"Some Canon and Nikon lenses are rebadged lenses from 3rd party makers"

guybrush

guybrush

Messages
358
Name
Rebecca
Edit My Images
Yes
I was reading another forum and I came across this quote in a Canon vs Nikkor lens thread..

Some Canon and Nikon lenses are rebadged lenses from 3rd party makers (like Sigma or Tamron), never the high end glass, but some kit lenses or mid-range quality stuff, so sometimes, in some classes, the 3rd party lens can be just as good, at less cost.
Click to expand...

I daren't question the guy as I haven't even posted on the forum yet and you know how people get when someone new comes along! But just to clarify and for my peace of mind.. any idea what this bloke may be on about? Canon using Sigma and Tamron lenses in their consumer range of lenses/ :thinking:
 
Absolute rubbish IMO.

Just look at the different offerings, they all look so different for a start, without even getting into technicalities
 
He's talking rubbish.

There is no way you can buy an identical Canikon lens with another brand name for less money.

Out-sourcing of peripherals like filters/bags/batteries/cables etc goes on of course, but not core products. Not on principle.

TBH I wouldn't worry if they did, if it made business sense, but I don't think it would be very popular with most consumers. It would still be a unique and exclusive Canikon lens. Cosina for example make Zeiss lenses, but they are still Zeiss, just made in a different factory.
 
I don't know about Canon/Nikon but some of the Pentax glass is Tokina stuff, so I read somewhere; 12-24mm f/4 and the 10-17mm are strikingly similar.....
 
Last edited:
Pentax and Tokina are both owned by Hoya, so that would make sense.

Kenko is also owned by Hoya so no doubt their filters are very similar too

The company is called THK (Tokina, Hoya and Kenko)
 
Not sure about who makes Canon lenses, but they are not all made in Japan. My 18-55IS was made in China and my 55-250IS was made in Taiwan, which does beg the question. Were they made in a Canon factory?
 
Does it matter who actually builds them?

You don't hear very many people complaining that Apple don't actually manufacture iPhones and iPads....
 
In reality, it's going to be no different Thant other Market place. I've worked in angling for a decade and the number of products that have been the sane as three or four others was astounding, especially when they all varied so much in price for essentially the same products, albeit with varying degrees of brand power.
 
Some Canon and Nikon lenses are rebadged lenses from 3rd party makers (like Sigma or Tamron), never the high end glass, but some kit lenses or mid-range quality stuff, so sometimes, in some classes, the 3rd party lens can be just as good, at less cost.

I'm not sure about the manufacturer but the bit I've highlighted in red is certainly correct.
 
it wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that some accessories/cheap lenses/low end compacts are manufactured by a completely different company - it happens all the time with other electronic items - nearly every laptop you'll by these days will have been put together by foxconn for instance.

as someone has already identified, the canon kit lens is made in taiwan so it is indeed very likely that the manufacture of this lens is subcontracted out.
 
Houston1863 said:
As long as the standards originally prescribed by the company whose name is on the lenses are maintained I'm probably not too bothered.



a010.gif


H
a035.gif
Click to expand...

On the contrary, it would bother me if I was paying double the price for the Canon or Nikon name, when the lens isn't made in one of their factories by their technicians.

Both the lenses I quoted in my previous post are cheap to buy and very good for the money, but not all Canon lenses are cheap. I wouldn't be too pleased if I bought an L lens to find it had been made in China by some unknown company.
 
killwilly said:
On the contrary, it would bother me if I was paying double the price for the Canon or Nikon name, when the lens isn't made in one of their factories by their technicians.

Both the lenses I quoted in my previous post are cheap to buy and very good for the money, but not all Canon lenses are cheap. I wouldn't be too pleased if I bought an L lens to find it had been made in China by some unknown company.
Click to expand...

Why? If you thought it took fantastic pictures before you found out where it was made what would have changed?
 
killwilly said:
I wouldn't be too pleased if I bought an L lens to find it had been made in China by some unknown company.
Click to expand...

but would it really matter though?

if the lens still had great build quality, performance and was supported by canon... i just don't see what difference it makes? obviously if the build quality or performance was poor or inferior and didn't bely the cost of the lens itself it would be different.

nearly every bit of consumer electronics is made in china/taiwan by companies most of us in the west have never even heard of. as long as it works it is of a quality i would expect for the price it doesn't worry me at all.
 
guybrush said:
Some Canon and Nikon lenses are rebadged lenses from 3rd party makers (like Sigma or Tamron), never the high end glass, but some kit lenses or mid-range quality stuff.....
Click to expand...

Rebadged? No. Rubbish idea.

