THE LENS LOTTERY
Author AndrewS May 2012
Introduction I have enjoyed making photographs and working, or just messing around with cameras for almost 60 years. Along the way I have bought and used many cameras and lenses. In the early days I assumed, perhaps incorrectly, that one copy of a particular model lens would be the same as the next copy for all practical purposes. However in recent times I have developed the habit of systematically testing every new lens which comes into my hands. This practice has revealed great variation between copies of many lenses together with a high rate of defects and problems.
Here follows a list of the lenses I have purchased new over the last few years with some comments about each and the cameras which drive them. Yes, I am a confessed cameraholic, but eBay helps to offset the cost of my addiction. So here they are, in vaguely alphabetical order:
Canon EF 70-200 mm f4 L IS This is the nearest thing to a perfect lens I have ever owned. It is optically and mechanically superb, OIS works really well and it's not outrageously expensive for such a fine optic. This one gets a STAR rating from me. Unfortunately the Canon 60D camera which I chose to drive this lens is not up to the same lofty standard. I thought I would use this combination a lot, but don't for two reasons. First, my Panasonic GH2 with Olympus 40-150 mm lens delivers 95% of the image quality at a fraction the size and weight. Second, the 60D is plagued by capriciously inaccurate autofocus to the extent I cannot rely on my photos being in precise focus. Perhaps a more expensive EOS camera body would fix the AF problem, but I am not encouraged by ongoing reports of AF inaccuracy from the EOS 7D and have no interest in going up to full frame. Even if I did the 5D2 has an underwhelming record on AF performance, with many complaints in user forums. By comparison the GH2 nails correct focus with near perfect consistency in single shot operation.
Canon EFS 15-85 mm IS [First copy] This was returned to the vendor, faulty with obvious decentering, producing marked softness on the left side. The [Second copy] was good. When focussed correctly this lens delivers excellent resolution at all focal lengths. Unfortunately focus with the 60D is erratic especially at the wide end in SLR mode with the mirror down. In live view mode the camera uses contrast detect AF which is extremely slow, more accurate but still prone to errors.
Canon EFS 17-55 mm f 2.8 IS This is a good lens with which I made many documentary photos. It would not focus reliably at the wide end on EOS 20D or 40D. The workaround for this was to zoom out to the long end, set AF then zoom back to the wide end. Tedious.
Canon EFS 18-55mm IS kit lens [First copy] This was the Mark1 version which was surprisingly good optically. I got a good copy in the kit lens quality lottery. AF accuracy was unreliable on Canon EOS 450D. The [Second copy] was the mark 2 version which is supposed to be better, but I got the wrong lottery ticket and ended up with a bad copy, soft on one side at the wide end and soft on the other side at the long end.
Canon EFS 55-250 mm IS budget zoom [First copy] This was the Mark 1 version which was surprisingly good and a real bargain. I should have kept it because the [Second copy] the Mark 2 version was not as good, with decentering and marked softness with loss of contrast at the long end.
Olympus 40-150 mm This compact Micro 4/3 lens is a STAR. It delivers most of the performance of more expensive lenses. It lacks IS but that has not been a problem for me on the Panasonic GH2. It should be perfect on the Olympus EM5.
Olympus 75-300 mm This is another M43 lens from Olympus with very compact dimensions for it's focal length range. No problems but the optical quality is not quite up to that of the Panasonic 100-300 mm.
Pansonic 14-45 mm OIS I have used two copies of this M43 standard zoom and both have been STARS with very good to excellent image quality across the focal length and aperture range and no mechanical or optical defects.
Panasonic 14-42 mm OIS kit zoom My copy of this was faulty. Optically it was reasonable but it was unpredictably prone to double imaging for reasons I never determined, maybe a case of Shutter Shock Syndrome (See my post about S.S.S. on this blog) involving the OIS module.
Panasonic 45-200 mm OIS I have used two copies of this both showing the same characteristics. From 45 to about 120 mm focal length the lens delivers very decent results. But at the long end it exhibits loss of contrast and sharpness with a tendency to misfocus even on the GH2 which has an exemplary focussing performance with most M43 lenses.
Panasonic 45-175 mm PZ OIS Presumably this was intended to be Panasonic's upgrade to the somewhat outdated 45-200 mm. I bought one in November 2011 and found it to be totally unserviceable. It was faulty with severe jitter effect (double imaging) in all operating conditions. It went back to the vendor for a refund. Some, but not all, users have reported the same problem. I have not yet seen any acknowlegement from Panasonic that a problem even exists.
Panasonic 100-300 mm OIS This is another super zoom lens for M43, with overall very decent performance. My copy shows a bit of decentering evidenced by softness on the left side at most focal lengths. Ortherwise it is a good lens suitable for hand held use on Panasonic OIS bodies.
Samsung NX 18-55 mm IS My [First copy] of this was a bit soft at the long end but otherwise turned in a very decent performance for a budget kit zoom. The [Second copy] was even better with good sharpness at all focal lengths.
Samsung NX 30 mm f2 This is a STAR lens in Samsung's lineup, with an excellent rating in all aspects of performance. A very small lens with a big performance.
Samsung NX 20 mm f2.8 My [First copy] of this was a poor performer with low resolution and poor resistance to flare. It was retured to the vendor. The [Second copy] was better, delivering good sharpness stopped down a little. But the flare problem remained.
Samsung NX 50-200 mm OIS My [First copy] of this is slightly decentered evidenced by a little softness on the right side at 200 mm. This one also has a slightly sticky zoom action. I tried two further copies to see if I could find a better one. The [Second copy] was faulty with poor sharpness at the long end so it went back to the vendor. The [Third copy] had a nice smooth zoom action but was not quite as sharp as Copy 1 at the long end. So I kept the first one.
Summary Of the 25 lenses listed here, one was completely unserviceable on delivery. This and 3 others were returned to the vendor as fauly. Seven others had faults or defects impacting on image quality. Fourteen had no faults or defects. That is a rate of 56% with no obvious faults and 44% with a fault or problem affecting operation and/or image quality.
Conclusion As you can see from this experience, the bad copy rate in new lenses is disappointingly high. There does appear to be a tendency to less problems in the higher price range but even expensive lenses are not immune from trouble. I see no trend to prefer one manufacturer over another. It would appear from my reading of reviews and reports that all brands have a percentage of bad copies. The further disappointment about this issue is that lens makers rarely acknowlege problems publicly and rarely issue recalls.
Recommendation to buyers My suggestion is to buy from a vendor which guarantees replacement or money back on return. The rate of bad, or at least "not best" copies is so high that any buyer who acquires more than 2-3 lenses is almost guaranteed to encounter a problem. You may find it worth buying from a real shop with a real live sales person who you know by name, and more importantly who knows you and respects your judgement.
I suspect that most retail customers who report a "problem" with a camera or lens are probably not using their equipment correctly. So, when you present yourself to the vendor claiming to have faulty equipment make sure you have in hand good evidence in the form of hard copy photographs illustrating the problem.