CanoNikkor Lens Snobbery

[Mike Buckley]

It's really simple: Tokina's web site is an embarrassment compared to Nikon's and Canon's web site. If you believe as I do that top management is aware of it and chooses to do nothing about it, and if you believe as I do that top management probably knows about other issues that are hidden from my view and is also doing nothing about them, you would feel compelled as I do to evaluate their products a lot more rigorously than their competitors' products out of fear of being burned.

If you don't care that a huge international company can't get its act together enough to simply publish a web site that is not replete with errors that are so egregious that they make the sentences difficult to understand, that's fine. I do care on many levels. That doesn't mean that I won't buy their products, but it does mean that I will think much more seriously before buying their products. That's exactly the opposite impact the CEO intends for the web site to have on prospective customers.

[nimitzbenedicto]

Funny .. I just spotted one of the respected english contributors to this forum using there when it is obvious he meant their ... do we question his knowledge and competance?
Similar to my hate of the close-up LENS being called a CU FILTER amongst other things .....

Hi John,

Though it may seem to be minor to native English speakers, for not native English speakers, it sometimes causes confusion. ex. were-where; their-there; etc. Also, colloquial words/phrases.

Thanks

On-Topic. Maybe Canon and Nikkor lenses really give good quality images. Something pixel-peepers look for.

[Colin Southern]

It's really simple: Tokina's web site is an embarrassment compared to Nikon's and Canon's web site. If you believe as I do that top management is aware of it and chooses to do nothing about it, and if you believe as I do that top management probably knows about other issues that are hidden from my view and is also doing nothing about them, you would feel compelled as I do to evaluate their products a lot more rigorously than their competitors' products out of fear of being burned.

If you don't care that a huge international company can't get its act together enough to simply publish a web site that is not replete with errors that are so egregious that they make the sentences difficult to understand, that's fine. I do care on many levels. That doesn't mean that I won't buy their products, but it does mean that I will think much more seriously before buying their products. That's exactly the opposite impact the CEO intends for the web site to have on prospective customers.

Best post I've read today!

Agree 100%

[Colin Southern]

Hi John,

Though it may seem to be minor to native English speakers, for not native English speakers, it sometimes causes confusion. ex. were-where; their-there; etc. Also, colloquial words/phrases.

Thanks

On-Topic. Maybe Canon and Nikkor lenses really give good quality images. Something pixel-peepers look for.

Hi Victor,

I agree with you too.

I consider myself an intelligent person who understands English to an average level (or above) (ie probably 90% of Tokina's target market) and to be honest - even though I get the gist of what they're saying with that about page quote above, even I found it too ambiguous to be able to "translate" it for them and have 100% confidence that I was now saying what they were actually meaning. ie that's written so badly that it's not just English-as-a-second-language people who are struggling with it.

[jcuknz]

Hi John,

Though it may seem to be minor to native English speakers, for not native English speakers, it sometimes causes confusion. ex. were-where; their-there; etc. Also, colloquial words/phrases.Thanks.

Not sure where you are coming from ... as a reasonably well dragged up english person and speaker I view such mis spellings with irritation becuase they interupt the flow of my reading ... with a later experience working for a high quality magazine for three years I was indoctrinated with the concept of proof reading, though appreciate just how difficult it is for an english speaker let alone the EAASLer.
I depreciate such material/behaviour but I do not judge peoples competance by it .... perhaps I have a superiority complex in this matter and do not expect the non-english to cope with my language.

I just visited the Tokina site and found it easy to read with a few very minor errors ... move instead of moves ... I also have memories of visiting Canikon USA and being extremely irritated at their clumsy sites which I put down to "clever b's trying to be clever and falling down" [ the webmasters ] ... but that was ten years or so ago when I was building my simple websites.` Long gone when Yahoo pulled the plug on free sites.

Personally I find Mike's stance rather silly ... but each to their own ... he is spending his money .... my one Tokina lens bought 2/h over 25 years ago seems to work well but I am not a pixel peeper and what that involves.

