Someone here with Experience regarding "cheap" Lenses for Canon A6X0 Series? - General Chat - CHDK Forum

Someone here with Experience regarding "cheap" Lenses for Canon A6X0 Series?

  • 13 Replies
  • 6330 Views
*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
Advertisements
Hi,

i'd like to "pimp my Cam". It's a A620 and i know one can buy special lenses you can "screw on/mount" via a special Adapter.
There are wide angle / Fish eye lenses, there are macro lenses and there are teleconverters. now i know they all can't do magic, as for magic (well, not really) it would be best to replace the built-in canon lens.
anyhow, i can buy these lenses off of Canon and will pay about 150 Euros each, while i can buy cheap lenses (of course not by canon, i guess built in a thai sweatshop) for about 50 bucks each (off of ebay for example).
Now i know these cheap lenses cannot reach the quality of the canon lenses, BUT will the difference matter on a "cheap camera" like the a620? you know what i mean?
do you suggest investing 150 euros into a lens or do you have experience with the non-canon lenses and can tell that the difference is not to be noticed?
i know the chdk forum isnt exactly the right place to ask for something like that, but it's the only "photoforum" i visit, so...
Thanks in advance, PhoX

*

Offline wontolla

  • ****
  • 413
  • S3 & G9 & A720

Do yourself a favour and don't waste the 50 Euros.

I bought two Opteka lenses from ebay: 2.2x Telephoto and a .45x Wide Angle. I went out to take some testing pictures and came back with this:

Now I use them as nice heavy expensive paperweights. I tried manual focusing, tweaking the menu options and I couldn't rescue the money I paid for them.

As you said, the Canon ones are expensive but I thing there are options like Rynox, Olympus or Kenko. I personally haven't test them but there are many guys in the S3 forum that swear for them (sorry, I have the S3 and not the A620 but the idea is the same). You can see comparisons of different lenses for the A620 in the lensmate page (can we post commercial links in this forum?).

IMHO: If you buy the cheapest (or the most expensive) of something, you end up loosing money.

Sorry if my english is not Shakespearean.

*

Offline GrAnd

  • ****
  • 916
  • [A610, S3IS]
    • CHDK
I used wide angle lenses Raynox DCR-6600Pro and macro lenses DCR250 with S3. The quality of shots was quite good.
CHDK Developer.

*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
thanks for the replies, guys!
wow barney, have you been a secretary in your former life? you must type really fast. your posts always are so huge and consistently giving good suggestions, hints and things like that, and i don't find any typos at all :)
Well Barney and Wontolla, what have we here: Two opinions that couldn't be more different from each other.
well, i read both your posts, and my conclusion was: Ah [admin: avoid swearing please] it, just go for the cheap lenses, it just doesnt feel right buying a lens worth a whole camera.
BUT if these new lenses are [admin: avoid swearing please], i have the right to return them to the seller at ebay (like after a 2 week period latest) and get my money back.
I got a set of different Lenses now for about 100 Euros (about 150 $) which contains a wideangle lens (x0.45) (including a macro lens i can take off) and a teleconverter (x2.0).
When i got the lenses i will immediately test them thoroughly and post the results here, we'll see.
either of you will be right :D
thanks for the lensmate tip (i guess it's ok to post links to such sites here!), didnt know they build converters so i can choose from a lot of lenses (not only the ones from ebay :D).
grand i found your lenses in the web, still too expensive. will see what the cheap ones can do and can not do, so i can later eventually invest into more expensive ones.

as i'm writing this i noticed, due to the fact that the a620 has it's own lens and i have to use the adapter i screw the other lens on, i think i will not be able to take highspeed macro pics anymore (because the lensbody is blocking the flash). hm, we will see :D

thanks guys

by the way, the example tele pic you provided really does look fudged, wontolla. ouch. hopefully my lenses will be da bomb *crosses fingers*

edit: edit, haha, automatic swear filtering, funny :)
for the fun of it, i will let the "admin comment" in my post, i guess you know what i mean anyway :D


*

Offline wontolla

  • ****
  • 413
  • S3 & G9 & A720

Well phyrephox, what can I say, let's quote Virgil: "Fortune favours the bold".

I'd appreciate if you could show us latter on this thread some tests with your new lenses if you find them a good purchase. Due to my last experience, I haven't dare looking for more lenses and if yours are good I could give ebay's another chance.

Good luck!

*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
ha. darn. finally received the package. to be honest (and i hate being honest this time :D) the lenses do _s_u_c_k_ (hopefully avoiding censorship here).
BUT: the wide angle converter doesnt _s_u_c_k_ as much as the tele _s_u_c_k_s. plus, the WA has the macro lens.
here's the deal: i already informed the seller on ebay that i don't want to keep the stuff and want to send it back. well, he made a new offer: he's willing to pay me back half of what i paid him. in other words: 50 bucks for the Teleconverter (yes, i know, it _s_u_c_k_s) the wideangle+macro (it's okayish, though not nearly 0.45 like advertised) and the soligor adapter (finally a brand i know, the adapter tube is seems to be really good quality).
so i learned my lesson, paid 50 bucks, got a half-decent WA+macro & adapter tube (i can use my new hama ir,pol & greyfilters with) and will save some money and then go to a real shop and test everything before i order something off the internet ever again :D
will provide some testshots here soon.
by the way the lenses are from "Merkury Optics", which seems to be "Merkury Innovations" ( http://www.merkuryinnovations.com/ ) in real life. a short "googling" for merkury+lens reveals some devastating reviews about their lenses. the seller on ebay did a good thing in hiding the logo and not writing down the name of the company ;)
thanks @ all :)

Aha! It is quite probably the same lens as I have, then.

I have been using this lens (under the 'digital optics' brand), though I bought it for my JVC D-53EK Mini DV camcorder rather than the digital camera. The telephoto lens is truly atrocious, but the wide angle lens has come in useful a few times with the camcorder, usually in footage taken with a central object where the soft edges (let's be honest, the soft-outer-third-of-the-picture) aren't much of an issue.

Actually, this footage was almost all shot with that lens attached. It's not so bad with a moving object, heavily compressed and at low resolution, is it? :lol

So, I have to concur: Awful lens for digital camera use. It'd be a public service if someone would put up a page with sample images and the names it is advertised under, showing how bad it is.



*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
candid photography, now with chdk there are even more possibilities... *drools*
wait a second, just kidding here.
so you buy lenses and eventually tear them apart? nice hobby :D you gotta have a steady hand and real good equipment to build your own lenses, right? then again you also have to have a steady hand and good equipment when it comes to taking shots of alligators :)
by the way i ordered the original canon tele & wideangle lenses (got some lucky shots @ ebay) so i can finally make a good review regarding cheap vs. expensive lenses :)

*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
uh, nice picture indeed. seems like one can smell their bad breath just by looking at it :D
i dont think ur gonna be yelled at, ur somewhat the forums caretaker!

 

Related Topics