GH2 Canon vs "JC Penny"

D

dishan

Well-known member
I've heard excellent things about the FD 35-105mm F/3.5 constant aperture lens.

Was trying to price one out, and I keep finding JC Penny branded ones. They look pretty similar from what I can tell- Did JC Penny just rebrand the Canon lenses back in the day?
They seem to be considerably cheaper, but I can't find any reviews of one.
 
I have some very nice JC Penney primes, and they used a variety of manufacturers, including Soligor, and possibly some Pentax OEM. My 135mm JC Penney is a very good lens indeed. But mainly you will find two things. The ones made in Japan, as opposed to elsewhere, tend to be better. And the other is that there are better choices for zooms, period. Vivitar has some great zooms in that size, and there is the legendary Kobori 28-200 that absolutely wipes the field.
Another option is the Olly 45-150. I picked mine up for $145, new, and it is super lightweight and amazingly sharp.
And, lastly, one always has to say "Minolta Beercan" just because it is fun to say. Now that I have the Olly, with the Panny 14-45, I cover 14-150 and I don't go near my 20 or so legacy zooms. Sad but true.
If I break out the big heavy glass, it will be a legacy prime, like the Vivitar 55mm and 90mm.
 
It's hard to say... JC Penny and Sears both at one time had marketed their own rebranded versions of Canon, M42 and K-mount cameras.

My Soligor m42 mount 35-105/3.5 looks a lot like the FD one.
 
Interesting. Thanks so much for all the helpful replies!
DrDave, those sound like great options, but are they all constant aperture? Finding something sharp in such a variable zoom range with constant aperture seems nearly impossible. I also have the lumix lens which comes in handy for AF shots, but the aperture change along the zoom barrel makes it far less than desirable to me and the way I shoot.

Meanwhile, I've heard such excellent thins about that Canon FD 35-105mm F/3.5 being tack sharp and covering such a versatile range, that I'm dying to try it. I got outbid on one, and then stumbled upon a JC Penny branded one. Seems almost half the price, but likely not just a rebranded Canon, right?

Meanwhile, the JC Penny and Sears branded lenses are probably still pretty good, I'm guessing. Doesn't sound like anyone has anything bad to say about it or the Sears offerings. I'm looking at a 135mm F/2.8 from JC Penny as well, so we'll see I suppose.

While I'm at it- are any of those ebay FD adapters any good? I usually go with Fotodiox, but I just bought 2 other adapters from them and decided I'd like to try and save a bit more money this time around.
 
bronxjragon said:
Wait, JC Penny as in mom jeans store JC Penny?
Click to expand...
JC Penny used to be a big department store, like Sears still is, a couple of decades ago. Back then, before the internet made the world a smaller place, not everyone had access to a reputable camera shop, and would buy all of their gear and accessories at department stores (who they trusted to have decent return policies and guaranteed to be nearby). JC Penny and Sears used to rebrand their own equipment, much like Sears still does today (you can buy a Sears-brand "Xcargo" roof box for your car that is actually made by Thule, and is identical to one of their models).

The question is, were they high quality, similar to the Canon-branded one of the same specifications? Or was it more like Walmart's rebranding, where they cut corners and actually make it worse than the real brand name.
 
I understand about constant aperture, but then really get a legacy 2.8. There is the "maybe Leica" design F4 35-70 which is very cheap, quite sharp. AKA "minibeercan"
I have a Kobori 70-210 F4 also very sharp, small, lightweight. But for real IQ the primes are the best deal, sad to say, unless you want to spend some $$$.
 
DrDave said:
I understand about constant aperture, but then really get a legacy 2.8. There is the "maybe Leica" design F4 35-70 which is very cheap, quite sharp. AKA "minibeercan"
I have a Kobori 70-210 F4 also very sharp, small, lightweight. But for real IQ the primes are the best deal, sad to say, unless you want to spend some $$$.
Click to expand...

Yes, I shoot mostly primes when I can, but I also do a lot of event / documentary work, and having a zoom lens with constant aperture is really mandatory for that sort of work. Preferably one that is fast so it can be used in natural lighting, and/or be stopped down for sharpness when I need it.
 
The Minolta 35-70 and 70-210 are not Leica design, but they were adapted and rebranded by Leica for their own use.

There's a special reason why we're looking at the 35-105/3.5, it's constant aperture and internal zooming. There's really nothing like this available with vintage lenses, other than a PL mount cine-zoom.
 
The fd 35-105 is definitely a favorite of mine. Just about lives on my gh2 for day exterior shooting. Tack sharp wide open and at every focal length, smooth action, silky bokeh and lots of versatility. In all honsty, it's just as sharp as my prime lenses within the focal range, just not quite as fast. My only wish is that it had slightly better close focus capabilities, but this is just a minor shortcoming. Keep checking KEH or Adorama Used Lenses. It's well worth it if you can pick one up. Don't get the JC Penny variety - it's not the same quality by a long shot.
 
