| Author | Thread |
|
|
03/30/2004 04:25:04 AM · #1 |
Hi.
I was wondering if anyone here as used Phoenix lenses and if they have, how did they liked or disliked them. I found this lense and it seems like a great deal, but I've never heard of Phoenix before.
June
|
|
|
|
03/30/2004 07:34:17 AM · #2 |
That's cheap for a 100-400mm lens. Got a six year warranty too.
|
|
|
|
03/30/2004 07:58:11 AM · #3 |
My experience with Phoenix is pretty limited but I did have one a while back. It was a 28-80mm (I think). What I remember about it was that the lens was decent when stopped down about a stop and the price was very low so I thought it was a good value. I thought the lens was at least as good as the EF 28-80mm f/3.5-5.6. My guess is that the Phoenix 100-400 is going to be a bit lacking and you would probably be better off spending that money on a Sigma 70-300mm APO macro super 2 or something similar.
Greg
|
|
|
|
03/30/2004 08:04:29 AM · #4 |
one person i know had one and it had horrible purple fringing
|
|
|
|
03/30/2004 08:34:06 AM · #5 |
Originally posted by magnetic9999:
one person i know had one and it had horrible purple fringing |
I'll second that - I took some test shots with a secondhand one on a sunny day outside of the camera shop (they're real trusting :-] ) and the chromatic aberrations were just terrible. |
|
|
|
03/30/2004 08:37:21 AM · #6 |
| As the saying goes, "you get what you pay for"... |
|
|
|
03/30/2004 09:48:53 AM · #7 |
From what I have recently found out, Phoenix use to be called Promaster, which had a 100-400mm now discontinued lens. I saw a used one on Amazon for 109 USD and it seemed to have mixed reviews. Some people like it for the money, some people who could afford better thought it was bad. As Eddy says, too often you get what you pay for. That said, I have a cheap 70-300 lens that certainly could be better, but still does ok.
|
|
|
|
04/18/2004 06:06:37 PM · #8 |
I have a Phoneix 100-300mm for my old Pentax 35mm. Its a cheap lens (i was a student then) and its taken some cracking photos. No bad fringing as described above.
However, the lens was extremely slow. And I mean extremely!! Also it seemed quite dark - great for outdoor as it looked like it always had a polariser on the front bringing out nice colours. Inside was a nigthmare as was at night.
Unless you really can't afford a few extra £s for a Sigma or somthing, I'd probably avoid.
Peter |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 04:13:49 PM EDT.