Manufactured under contract, to Canon/Nikon design and specifications? Quite possibly.
 
killwilly said:
... it would bother me if I was paying double the price for the Canon or Nikon name, when the lens isn't made in one of their factories by their technicians.

I wouldn't be too pleased if I bought an L lens to find it had been made in China by some unknown company.
Click to expand...
I really don't understand why the name of the company on the technician's employment contract or on the factory's lease matters so much?

Your real complaint seems to be about quality versus cost. But if a lens is designed by Canon, constructed using materials specified by Canon, using equipment specified by Canon, by technicians trained to a standard approved by Canon, and subjected to quality controls required by Canon, how has the quality suffered?

Outsourcing manufacturing can reduce costs by exploiting lower labour costs, lower land costs, more efficient logistics, and/or economies of scale. But quality products still cost.
 
Last edited:
Cosina make Zeiss lenses to Zeiss specifications and standards, not sure about rebadged lenses from Sigma and Tamron though doesn't sound likely.
 
OK, I will explain. I recently bought a new Mercedes Benz, the cost is insignificant. I could have bought a Ford for less than half what I paid for my Mercedes, which does exactly the same job. If I had later found that it was made by Ford in Dagenham, or wherever they build them. I would not have been happy and neither would anyone else in their right mind, knowing they could have bought exactly the same car for half the price, but with a different badge

We buy Canon or Nikon because we "think" and hope we are getting the best for the money we spend. I am not saying that Sigma or Tokina are inferior, but they are generally cheaper to buy and we know that when we make our decision.
 
killwilly said:
OK, I will explain. I recently bought a new Mercedes Benz, the cost is insignificant. I could have bought a Ford for less than half what I paid for my Mercedes, which does exactly the same job. If I had later found that it was made by Ford in Dagenham, or wherever they build them. I would not have been happy and neither would anyone else in their right mind, knowing they could have bought exactly the same car for half the price, but with a different badge
Click to expand...
But there's the point... You'd only be buying the same car if it was exactly the same car just with a different badge on it. But they aren't the same car, so what you are discriminating against is the perceived quality systems in place in the different factories. Nothing more, nothing less. Bizarrely, you may find the manufacturing standards are higher in a third party factory - even although the product is cheaper to produce.
 
StewartR said:
Does it matter who actually builds them?

You don't hear very many people complaining that Apple don't actually manufacture iPhones and iPads....
Click to expand...

i agree with Stewart.
what does it matter as long as you get 'exactly' *** you paid for. and dont forget japanese made kit arent perfect given the quality variation! just have a look at the classified, *** are alway after a good/sharp copy, even for L lenses.
 
minolta 28-70mm f2.8 was pretty much rebadged tamron 28-70mm . can't remember if it was exactly 28-70, can't be bothered to check.
 
Vans are often the same vehicle, but rebadged.

The Vauxhall Vivaro, Renault Traffic and Nissan Primastar are all the same van, just with different tweaks depending on the brand.

Some Mazda's are old Fords, with different names.

And is the the Toyota Aygo that citroen and peugeot make the same of?

But I can't see it being the same with lenses, it would be too obvious, although one could argue that whilst the physical outside of the lens was the same, the quality of the glass inside was different.

However, as someone who does not handle many lenses at all, I would rather go with the view of Stewart who does.
 
killwilly said:
OK, I will explain. I recently bought a new Mercedes Benz, the cost is insignificant. I could have bought a Ford for less than half what I paid for my Mercedes, which does exactly the same job. If I had later found that it was made by Ford in Dagenham, or wherever they build them. I would not have been happy and neither would anyone else in their right mind, knowing they could have bought exactly the same car for half the price, but with a different badge

We buy Canon or Nikon because we "think" and hope we are getting the best for the money we spend. I am not saying that Sigma or Tokina are inferior, but they are generally cheaper to buy and we know that when we make our decision.
Click to expand...

BMW do outsource their manufacturing to places like Bulgaria/Poland etc and ship them back to Germany to sprinkle the 'Made in Germany' fairy dust on them to add value. I've read Porsche outsource their Cayman to a Finnish company (Valmet) I'd be surprised if Mercedes didn't have a similar manufacturing process of outsourcing labour intensive work. I remember reading they do shift some production to Graz in Austria as well.

For me though (and a lot of others) China/Taiwan will forever be associated with cheap mass produced manufacturing and Germany/Japan with engineering excellence and reliability. Germany has been adding value to their products and boosting exports for years this way.
 
I remember my father going to germany to buy some expensive ass huge tractors for work which where suppose to be made in germany, in reality - in poland by turks, who are well - very "careful" and passionate workers.
the same with "made in germany" I'm not a racist, but - if it's made by turks I would avoid it at any cost.

