Second time's a charm!

Started Feb 5, 2013 | Discussions thread
OP daddyo Forum Pro • Posts: 12,670
My thoughts...

I normally do not test lenses extensively. If I do a few test shots and the contrast and detail looks good when zoomed in, I'm happy.

Why there are obvious sub-standard lenses within a costly line of lenses, I have no idea. Perhaps some are simply treated way to harshly in the shipping process and something gets knocked out of alignment.

I sometimes think that 'soft' lenses stay in the supply chain because they are returned in new condition -- such as my first 12-35mm -- then they are quickly tested on a camera, found to be functioning 'properly', and are returned to stock rather than to the manufacturer. I'm not suggesting B&H does this, but I'm fairly sure it happens.

It took a second Sigma 50-500mm from a local dealer for me to get a sharp copy of that lens. My initial shots with the first lens just didn't look that good to me. I had noticed that the tripod collar foot had some slight scuff marks on it, and believe it had been returned by some previous customer. The second copy is tack sharp.

Often, without very carefully testing with comparison shots, etc. a lens may seem to be OK, and I'm sure many dealers assume the return was from an overly critical customer. So if the lens seems good in quick testing and looks 'new', it may very well simply be placed back in stock.

There are number of decent reviews of the Panasonic 12-35mm and 35-100mm there verify the quality of those lenses -- I doubt very seriously that Pany has a systemic QC problem with either lens.

All I know is the copy I have now is outstanding from what I'm seeing initially, and all is right with the world!:-)

God Bless,


 daddyo's gear list:daddyo's gear list
Olympus 12-40mm F2.8
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow