USB Lens Dock (Page 2): That's utter BS. Some "third party" lenses are actually better than some OEM lenses... some are even MUCH "better". There are also crappy third party lenses...

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

billnikon wrote:

You are talking about third party lenses here. I would not consider them HIGHER END. Yes, they may be the manufactures higher end lenses but they are not to the standards of Canon, Nikon, Sony, and any other major camera manufacture. STAY AWAY. FAR FAR AWAY.

That's utter BS.

Some "third party" lenses are actually better than some OEM lenses... some are even MUCH "better".

There are also crappy third party lenses... Just as there are some crappy OEM lenses.

No OEM manufacturer even makes some lenses that are available from third party makers... Such as the Sigma 120-300mm f2.8 or 200-500mm f2.8.

Besides, with out-sourcing more than a few "OEM" lenses are actually re-labelled lenses made by someone else. There are more than a few Nikkors made by Tokina, for example. And, in fact, most Pentax lenses are made by Tokina. At one time Tokina, Hoya and Kenko's parent company THK owned Pentax... Now it's owned by Ricoh, who also make a lot of stuff for other OEM companies. Sony makes components for Nikon, too... virtually every sensor used in their DSLRs, for example. Even if a manufacturer makes something themselves, they also study each others' products closely and widely copy each other.

So, there's really little reason to only consider a manufacturer's own products... likely limiting your choices, while possibly forgoing some useful features and/or spending more than necessary.

For example, say you're shooting with Nikon DX camera and want a wide zoom. Well, Nikon offers two good ones: AF-S 10-20mm f3.5-5.6G DX for $800. Or, there's the Nikon AF-S 12-24mm f4G DX for about $1150 (which I wouldn't be surprised if it were actually manufactured by Tokina, perhaps entirely or just components).

For a lot less money you could get Sigma 10-20mm f3.5 ($450 and non-variable aperture) or Tokina 12-28mm f4 DX ($450). Or maybe you want something even wider than anything Nikon offers and should look at the Sigma 8-16mm ($700). Or perhaps you want a bigger aperture lens than Nikon offers and will want to consider the Tokina 11-20mm f2.8 ($550) or Tokina 14-20m f2.0 ($900). Or maybe you want a zoom with a fisheye effect, in which case the Tokina 10-17mm might be ideal. All these are at least competitive with the Nikkors... And many of them offer things that Nikon doesn't... Often it's at considerably lower cost too.

Thank heaven for third party manufacturers... No doubt the competition benefits us all and urges the OEM manufacturers to keep doing R&D for new products and improvements on existing ones!

OP,

AFAIK only Sigma is offering the USB Dock at present. It's usable with some of their lenses, but not all of them yet. As others have described, it's used to "fine tune" various aspects of lens performance by giving you access adjust the firmware. Exactly what can be adjusted depends upon the lens model. In most cases Sigma's dock-enabled lenses' focus accuracy can be adjusted... in some cases focus speed, image stabilization mode, and other things also can be tweaked by the user.

Some of Sigma's higher end lenses come with the USB dock (their 120-300mm f2.8 OS "Sport", for example). Other less expensive models don't include it, but it's available separately for around $50-$60.

Fat Gregory Loc: Southern New Jersey

I buy my lenses for specific applications. Some are primes some are zooms, some are Nikon and some are ???

ALL are supurb at the function they were bought for!

You might be surprised by who makes what for whom...

Programmable lens are the future!

Greg

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

John_F wrote:

Do you have a way to read what the seller web site says. I can't imagine why a lens would need an USB connectivity, unless it has some sort of chip inside but then why a chip. Do some lenses have internal electronics for some purpose. Modern day lenses have electrical connectors so a camera can run the focusing 'motor.'

Many lenses do have chips with firmware. However, updating that firmware is done from an sdcard in the camera. Though perhaps a repair company may need another mechanism, the Nikon and Fuji websites at least, instruct you to download the new firmware to an sdcard, install it in the camera and then update the lens.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

billnikon wrote:

You are talking about third party lenses here. I would not consider them HIGHER END. Yes, they may be the manufactures higher end lenses but they are not to the standards of Canon, Nikon, Sony, and any other major camera manufacture. STAY AWAY. FAR FAR AWAY.

I am a longtime Nikon fan, as are you. From what I have seen, the newest Sigma 50/1.4 ART BLOWS away the Nikon 50/1.4G that is now made in China! I'm sorry I upgraded from the D version, but I needed the internal motor for basketball. When I have the opportunity to try the Sigma for basketball, I will post more, but from everything I've seen and read that is THE go to 50 at the moment.