Made in China used to be the best thing , before russians came in .
Made in Germany used to mean something as well.
now it's just down to QC and the company's ideology.
 
killwilly said:
OK, I will explain. I recently bought a new Mercedes Benz, the cost is insignificant. I could have bought a Ford for less than half what I paid for my Mercedes, which does exactly the same job. If I had later found that it was made by Ford in Dagenham, or wherever they build them. I would not have been happy and neither would anyone else in their right mind, knowing they could have bought exactly the same car for half the price, but with a different badge

We buy Canon or Nikon because we "think" and hope we are getting the best for the money we spend. I am not saying that Sigma or Tokina are inferior, but they are generally cheaper to buy and we know that when we make our decision.
Click to expand...

How many of the components in your nice new Mercedes were actually manufactured by Mercedes?
 
killwilly said:
OK, I will explain. I recently bought a new Mercedes Benz, the cost is insignificant. I could have bought a Ford for less than half what I paid for my Mercedes, which does exactly the same job. If I had later found that it was made by Ford in Dagenham, or wherever they build them. I would not have been happy and neither would anyone else in their right mind, knowing they could have bought exactly the same car for half the price, but with a different badge

We buy Canon or Nikon because we "think" and hope we are getting the best for the money we spend. I am not saying that Sigma or Tokina are inferior, but they are generally cheaper to buy and we know that when we make our decision.
Click to expand...

What on earth possessed you to pick motor manufacturers as an example? They are probably one of the best known industries for cross manufacture and rebadging with the possible exception of supermarkets and Heinz baked beans*.



*better include tomato ketchup in that bracket as well!
 
Last edited:
The point I was making is..... I don't expect to pay £2000 for a Canon "L" lens and then find that I can buy exactly the same lens for half the price with a different makers name on the side, but made in the same factory and to the same specification.
 
Last edited:
killwilly said:
I am not saying that Sigma or Tokina are inferior, but they are generally cheaper to buy and we know that when we make our decision.
Click to expand...

I know of several Sigma lenses that are the best in their class and I'd imagine that the same is true of Tokina and on the whole I do wish people would stop all this brand snobbery silliness and buy the best at the price they're willing to pay.

As for Merc... I had an SLK and it was one of the worst cars I've ever had :nono: The roof kept jamming, paint came off in flakes and the gear change was awful, and my Porsche was Gerry built to say the least :bang: For motoring the JD Power survey showed Mercedes weaknesses and if we had the same sort of thing for camera gear it'd make interesting reading (y)
 
Nikon use Sony sensors in their pro line cameras (modified a bit admittedly) don't they, so no difference there either...
 
killwilly said:
The point I was making is..... I don't expect to pay £2000 for a Canon "L" lens and then find that I can buy exactly the same lens for half the price with a different makers name on the side, but made in the same factory and to the same specification.
Click to expand...
That's OK - because you can't :)
 
stumeech said:
Nikon use Sony sensors in their pro line cameras (modified a bit admittedly) don't they, so no difference there either...
Click to expand...


they are - as well as other brands use sony sensors and others use some other company sensors. I think Kodak was somewhat in top as well . not that I care or anyone should. Just sometimes I crossread stuff like that.
 
The basic Seat, Volkswagen and Audi share most of their engines and elements, seat ibiza, polo and a3 are/were made at the same factories. What makes them in different price brackets is the bells and whistles that some of them have and some of them haven't. It is not necessarily snobbery, it is just down to the fact of do you want those extras that make the car more expensive but also make it into a better experience?
At the end, I think what it goes down is to information. If you are informed about the purchases you make and you understand what you are getting in terms of value, there is nothing wrong with getting a cheaper lens or a more expensive lens. I know that in some areas I want to know that I have got the best I could afford, while in others I prefer to know that I got the cheapest (not best) option available.
Then there is depreciation of products, do nikon/ canon lenses hold their value in used markets better than 3rd party ones? I don't know about that one, but usually a mercedes holds it's value better than a seat.
 
specialman said:
I don't know about Canon/Nikon but some of the Pentax glass is Tokina stuff, so I read somewhere; 12-24mm f/4 and the 10-17mm are strikingly similar.....
Click to expand...

10-17mm fisheye, 35mm f2.8 macro, 100mm f2.8 macro, 12-24mm f4, 16-50mm f2.8 50-13mm f2.8 were co designed by Pentax and Tokina.

Pentax then added quickshift and their own smc coating plus the 16-50mm and 50-135mm got weather sealing and ultrasonic motors as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top