[ajohnw]

It's really simple: Tokina's web site is an embarrassment compared to Nikon's and Canon's web site. If you believe as I do that top management is aware of it and chooses to do nothing about it, and if you believe as I do that top management probably knows about other issues that are hidden from my view and is also doing nothing about them, you would feel compelled as I do to evaluate their products a lot more rigorously than their competitors' products out of fear of being burned.

If you don't care that a huge international company can't get its act together enough to simply publish a web site that is not replete with errors that are so egregious that they make the sentences difficult to understand, that's fine. I do care on many levels. That doesn't mean that I won't buy their products, but it does mean that I will think much more seriously before buying their products. That's exactly the opposite impact the CEO intends for the web site to have on prospective customers.

What I see is some one trying to use there own language in English. There is a strong possibility that their management are completely unaware of that as they have the same problem. Tokina unlike Nikon and Canon do not maintain local companies. There products finish up with distributors in various countries. The UK one is not far from me actually. Maybe I should break in. There is a USA site that seems to have had a name change recently. Perhaps they do maintain this one locally or maybe they just divert to Tokina's own pages.

http://www.kenkotokinausa.com

Kenko Tokina is part of the Hoya Corporation who are a sort of Schott Glass type company but far more diverse. Oddly Kenko Tokina also manufacture microscopes. Not odd at all really but this strongly suggests a company with yet another name actually manufactures and designs the optics.

There are all sorts of abuses of the English language. Incorrect use of words such as replete, no offence intended, people who reckon that there is something wrong with "this begs the question", the term ship - that literally means sending something via a ship. Americans that think there should be more Z's in the English language. One of the problems for none native speakers is the scope in meaning of words like post, tap and many others. Also simple words like dog and cur and others. They have the same meaning but far different implications. Some miss uses like this catch on which is sad really as it depletes the language. The inferences associated with a specific word disappear. Personally I find this rather sad. It's a feature rich language but as this goes on primarily in North America and is generally accepted who are we to complain about a Japanese interpretation of it. I suppose over time it might make the language easier to learn.

John
-

[Colin Southern]

Not sure where you are coming from ... as a reasonably well dragged up english person and speaker I view such mis spellings with irritation becuase they interupt the flow of my reading

I think that's Victor's point; if something is bad enough to interrupt the flow of a "reasonably well dragged up English person" then it's enough to stop someone who's doesn't speak/understand English as a first language dead in their tracks.

... with a later experience working for a high quality magazine for three years I was indoctrinated with the concept of proof reading

So you'd know that "english person" is actually "English person", "mis spellings" is actually "mis-spellings", "becuase" is actually "because", and "interupt" is actually "interrupt" then

I depreciate such material/behaviour but I do not judge peoples competance by it .... perhaps I have a superiority complex in this matter and do not expect the non-english to cope with my language.

*competence.

It's not a person's competence being judged; it's an organizations ethos being judged. It's in-congruent to expect a company to have the highest standards of engineering precision when management appears to settle for lower standards of presentation.

I just visited the Tokina site and found it easy to read with a few very minor errors ... move instead of moves ...

... and sentences like "It one of the largest OEM speciality binocular manufactures supplies one of the world's leading brands." that has considerably more than "minor errors".

Personally I find Mike's stance rather silly ... but each to their own ... he is spending his money .... my one Tokina lens bought 2/h over 25 years ago seems to work well but I am not a pixel peeper and what that involves.

I find Mike's stance spot on. In a nutshell, if you're trying to convince people that you produce a quality product, you're making a rod for your own back if the material you're using to promote it is of a far lower quality. I understand that the people who wrote it probably weren't English first-language people -- but that's no excuse; if you care about quality then you engage someone who IS competent in that area.

[jcuknz]

to #66 ..... I am reminded of my Mother's story about her work for the American Red Cross during WWII organising R&R, and her use of the word 'bloody' which even then was pretty innocuous but scandalised the American officers she was dealing with ... " Only a prostitute uses that word" etc. My step-father was a senior naval officer at the time ....
"Two great countries separated by a common language" as somebody is supposed to have said who had links to both countries.

to #67 Rampant intolerance and nit-picking seems to be stalking this thread which is not what I usually associate with CiC.