Macronaut Loc: Redondo Beach,Ca.

billnikon wrote:

I get my info from 40 years in the profession. It has been my experience that third party glass does not compare to branded lenses. I have used several and the comparisons just don't justify their purchase. Of course these lenses are less expensive and THAT ALONE is their sales advantage. But lens bargains does not translate to IQ quality. It is my opinion alone and I stand by it from years and years of comparing these lenses to branded lenses.

40 years.....at what point did you become unable to learn?

skidooman Loc: Minnesota

I have a Sigma 50mm 1.4, beautiful lens. Razor sharp and built like a tank. Sigma Art series lenses are a far cry from the old cheap Sigma lenses. My 120-300mm f2.8 is also sharp and fast. All of my other lenses are Canon L series,,,but I can honestly say I am satisfied with the Sigmas also.

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

Lots of BS in this thread ! I use Sigma and Canon L's - love em both !

ptcanon3ti Loc: NJ

billnikon wrote:

I get my info from 40 years in the profession. It has been my experience that third party glass does not compare to branded lenses. I have used several and the comparisons just don't justify their purchase. Of course these lenses are less expensive and THAT ALONE is their sales advantage. But lens bargains does not translate to IQ quality. It is my opinion alone and I stand by it from years and years of comparing these lenses to branded lenses.

Are you out trolling?

Times have changed in 40 years.
:roll:

wolfman

ptcanon3ti wrote:

Are you out trolling?

Times have changed in 40 years.
:roll:

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

ptcanon3ti wrote:

Are you out trolling?

Times have changed in 40 years.
:roll:

If I only I could catch this many fish when I troll in my lake. It has been lousy outside but great on the site.

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

billnikon wrote:

If I only I could catch this many fish when I troll in my lake. It has been lousy outside but great on the site.

What you said may have been true 5 or 10 years ago, but today Sigma has a number of lenses which not only the equal of Canon and Nikon offerings, but in several cases both the build and optics are superior and cost less to boot. I have over a dozen Canon lenses, including some L's. However, two of the sharpest and best made lenses I own are Sigmas. The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 ART and the Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art are two of the best lenses at those focal points available, are built like tanks, have a four year warranty. These are state of the art products.

RWR Loc: La Mesa, CA

imagemeister wrote:

Lots of BS in this thread ! I use Sigma and Canon L's - love em both !

Indeed! And I'll add Tokina and Zeiss to the list.

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

mwsilvers wrote:

What you said may have been true 5 or 10 years ago... (show quote)

Interesting, B&H has the Canon 35 1.4 for $999 with a rating of 4.9 with 621 responding and the sigma 35 1.4 at $799 with a rating of 4.9 with only 298 responding.
Nikon on the other hand rates the Sigma lens a 4.7 and surprisingly rate the Nikon 35 1.8 lens at almost $550.00 less at 4.7.

ptcanon3ti Loc: NJ

billnikon wrote:

Interesting, B&H has the Canon 35 1.4 for $999 with a rating of 4.9 with 621 responding and the sigma 35 1.4 at $799 with a rating of 4.9 with only 298 responding.
Nikon on the other hand rates the Sigma lens a 4.7 and surprisingly rate the Nikon 35 1.8 lens at almost $550.00 less at 4.7.

Thanks for confirming that the Sigma is as good or better than the Canon and Nikon branded lenses. :thumbup:

I can personally attest to my three day ownership of the NIKON 85mm 1.8G. The lens sucked! Horrible front focusing which was NOT correctable with maximum MFA.
Also chromatic aberration that was so bad, with the lens, that I could NOT correct it by any means.

I sent it back as defective. Just sayin'

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

ptcanon3ti wrote:

Thanks for confirming that the Sigma is as good or better than the Canon and Nikon branded lenses. :thumbup:

I can personally attest to my three day ownership of the NIKON 85mm 1.8G. The lens sucked! Horrible front focusing which was NOT correctable with maximum MFA.
Also chromatic aberration that was so bad, with the lens, that I could NOT correct it by any means.

I sent it back as defective. Just sayin'

Even more interesting. Evidently I got the best Nikon 85mm 1.8 made. I have just printed a 20X30 print for my upcoming show and it is exceptional in focus, definition, contrast and sharpness. I am sorry your copy was not good. Just sayin.