Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 21 to 23 of 23

Thread: Other lens manufacturers

  1. #21
    Fstop Manalo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    100
    Real Name
    Raul or Gabriel

    Re: Other lens manufacturers

    What kind of things have been cut in the flash? And what kind of risks are we talking about here other than the alleged words blake said??

  2. #22

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Grand Cayman, GT
    Posts
    830
    Real Name
    Graham Heron

    Re: Other lens manufacturers

    Quote Originally Posted by Fstop Manalo View Post
    I was walking in the mall one day and I saw lenses of sigma and tamron. I was wondering, what's the advantages and disadvantages of using those lenses on a nikon/canon camera??
    Or any other make of DSLR - just to include those who shoot with other than canikon.

  3. #23
    Moderator Manfred M's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    22,166
    Real Name
    Manfred Mueller

    Re: Other lens manufacturers

    Quote Originally Posted by Fstop Manalo View Post
    What kind of things have been cut in the flash? And what kind of risks are we talking about here other than the alleged words blake said??
    I believe what Blake is referring to is that earlier models of Canon cameras had very low maximum trigger voltage ratings and using them with non-Canon flashes would result in damage to the camera's electronics.

    My point is one I make as a design engineer with over 30 years of production experience. There is no way that a knock off manufacturer can make a flash that costs significantly less than the OEM part. People are flocking to the knockoffs because they cost a lot less than what the name brand companies do. Sure, they sell over the internet and don't have large and fancy marketing departments. I can see this resulting in a unit that is perhaps 20% or 30% cheaper than the OEM unit, not a quarter or a fifth of the cost. In photography, like anywhere else, you tend to get what you pay for.

    So how does a manufacturer reduce costs? By using a cheaper design and making it out of cheaper components and using cheaper assembly techniques. As an example, not all flash tubes are created equal and buying lower quality ones could result in shorter overall unit life; which affects image quality as well, as flash tubes give off a yellower light as they age. You can get cheaper capacitors that don't last as long or don't hold the rated charge, potentially resulting in colour casts that could vary from shot to shot. Flash tubes emit UV and this has two effects on plastics; yellowing and embrittlement. UV resistant plastics cost more money, so this is a place where the knockoff manufacturer could save money. Flash circuit boards are much higher voltage than normal electronics and care has to be taken in circuit board design and manufacture to ensure good life and "elegant failure" should the high voltage side fail. Poor design could dump high voltage into the low voltage side of the system and even into the camera. It is less expensive to worry about that possibility, etc. etc. Those switches on the unit could last a hundred on-off cycles rather than tens of thousands. I could list dozens of more examples.

    Can I prove it. No. I would have to see the manufacturing bills of materials, the quality assurance procedures and visit the factories of both the OEM manufacturers and the knock off ones to make a definitive call. That is unlikely to happen.

    Would I put one of these on my very expensive camera body; no. But somebody else will and if they get lucky; great. If they have inconsistent results, or the unit dies after 3 months or worse, their camera gets damaged, I won't be making a lot of sympathetic noises.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •