…and the 5 Softest Lenses I’ve Ever Tested

by Staff April 30, 2017 at 2:31 pm

more news from the blog


  1. OMG, I had the 70-300 DO, the most expensive Elephant Feces made!!!
    There are other lenses I have had, for example the Sigma 50/1.4, the one I had for my Canon 7D was a Marshmallowmaker at all apertures and no amount of back or front focus corrections would improve anything, in fact, either direction made it even worse. I however also had the same Sigma 50/1.4 for my Nikon D7000 was one of the sharpest lenses I had. I also recently purchased 3 YongNuo 50/1.8's for a EOS M2 & M5, to compare with my old Canon 50/1.8. One YN was a horribly loud marshmallow-maker, another was super quiet because it was dead, however the 3rd was substantially sharper than my old Canon… but there is a caveat with this lens. It Arrived with its whole outer shell from where the red alignment dot starts to all the way around and almost completely broken off. I completely disassembled the lens and inside found everything loose and too much play everywhere. So, I superglued anything that was plastic connecting to plastic. So, the caveat is that I have no idea whether this lens was already sharp or whether the damage and my subsequent repair did something to correct missed focus due to too much play with the imprecise plastic on plastic joints and attachments inside the lens.

  2. Sharpness is not the be all and end all of lenses. The Helios 44 and variants is not a perfect lens and is still beloved by many. The E Ludwig Meritar is loved and hatred in equal measure. Zooms will always be the stinkers.
    “The best zoom lens is your legs.”
    – Ernst Haas

  3. There's only ONE WORD to describe these lenses… and I'm gonna SPELL…. IT… OUT …. FOR YA…… S….A…..W…..F….T… SAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAWFT!!! Like if you get the reference 😛

  4. OMG… that Caligula reference, hahaha!! You should include more dark humor like that in your reviews 😉
    (and dear God, that Tamron lens is the most aesthetically hideous lens I have ever seen)

  5. I have some old Canon FD lenses that aren't great, but my worst lens ever was a Vivitar Series 1 19-35 f3.5-4.5. I bought the lens when I had an older Canon A2 camera; it wasn't great on the A2, but it was usable. Moving to my first digital camera in 2007, the Canon Rebel XTi (400D), the photos were horrible at best. So bad were they that I threw away the lens rather than carry it through my 2+ month trip through Europe.

  6. That is pretty bad indeed, a pretty bad bunch. The worst lens I have is a Minolta 35-80mm. Out of the time when they switched to plastic. Oh dear, I am not sure how much actual glass they used. They used their 35-70mm design, which is great, and stretched it out to 80mm. The last 10mm feel very bad!

    And the image quality? Forget it. It has that nice 70ties porn sheen over it. It just is bad news!

    The only good is that it costed me nothing. And I still use its end cap to this day.

  7. I have only just recently started watching your channel Christopher and while I have really enjoyed most of your highly useful videos and learnt a bit from you it is also good to see that you don't take every thing to seriously at all by giving us a gift like this one . Keep up all the good work and we will keep watching your we'll presented channel.

  8. That Tamron 28-105/2.8 could be better with film, as film does not need right angled light, like shiny sensor. Also it seems, that the F2.8 setting is there just to help camera AF to catch, while you should use F5.6+ for taking photos.
    I tested some simillar lenses and they also behave like this on digital, while on film they do work qute well.
    Just for example.. pentax FA28-70/4 proved to be quite a good lens on film, but with digital sensor its sharpness is lost, contras is weak and corners are bad even on APS-C and stopping down does not help much. When switched to film body, it does nice sharp and contrasty pics even at F4..
    Film was much less demanding, it could capture light coming even from wider angles. And standard zooms (28-70, 28-105, 24-70 etc) from film era often struggle with digital and especially with hi-res body. Sometimes older 5Dmk1 works better with these lenses than 5Dmk3 or 18+mpix APS-C.

  9. Yeah, maybe its not comparable… nor the "softest one", but I would like to nominate the Canon EF 24 – 105 f/4L IS USM as one of the most overrated lenses. At its expensive price you'd expect more. Super bad quality, bad colors, high distortion and excuse me – but the stabilizer is nothing but crap. I'd rather go with a cheap third party lens…

Add Comment

20 − 19 =