Fakes of the Venus 60mm macro lens

Have questions about the equipment used for macro- or micro- photography? Post those questions in this forum.

Moderators: rjlittlefield, ChrisR, Chris S., Pau

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8605
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Fakes of the Venus 60mm macro lens

Post by ChrisR »

I have seen several references about a knock-off of the Venus 2:1 lens, such as here:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2760818@N ... 347420666/

bearing the name Oshiro , or Bresser.
They are cheap.
Chris R

concon
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:21 am

Post by concon »

I have and use the Oshiro 2:1 lens. If it's 'fake', it's a great fake. I have been using it for years without any idea that it could be better (?). I just assumed they were either two different companies, or one was the cheaper version (as companies are known to do [spin off ghost companies with cheaper alternatives]).

It was the one lens that I've used since starting that I've found no one else uses. Honestly, this is the first time I've seen Laowa come out and say that they are the only brand that makes a 2:1 and these other brands are knock-offs. I've been posting my lens info with my photos for about a year now, and people eat it up - some have even purchased one.

I purchased mine from Amazon, and it appears you still can. Laowa can claim that they did it first, but I've seen zero differences between their lens and the Oshiro, optically, so it doesn't feel like a 'knock-off', just that someone did it cheaper.

Cheap- but just as good, imo.

ChrisR
Site Admin
Posts: 8605
Joined: Sat Mar 14, 2009 3:58 am
Location: Near London, UK

Post by ChrisR »

Some incarnations of the Oshiro have a glass "filter" over the front. Apparently the grip (Venus's was metal?) has changed too.
It's a bit odd - it may be a case of something like a disgruntled ex-employee running off with the plans!

If I didn't have a Canon + MP-E I'd be tempted, as a Nikon owner. But it is fully manual, which makes it rather dark. It's easier to put a Raynox or tubes onto a regular macro lens.
Chris R

concon
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:21 am

Post by concon »

I hear ya! I like the disgruntled employee idea, haha. I bought a filter for the front of mine since the optics pull into the tube and things can fall in- it'd be nice to have it already included hehe. I didn't have one for the longest time until a friend got me paranoid about it. The full manual aspect helped me understand f-stop as I started out since you control it and see it as you do it. The Venus price was harder to justify when I was researching the differences between the two lenses and brands. I will say that between the MPE at 2x and this at 2x, the Oshiro/Venus takes in more light at the same stop. MPE is way more dynamic though! For 180, it's not a bad place to start to go beyond 1x without having to worry about adapters and tubes.

JohnDownie
Posts: 108
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:57 am

Post by JohnDownie »

I don’t believe we should be so gleeful about extolling the virtues of a product that appears to be the result of a theft of intellectual property. The fact that the stolen item is cheaper shouldn’t be relevant.

Those who are complicit in the theft help to stifle innovation.

rjlittlefield
Site Admin
Posts: 21536
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 8:34 am
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA
Contact:

Post by rjlittlefield »

concon wrote:I will say that between the MPE at 2x and this at 2x, the Oshiro/Venus takes in more light at the same stop.
Most likely that's just a difference in how the stops are labeled. Things like pupil factor can make "f/8" on one lens be significantly different from "f/8" on a different lens.

The key thing to know is that DOF, diffraction, and brightness all track effective aperture in the same way for all lenses at the same magnification, barring incidental differences in light loss due to absorption and internal reflections. With both lenses set at 2X, you can expect same DOF and same diffraction blur at same brightness, regardless of how the stops are labeled.

--Rik

DavidG1980
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:28 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by DavidG1980 »

Concon,
Do you have any sample images with it? did you try it with extension tubes?
thanks

concon
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:21 am

Post by concon »

I'm still under the impression that this falls under the same branding convention as Rokinon, Samyang, and Bower...Or Venus is an Acura while Oshiro is Honda.
DavidG1980 wrote:Concon,
Do you have any sample images with it? did you try it with extension tubes?
thanks
Fairly certain these were at 2:1:
https://flic.kr/p/RhcCoz
https://flic.kr/p/SfytgM

I did try tubes with it, but the magnification gain was pretty negligible, or didn't get me where I wanted to be, so I only use it as a 1:1/1:1.5/2:1.

