screen or the laptop, its just so far out I just wondered if it was the lens or me (highly likely!!!) or a combination of both. Sometimes it is in perfect focus, but then that doesn't explain why at times, it isn't

 

[Fuzzdog]

Tamron 70-300 VC is as good, if not better than the Nikon equivalent (and better than the Canon).

Also, of course, lots can vary between individual lenses - I'll use that Tamron 70-300 VC as an example, as I had three copies from brand new, two of which seemed to treat the ability to focus as an optional extra.

(Annoyingly, the one which had swift and accurate focus also sounded like the stabiliser had a small rodent trapped inside, so also went back and I went and bought a Sigma!)

Regarding things looking sharp in the viewfinder, most DSLRs (certainly my old 400D!) really don't have terribly accurate focus screens, mostly as a nice accurate one would be incredibly dark with most consumer lenses. Should still be fine for fairly slow lenses like the 18-200 though, worth checking that your camera isn't jumping focus to something else right at the last minute when you take the shot.

 

[Phil V]

Hmm...I see your point. The reason I asked initially is because I mainly use my Tamron 18-200mm lens. Some shots I take are really sharp focus and other times, even though the camera focuses on something and it looks like its clear in the viewfinder, when I come to view it on the screen or the laptop, its just so far out I just wondered if it was the lens or me (highly likely!!!) or a combination of both. Sometimes it is in perfect focus, but then that doesn't explain why at times, it isn't

If that lens creates 'in focus' shots sometimes, there's possibly nothing wrong with it.

That leaves the other option, or the lens is just crap.

It's not exactly a premium product, you should read some reviews of alternatives.

 

[pete.rush]

Hmm...I see your point. The reason I asked initially is because I mainly use my Tamron 18-200mm lens. Some shots I take are really sharp focus and other times, even though the camera focuses on something and it looks like its clear in the viewfinder, when I come to view it on the screen or the laptop, its just so far out I just wondered if it was the lens or me (highly likely!!!) or a combination of both. Sometimes it is in perfect focus, but then that doesn't explain why at times, it isn't

Are you using a single focus point or multiple points, using the multiple points the camera tends to focus on the nearest subject rather than the subject you actually want to capture. Camera setting and light conditions also have major influence. As others have mentioned there are good lenses and bad ones. Your 18-200mm lens although convenient to you because of the focal range falls into the lesser category as the zoom ratio great than 1:4 (yours is 1:11) these hyper-zooms as they tend to be called really don't deliver on quality or performance, but they do offer a convent way of carrying few lenses and having to constantly change lenses and they are affordable, so it's weighing out the pro's and con's

 

[Nostromo]

I think part of the problem is with most consumer zoom lenses is that they generally get softer as you zoom in, are effected by the aperture (normally better at around f/8). So it may not be a focus issue that you have, but just that the lens is soft at the long end.
My Tamron 70-300 vc is pretty good between 70 and 150 but after that it goes rapidly down hill. So I'm probably going to sell it and get the Canon 55-250 stm. I know I'm going to lose 50mm in length, but i think it's worth it.

 

[ancient_mariner]

Hmm...I see your point. The reason I asked initially is because I mainly use my Tamron 18-200mm lens. Some shots I take are really sharp focus and other times, even though the camera focuses on something and it looks like its clear in the viewfinder, when I come to view it on the screen or the laptop, its just so far out I just wondered if it was the lens or me (highly likely!!!) or a combination of both. Sometimes it is in perfect focus, but then that doesn't explain why at times, it isn't

There are a number of reasons why a photo might not be sharp - missing focus is just one - but as Phil says, if you can get some shots in focus then it's robably not the camera body. However if you're trying to photograph a moving object then the camera might not be able to track and change focus quickly enough, and a superzoom lens like that isn't going to focus quickly or be terribly sharp, especially at the telephoto end.

Everyone has their preferred technique for getting sharp photos. Mine is to use a single focus point in the middle of the viewfinder to enable me to focus on the thing I want sharp, then once that is in focus I will recompose while holding down the button and take the shot. It's not the only way, but it works most of the time for me.

 

[troutfisher]

Also dont forget that if you are using multiple focus points the one you want and the one the camera chooses may not be the same

 

[SarahMarie]

If that lens creates 'in focus' shots sometimes, there's possibly nothing wrong with it.

That leaves the other option, or the lens is just crap.

It's not exactly a premium product, you should read some reviews of alternatives.

Yeah, it came with the camera as a second hand job lot. That's what got me thinking maybe it was just a cheapo lens that the original owner bought? I do think some shots are okay with it though? This photo was taken with the lens in question...does it look reasonable?

 

[SarahMarie]

Are you using a single focus point or multiple points, using the multiple points the camera tends to focus on the nearest subject rather than the subject you actually want to capture.

I use the single focus point all the time

Thanks for all your help everyone. It was a lens that I got with the camera when I bought it 2nd hand. I think I have got a few good shots out of it so I think it is probably me that is at fault when the lens isn't focusing properly. I clearly have a lot to learn when it comes to lighting etc and how that can influence a shot. I also do think that the lens probably does get softer when its at its maximum, something that I never really considered before but something that makes total sense now. I'll persevere with it and see what improvements I can make with other settings too

 

[Phil V]

I'm no expert on bird photography, but the focus appears to be on the leaf behind the bird.
That could be poor technique or the lens is back focussing.
There are methods for testing focus accuracy, if you're at all unsure you should check it out.

 

[SarahMarie]

I'm no expert on bird photography, but the focus appears to be on the leaf behind the bird.
That could be poor technique or the lens is back focussing.
There are methods for testing focus accuracy, if you're at all unsure you should check it out.

Hmm...not sure about the leaf, I was aiming for the bird lol. Poor technique is something that I am working on all the time. I am trying to improve lol. I don't know how to test focus accuracy, is there a way to do this?

 

[Phil V]

Hmm...not sure about the leaf, I was aiming for the bird lol. Poor technique is something that I am working on all the time. I am trying to improve lol. I don't know how to test focus accuracy, is there a way to do this?

Yes. I rarely say 'google it' but it's complicated and others have put great tutorials online.

Try looking for the dot tune method, though not sure if you can calibrate your camera, you really should be able to check it at least.