[Colin Southern]

to #67 Rampant intolerance seems to be stalking this thread which is not what I usually associate with CiC.

If you "talk the talk" John, be prepared to "walk the walk". Intolerance? No - But I must admit to finding something of an irony in someone making 4 basic spelling mistakes in the same sentence where they're telling us how they've been "indoctrinated with the concept of proof reading".

Perhaps less time is needed criticising the signpost and more time spent travelling in the direction it's pointing?

[John 2]

I think Colin, that we may be mixing and matching two different aspects in this discussion. On the one hand I would agree that if I were alert enough to notice the deficiencies in Tokina's WEB site before I bought their products, it just might put me off doing so. But on the other hand, having bought their products and used them over a period of time, there is no denying the fact that some of their lenses are very good and represent excellent value for money. Personally therefore, it is hard for me to come to the conclusion that finding some errors in a WEB site necessarily means that they can't design and make decent kit. Going back to the original question though, Canon/Nikon have justly earned the reputation that they have and although not all they produce is the very best, buying only their products probably represent the lowest risk. However, and I only speak for myself, paying the associated premium for that as a warm feeling rather than doing a bit of research and buying selectively, is a luxury I don't want to afford.

[ajohnw]

to #66 ..... I am reminded of my Mother's story about her work for the American Red Cross during WWII organising R&R, and her use of the word 'bloody' which even then was pretty innocuous but scandalised the American officers she was dealing with ... " Only a prostitute uses that word" etc. My step-father was a senior naval officer at the time ....
"Two great countries separated by a common language" as somebody is supposed to have said who had links to both countries.

.

Interesting. Expletives are useful as they help get rid of feelings and frustrations so some should be acceptable such as what a bloody mess or bloody hell etc. Some that have been popular such as God Almighty or more recently Jesus Christ might cause offence in some quarters.

It's an interesting area. I once asked an American colleague if many people speak as they do in many American movies using expletives that most people here may have used in their younger days but in many cases have never used at all. Seems the US is much the same. Most grow out of it and the flicks that do this embarrass some. Back to language. I have heard of far eastern people visiting the UK for the 1st time who have gained the impression that these words were normal. At the end of the meeting he also expected the person that was dealing with him to provide a prostitute. Going on the movies there are clearly loads of them around.

Personally I feel that in this area that we all live in glass houses and shouldn't be inclined to throw stones.There is a need to make allowances for people and realise that there is a big multicultural world out there and peoples differ in all sorts of ways including the way there languages work. It's oh so easy to get the wrong impression too. I sometimes wonder why in goody bady films why a Brit often gets cast as the bady. I wonder if there is a hidden agenda.

John
-

[Colin Southern]

I think Colin, that we may be mixing and matching two different aspects in this discussion. On the one hand I would agree that if I were alert enough to notice the deficiencies in Tokina's WEB site before I bought their products, it just might put me off doing so. But on the other hand, having bought their products and used them over a period of time, there is no denying the fact that some of their lenses are very good and represent excellent value for money. Personally therefore, it is hard for me to come to the conclusion that finding some errors in a WEB site necessarily means that they can't design and make decent kit.

I'm not saying that their current products are good or bad (I don't use them) (so I don't disagree with you) (to use a double-negative), but like it or not, we do live in a world where people's perceptions are their reality; these days EVERYONE will say that they produce a quality product (so one can't give any weight to such utterances) - instead, we have to look for other clues - and the care and attention they put into something I can evaluate (their website) is one of those things.

I'm the first to admit that it's not the b-all and end-all - but I none-the-less feel that they don't do themselves any favours - especially when their past reputation has been one of mediocrity at best. If I were running that company and trying to create an image of uncompromising quality then I'd have the person responsible for publishing that webpage hung, drawn, and quartered.

Another example is Align, who make the RC helicopters that I fly. They're a "biggie" in the industry - their pricing is very reasonable - their quality is good - their English translations are absolutely abysmal. Why? I don't have a clue. It just doesn't make any sense to me.

