Data on lens failures

[chorleyjeff]

I have had numerous Minolta and Sony lenses over the years and only one, a very cheap 35-80mm kit lens, ever failed or gave any trouble.

I have had two non Minolta/Sony lenses. A Sigma 105mm macro and Tamron SP 70-300mm. The focussing mechanism on the Sigma failed and cost £60 to repair (some years ago) and Tamron ceased to focus a couple of weeks ago and the estimated cost of repair is £110. ie a 100% failure rate for third party lenses. The Tamron uis especially annoying because I upgraded from my Minolta 100-300 which had been a faultless performer.

I researched both lenses before buying but nothing was flagged about reliability. Does anyone know if data is available about lens mechanical reliability? And is it poor quality that has contributed to my lens failures or is it something like third party manufacturers having to work around patents that makes their engineering less reliable? Or again are lenses now just another limited life throw away consumer product?

Jeff ( feeling poorer than I did this morning)

[ChrisLumix]

That's weird. The Tamron 28-70mm (my 'go to' lens for Minolta SLR) is still going strong, at least it was 4 or 5 years ago when I was still using it.

 

It may just be coincidence? especially if the sample size under discussion isn't statistically large enough to give a significant result. How much did you use the Sigma & Tamron in relation to the Minolta/Sony lenses?

[bugmeister]

I don't know about official lens failure rates but my experience is quite the opposite to yours. I would say, though, that a sample of two is not really statistically relevant in either your case or mine. You may have just been unlucky, and I may have been lucky with mine. It would be interesting to see if any official data is available anywhere.

 

I have a Sigma 105 that I bought over 6 years ago and it's still my portrait lens of choice and my walk-around macro lens (I use a specialised macro lens when the opportunity arises).

 

I also have a Tamron 28-300 superzoom that I bought in 2004 and it's still sitting on one of my spare camera bodies as a 'grab' kit. That one went to tropical Australia with me and performed extremely well in the humidity and ever since..

 

Neither are as fast focussing as the Canon originals but I wouldn't expect them to be. They are a lot cheaper after all.

[chorleyjeff]

That's weird. The Tamron 28-70mm (my 'go to' lens for Minolta SLR) is still going strong, at least it was 4 or 5 years ago when I was still using it.

 

It may just be coincidence? especially if the sample size under discussion isn't statistically large enough to give a significant result. How much did you use the Sigma & Tamron in relation to the Minolta/Sony lenses?

The Sigma is not used much. Only for macro and the I use manual focus- I don't want the gear stripping again.

The Tamron is lightly used from time to time.

I know two is of no statistical significance which is why I asked the question.

My other hobby is painting for which there are negligible "capital" costs and paint is a lot cheaper thank inkjet ink which is maybe why I resent the high cost of equipment :-(

[chorleyjeff]

I don't know about official lens failure rates but my experience is quite the opposite to yours. I would say, though, that a sample of two is not really statistically relevant in either your case or mine. You may have just been unlucky, and I may have been lucky with mine. It would be interesting to see if any official data is available anywhere.

 

I have a Sigma 105 that I bought over 6 years ago and it's still my portrait lens of choice and my walk-around macro lens (I use a specialised macro lens when the opportunity arises).

 

I also have a Tamron 28-300 superzoom that I bought in 2004 and it's still sitting on one of my spare camera bodies as a 'grab' kit. That one went to tropical Australia with me and performed extremely well in the humidity and ever since..

 

Neither are as fast focussing as the Canon originals but I wouldn't expect them to be. They are a lot cheaper after all.

Thanks for reply.

I asked the question because two items has no statistical use at a all.

It would seem there are no public stats on the matter but no doubt professional users would have an informed opinion. Would a professional on assignment in a remote part of, say, Africa use anything but a Nikon or Canon lens with a professional digital camera?

Jeff

[Guest]

I have a sigma 10-20 and a tamron 18-270 and the good lady has a tamron 18-270 and so far touchwood no issues, the good lady's tamron has shot quite a few images including a few hundred in one day at a friends wedding, all lenses still function perfectly