Are de-kitted lenses more prone to sample variation?

Greynerd wrote:

Impulses wrote:

Wasabi Bob wrote:

I really fail to see the humor in your response. So much of the info shared in such discussion begins as someones "opinion". It magically becomes fact and people start forming conclusions on assumptions. I've been to where the lens are manufactured and have a close working relation with their service network, globally. I'm not pulling rabbits out of a hat when I made those statements.

There is no value to the ridiculous theory that a well known company, in this case the largest manufacturer of aspherical lens in the world, intentionally sells inferior copies of a lens. People who are new to digital photography look to these forums for guidance. Any info should be factual and accurate.

Pikme wrote:

Wasabi Bob wrote:

Assaft

I've had some professional interaction with Panasonic as well as having the opportunity to visit their facilities in Japan. There is no such thing as a "bad copy" of a lens. When the lens leaves the factory, all are equal. The assembly is all automated, so they've removed the human factor which could introduce variations. If you see any difference, it's likely due to shipping related damage. When I see such comments, it almost sounds like some people believe that they are running some sort of lens counterfeiting operation.

Are you interested in ocean front property for sale in Arizona? I can get you a real bargain!

Nothing you're saying backs the facts on the ground... If their lenses are SO susceptible to shipping damage (and indeed everyone else's) then they're basically not fit for real world use and they'd all develop issues when handed over time... That doesn't really happen tho.

No one is singling out Panasonic btw, all the major brands ship uneven lens samples.

Probably no lens goes out perfect or there are minor tolerance limits and it is just some people look harder than others for the issues. The cheaper lens will just have a wider variation.

These lenses are fit for the real world and it is more a case of them being unfit for people from the world of unrealistic expectations.

This whole issue of a lens being a 'kit' lens is really a lot of nonsense anyway. Being bundled with a camera for mass sale just undermines the standing of a lens which really has nothing to do with the actual merits of the lens.

Agreed, I was just following his logic to it's illogical conclusion... I do think sometimes lenses come off the factory floor in bad enough condition as to be noticeable without being obsessed with minutia tho. I wouldn't say one needs to go shoot test charts to test that tho, it proves to be more trouble than it's worth.

M4/3 actually has several 'kit lenses' that I'd argue are a cut amongst many other kit lenses... Many are sharper stopped down than most people will ever need (14-140 particularly). There's always some sorta exception to everything, the kit 14-42 II comes with a plastic mount for instance which might bother some.

I think uneven play in zoom action is probably more common than anything... We had two 14-42 II here at one point, mine would rub pretty noticeably at either end and stutter towards the long end whereas the other was really smooth. Just luck of the draw, they were bought almost at the same time (w/a G6 & GF6).