In a world where where little things matter, I just can't understand why so many "just don't get it". I was looking for some servo braid the other day. Found some overseas. $5 for the braid and over $100 for the postage (that another firm would post for 69 CENTS). I've eMailed them to ask if they'd consider just posing it at my risk. No reply. The "stinking thinking" companies think "$5 sale to a far away country - won't pay for our standard courier - can't be bothered". Smarter companies have got back to me promptly - with personal attention - accommodated my needs - and in consequence I've bought from them again and again and again. I'm sure there's a message in there somewhere.

/end_rant!

Going back to the original question though, Canon/Nikon have justly earned the reputation that they have and although not all they produce is the very best, buying only their products probably represent the lowest risk. However, and I only speak for myself, paying the associated premium for that as a warm feeling rather than doing a bit of research and buying selectively, is a luxury I don't want to afford.

And one of the ways that reputation was earned was in their standard of presentation at all levels - from their website - to evangelists like Chuck Westfall - to their sponsorships - trade shows - presentations - support networks etc. It all counts. On the other hand, I've literally lost track of the number of times I've bought off-brand stuff to save money and got bitten. Bought an iPod sync cable from $2 shop just over a year a go - didn't work. Bought a $19 off-brand cable from Harvey Norman a few weeks ago - didn't work. Mental note to myself - just buy the darned original item! (note: ended up buying 3 iPhone batteries along exactly the same lines). Maybe as I get older I get either wiser or grumpier, but I'm just sick of getting ripped off buying clone products that don't deliver on quality or performance. For the same reasons I'll always buy Canon over Sigma / Tokina / Tamron. Maybe they'd be a better buy than Canon - but that's not a risk I'm willing to take.

[ajohnw]

I don't feel that Tokina aren't really all that much different from the other none camera maker lenses except that from time to time they have produced some excellent optics for what they cost even surpassing that aspect at times. Originally they seemed to specialise in slower primes and zooms than the camera manufacturers. Purely primes at first.

Where people may suffer buying either Tamron,Sigma or for that matter Tokina is that they are more likely to get a faulty lens and might not even notice. This is more unlikely on camera manufacturers lenses especially at the pro end. These too can have problems. It seems lenses with image stability in them often have decentring problems, mild or otherwise.

I just checked a test of 2 16-xx full frame lenses. Canon and Tokina. Swings and round abouts but the tester did get a bad example of the Tokina lens that was replaced. That one faired well in comparison. What it lacked was any form of water sealing. The Tokina also didn't have what I tend to refer to as a Sigma trait as far as resolution goes. The Tokina 11-16mm on APS faired very well for a lens of that type. More or less what I would expect from Tokina actually.

Quality control is interesting aspect in it self. Years ago a UK mag called Amateur Photographer that many people rushed out to buy as soon as it came out used to regularly contain free lens test charts - to try and get manufacturers to maintain quality standards. If they received a lens for testing there is little doubt that it may have been selected. Well people can still test there lenses within reason and if bad take them back. I don't test them any more but maybe I should. It doesn't take long at all but if it was lacking significantly I'm pretty sure I would realise fairly quickly. People who test their own lenses might also have unrealistic expectations Photography wise there is no such things as a perfect optic nor in many other areas.

John
-

[Shadowman]

A bit off topic, but surprised no one mentioned third party teleconverters. These items are very tricky because their movable parts can come into contact with your rear lens elements. I purchased one from a company called Digital Concepts and can only use it with two of my lenses on a DX camera. It works fine for most shooting situations, the auto focus only seems to work up to 135mm (on my 70-300mm) for some reason.

[ajohnw]

A bit off topic, but surprised no one mentioned third party teleconverters. These items are very tricky because their movable parts can come into contact with your rear lens elements. I purchased one from a company called Digital Concepts and can only use it with two of my lenses on a DX camera. It works fine for most shooting situations, the auto focus only seems to work up to 135mm (on my 70-300mm) for some reason.