Last edited:
cowpunk52 said:
The fd 35-105 is definitely a favorite of mine. Just about lives on my gh2 for day exterior shooting. Tack sharp wide open and at every focal length, smooth action, silky bokeh and lots of versatility. In all honsty, it's just as sharp as my prime lenses within the focal range, just not quite as fast. My only wish is that it had slightly better close focus capabilities, but this is just a minor shortcoming. Keep checking KEH or Adorama Used Lenses. It's well worth it if you can pick one up. Don't get the JC Penny variety - it's not the same quality by a long shot.
Click to expand...

Yes, I've heard wonderful things about this lens, I think I'll spring for a real Canon branded one.

Meanwhile, I've been seeing some 135mm F/2.8 FD primes that seemed like a good option for lower light- I've had to shoot some indoor band footage, and being able to get a good telephoto shot from the back at 2.8 might be useful. I think both of these would really compliment my set. For that, I might not mind a JC Penny or Sears branded one. Very excited.
 
oh no! I got excited about the rebranded (JC Penny / Sears) lenses that I totally messed up and bid (and won) on a brand I've never heard of before!

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...74&ssPageName=ADME:L:OC:US:1123#ht_4271wt_989

I guess for $29 its not so terrible if it ends up being junk, but some Google searches of the brand Miida reveal that I should have steared clear of this one. I don't know what I was thinking- I was just excited I guess. But man, look at the pictures of the lens- the description says like new condition, but does that glass look foggy to anyone else??

Apparently miida doesn't have a reputation for good lenses. Anyone heard of them or have an opinion?
 
hmmm... Miida?

Never heard of them. Must be an obscure brand. Looks like it might be made in Japan though, if that means anything to you. Maybe someone has heard of this brand before?
 
Ok, so I got it. I gotta say- the body is a lot cleaner looking than it did in that picture, and that dirt/smudge on the lens appears to have been a reflection. Also, it has a built in hood that retracts into the barrel of the lens- cool. Smooth focus and aperture blade movements. I'd say build quality wise, this is kind of cool.

Now, the not-so-cool:
This thing came in a box stuffed with newspapers and no lens cap. The auction did not state that it has one, but that's the sort of thing you should specify in the description, isn't it? The description says that it includes "protective cap", I didn't think that implied only the rear cap. Am I mistaken here? Should I have known that?
Also, if the lens has nothing protecting the front, should it really just be in a box with newspaper and whatever lint / debris rubbing against the glass? I would think it should have at least been put in a plastic bag, bubble wrap, or something protective if the cap is missing.

But, none of that bothers me as much as this:
P1010198.jpgP1010197.jpgP1010195.jpg
If you look closely, you'll see three distinct ruptures inside the glass- not on the front element, but somewhere inside the middle. They look like little pock marks or sipderwebbed cracks.
Not cool.

I admit, I haven't actually been able to test the optical quality fully because I don't have my FD adapter (enroute from china). I did, however, hold it up against my nikon adapter with my hands and tried to snap a pic or two.
It admittedly isn't the sharpest tool in the shed, but its not terrible (view larger version). I suppose I'll need to get a proper adapter to test for certain.
P1010173.jpg

So, the bottom line here is, what should I do now? I've complained to the seller that I don't feel like this product is as it was described. I'm being given the option to either return it for a full refund (I'll lose $6-10 in return shipping, which sucks considering it is about 1/3 of the value I paid for the item!), or they'll give me a $10 credit. I'm not sure which I prefer at this point. Both seem like I lose, honestly.

Got any suggestions?
 
That's FUNGUS... take the $10- credit, toss the lens and move on.

BTW, have you checked out KEH if you're in the US? They have some very good prices on the 35-105/3.5, and also 135/2.8's. Their "UGLY" or "BARGAIN" conditions lenses are better than most of the "MINT" stuff on Ebay.
 
Kin Lau said:
That's FUNGUS... take the $10- credit, toss the lens and move on.

BTW, have you checked out KEH if you're in the US? They have some very good prices on the 35-105/3.5, and also 135/2.8's. Their "UGLY" or "BARGAIN" conditions lenses are better than most of the "MINT" stuff on Ebay.
Click to expand...

So THAT's what fungus looks like? Heh. I always pictured it being like mold growing inside the glass or something. Well that totally sucks. Does that mean it will get worse over time?

If your suggestion is to toss the lens, wouldn't I be better off returning it to the sender instead of the $10 partial refund to keep it?

Yeah, I'm actually based in NY, so Adorama and B&H products arrive a day or two after purchase. Never shopped KEH before- are they better than B&H's used shop?
 
KEH is one of the best for used lenses, they rate their stuff very conservatively.

When you have a bad seller, or one that doesn't really care (the ad was bordering on fraud) - it's best to just cut ties with them and move on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top