MDL_777 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 267 posts, RR: 0 Posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1090 times:
I was wondering if anyone has used or had experience with this brand of lenses. It's a brand that I haven't seen discussed at all on this forum, and I've noticed that Wolf Camera really pushes these lenses with their SLR selection. I was wondering how they compared to other lenses like Sigma, Canon, Nikkor, and Tamron, specifically the Quantaray 28-80 f/3.5-5.6 AF and the 100-300 f/4.5-6.7 AF Zoom Lenses.
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 25 Reply 1, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1059 times:
The one I have is a 110% P.O.S. Every single picture I have taken with it comes out looking good but when I scan them, the scan comes out crap. When I purchased a Nikon lens and took some pictures, they came out much better and I finally got one added to the database.
Lindy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 3, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1056 times:
B757300 I have exact same experience.
When I scann them they are awfoul, when I scan pictures taken with Sigma or Tamron lenses I'm getting higher quality.
B757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 25 Reply 4, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 23 hours ago) and read 1053 times:
The lens I have cost me $550 and I really don't know what to do with it. I don't want to inflict it upon another person knowing it takes crap pictures.
Vulindlela From Germany, joined Apr 2002, 468 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 1050 times:
I have a 70-300 and I like it, but i is my first so I dont know how good it really is. My scans are crap as well, but I think its more due to my scanner. Anyway, Quantaray lenses are made by Sigma I'm pretty sure.
"If you take everything I've accomplished in my entire life and condense it down into 1 day, it looks decent!"
Alaskaairlines From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2054 posts, RR: 17 Reply 6, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 18 hours ago) and read 1038 times:
Quantaray = junk (I have never owned one, but thats what all the guys say). Sigma is better but not like the original equipment Nikkor and Canon. I also have a 70-300 f4/5.6 and its also pretty close to junk, I mean 3/4 of the stuff is soft.
FUAirliner From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 538 posts, RR: 3 Reply 7, posted (11 years 1 month 1 week 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 1026 times:
Dmitry,
I wouldn't call the Nikkor 70-300mm f4/5.6 "pretty close to junk". Of course, compared to a f2.8 lens the quality is not as good, but remember the price difference. Lenses that cover such a wide focal length usually tend to loose sharpness between 200 and 300mm.
If I can afford it I would always try to get lenses from the same brand my camera is. They are specially designed for your camera, while Sigma, Tamrom and Quantaray are made for several brands. These lenses used to be cheaper than the original Nikon, Canon, Minolta etc. ones, but now the price difference seem to become less and less, so they are no option for me any more.
Sponsor Message: 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 267 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From Germany, joined Apr 2002, 468 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