I have a couple of Kenko Nikon ones. No problems even with 2x on an F4 prime lens. They are nicely made but use plastic of course. The 1.4x is new. The 2x used. After i bought - ebay - the seller asked me if I really wanted it as on his zooms it would only work in AF part through the range and if sufficient light. That and effective F ratio is the problem. I haven't tried it on my 70-300mm. As I see things the main advantage of faster longer lenses F2.8 in particular is the ability to use a converter.

I have seen comment that F8 and phase AF is a no no,

Kenko - another Hoya company as per Tokina. Some of their products such as extension tubes don't really justify the price despite the name.

John
-

[rpcrowe]

As already pointed out, one needs to send the lens and sometimes the camera to the lens manufacturer. I have been told by many that the third-party manufacturers often provide this service for free just to insure happy customers. John

However, when Sigma replaced the 28mm f/1.8 model I have with a newer model, they would/could (amounts to the same thing) no longer rechip that lens to work with newer Canon cameras...

[Shadowman]

I have a couple of Kenko Nikon ones. No problems even with 2x on an F4 prime lens. They are nicely made but use plastic of course. The 1.4x is new. The 2x used. After i bought - ebay - the seller asked me if I really wanted it as on his zooms it would only work in AF part through the range and if sufficient light. That and effective F ratio is the problem. I haven't tried it on my 70-300mm. As I see things the main advantage of faster longer lenses F2.8 in particular is the ability to use a converter.

I have seen comment that F8 and phase AF is a no no,

Kenko - another Hoya company as per Tokina. Some of their products such as extension tubes don't really justify the price despite the name.

John
-

With the 70-300mm lens I'm at f/9 from 70-140mm, f/11 the remainder of the lens range, pretty much manual focus the same range. I tried it out on BIF and the birds won but it's good to have in the bag. I tried it in very low light settings and with a high enough ISO and steady surface I was able to get some acceptable (artsy style) people shots in motion.

[AB26]

Gee wiz, first time I have heard that people, not able to speak/write proper English are actually no good at technology and manufacturing good products. How many of you shoot Japanese made cameras? How many of you drive German and Swedish cars? How many of you speak/read/write Mandarin and/or Japanese, German and Svenska – but you keep using their products?

John,

There is no such thing as CanoNikkor Lens Snobbery. There is something like CanoNikon Body Snobbery. Why I say this is because the OEM lenses are simply a better fit to the OEM body. Shooting a Canon 1Dx or a Nikon D4s fitted with a “cheap” lens is like filling your Ferrari’s tank with diesel. It will run as long as the engine is warm, not giving good performance, as soon as the engine has cooled down you will not get it started again. That is when it cost you a lot of money to fix the problem.

“Cheap” lenses are budget lenses and do not belong on good camera bodies. Having a Nikon D800 body with a Sigma lens attached to it is “Cheap Brag” (body snobbery). Attaching a Pro lens to a cheap body is knowing something others don’t.

It is better to shoot with a lens that can out-resolve the body rather than shooting with a body out-resolving the lens.
I am “privileged” to shoot an old Nikkor lens and a new technology Sigma lens, the Nikkor is simply miles better than the Sigma, in all aspects.

[chauncey]

You need to ask yourself..."how good is good enough". Some folks, when sorting through "keepers", look at the image as a whole, while others first look at that image at 200-400%. Some may say that my stuff is not artistically stellar, which is probably true. But, when zoomed-in, one would be hard pressed to find focusing errors, which is my initial sorting criteria.

Would like to see an off-brand, 300mm lens that would give the consistency that would allow my BIF series.

[Colin Southern]

Gee wiz, first time I have heard that people, not able to speak/write proper English are actually no good at technology and manufacturing good products.

That's not what anyone is saying. It's about professional standards and customer perception.

Same reason as turning up in dirty jeans and a ripped T-Shirt for a job interview for a receptionist position at a legal firm isn't going to help your changes of being the successful candidate. It's a competitive world and the first thing you do if you want to succeed is make sure your ducks are all in a row. By choosing not to have their poor English translations re-written they're immediately at a disadvantage compared to those who present themselves to a consistently high standard.