JohnDownie
Posts: 108
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:57 am

Post by JohnDownie »

concon wrote:I'm still under the impression that this falls under the same branding convention as Rokinon, Samyang, and Bower...Or Venus is an Acura while Oshiro is Honda.
How did you form this impression?

Rebranding or licensing are quite different from "knocking off" or stealing.

From the OP's posted link:

"Venus Optics - Laowa
[Be aware of FAKE products!]

We have recently found poor counterfeit products of our 60mm f/2.8 2:1 Ultra-Macro lens and 15mm f/4 Wide Angle Macro lens surfing online. Notice that we, Venus Optics, currently have NOT manufactured lenses under a different brand name than 'LAOWA'. The optical design of both LAOWA 60mm f/2.8 2:1 Ultra-Macro & LAOWA 15mm f/4 Wide Angle Macro are patent-protected and we reserve the legal rights to seek remedies by law for any counterfeit products.

Please contact us via sales@venuslens.net to confirm the lens legitimacy should you have any doubts."

I wonder how people would react if the thread was about new stacking software that Rik said violated his Zerene intellectual property.

concon
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:21 am

Post by concon »

Unfortunately the world isn't that transparent. Especially when it comes to items manufactured in factories over seas. It's very common for companies to completely debrand and sell items that are 90% the same at a lower price point. I'm friends with an individual who does this with his own company. He is the direct competition to himself on Amazon and Walmart. He cycles the discounts and deals, but sells identical products under different names with zero association. I've contacted Anhui Changgeng Optical and Technology regarding their patent. If they can provide this then I'm one step closer to thinking they're different entities, but even then, I'll probably still need to see them file against one of these other brands.

JohnDownie
Posts: 108
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:57 am

Post by JohnDownie »

concon wrote:Unfortunately the world isn't that transparent. Especially when it comes to items manufactured in factories over seas. It's very common for companies to completely debrand and sell items that are 90% the same at a lower price point. I'm friends with an individual who does this with his own company. He is the direct competition to himself on Amazon and Walmart. He cycles the discounts and deals, but sells identical products under different names with zero association. I've contacted Anhui Changgeng Optical and Technology regarding their patent. If they can provide this then I'm one step closer to thinking they're different entities, but even then, I'll probably still need to see them file against one of these other brands.
The fact that there are companies that release the same product under different brands has no bearing whatsoever on whether a particular product is a ripoff or not. Does your friend say that the some of his products are fakes?

Pursuing an international patent case is very costly. A lack of a filing is hardly dispositive.

concon
Posts: 87
Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2017 6:21 am

Post by concon »

It's amazingly common and I'm surprised that no one has mentioned White-Labeling. Companies do this, especially over seas. It's easy to do, and allows you to produce products that you don't have to associate with- generic, cheap, products.

DavidG1980
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 4:28 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by DavidG1980 »

concon wrote:I'm still under the impression that this falls under the same branding convention as Rokinon, Samyang, and Bower...Or Venus is an Acura while Oshiro is Honda.
DavidG1980 wrote:Concon,
Do you have any sample images with it? did you try it with extension tubes?
thanks
Fairly certain these were at 2:1:
https://flic.kr/p/RhcCoz
https://flic.kr/p/SfytgM

I did try tubes with it, but the magnification gain was pretty negligible, or didn't get me where I wanted to be, so I only use it as a 1:1/1:1.5/2:1.
Thank you, looks very good.
I suspect it's from the same line as the Venus, i don't think it is so easy to replicate a lens design.

elf
Posts: 1404
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2007 12:10 pm

Post by elf »

Obviously not a "poor counterfeit product" as the images are quite nice :P

Ichthyophthirius
Posts: 1152
Joined: Thu Mar 07, 2013 5:24 am

Post by Ichthyophthirius »

Hi,

Is this really such an innovative lens design? It looks pretty conventional, easy to copy and could equally be 30, 50, 70 years old. Does anyone here know enough about lens designs to give me an idea?

What I find more surprising is that someone would copy such a niche product. Both companies have a very small range of lenses available but they've got this one in common?

... just wondering.

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic