Third Party Lenses. Are they really that bad?

Really depends on the brand/lens...

I used to have more lens for my video camera and there were times where the cheaper lens (Raynox) gave me more effect than the more expensive counter part (Century Precision Optics) that was 6 times more pricey.

 

I'm sorry, I don't mean to be confusing. But like Panda Jerk said, the 3rd party lenses (that are cheap) usually end up going. I mentioned that I too have Sigma lenses. While they do the job because I can't afford the 2k it would cost to get the Nikon version, it has it's flaws. to me #1 flaw was that chip issue in the lens, causing it to not communicate with the body right, #2 is its soft at various distances.

All lenses will do the job, but for best quality, you get what you pay for.

So to summarize my confusing overstatement, if you go 3rd party, look for the ones with good reviews, typically if you resell them, like Panda and Myself have done, you can get some of your money back to purchase that expensive one.

For hobby work, and recreational shooting, no need to go that high. I do weddings, portraits, and events need speed and consistency, thats all.

 

thanks luke! yeah i think for the price you really cant go wrong. and ive watched a TON of videos of the tokina 16-28mm and people say its just as sharp and clear as the nikkor equiv.

 

Im going to update and say that the brown truck just dropped off another sigma for me and looks like the AF is spot on

 

x2 I'm a Nikon whore so all my stuff is OEM.

 

dont get me wrong i am too. but either way i think im making a good decision

 

If you only stick with OEM you don't know what you're missing and how much money you can save

 

Yeah but I have peace of mind knowing that everything will work great no matter what!

 

I don't feel they are bad or cheep. I don't buy third party lens because they may not work on all my camera bodies. I had one Sigma lens, it worked on my film SLR but not my DSLR.