www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Fakes of the Venus 60mm macro lens
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Fakes of the Venus 60mm macro lens
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
ChrisR
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 7689
Location: Near London, UK

PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 3:40 pm    Post subject: Fakes of the Venus 60mm macro lens Reply with quote

I have seen several references about a knock-off of the Venus 2:1 lens, such as here:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2760818@N21/discuss/72157671347420666/

bearing the name Oshiro , or Bresser.
They are cheap.
_________________
Chris R
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
concon



Joined: 01 Jun 2017
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Sat Jul 15, 2017 4:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ChrisR
Site Admin


Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 7689
Location: Near London, UK

PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 2:30 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
concon



Joined: 01 Jun 2017
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 7:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JohnDownie



Joined: 18 Oct 2011
Posts: 37

PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 1:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18868
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Sun Jul 16, 2017 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
DavidG1980



Joined: 10 Jan 2017
Posts: 33
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 8:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Concon,
Do you have any sample images with it? did you try it with extension tubes?
thanks
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
concon



Joined: 01 Jun 2017
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JohnDownie



Joined: 18 Oct 2011
Posts: 37

PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 4:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
concon



Joined: 01 Jun 2017
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 6:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JohnDownie



Joined: 18 Oct 2011
Posts: 37

PostPosted: Tue Jul 18, 2017 9:35 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
concon



Joined: 01 Jun 2017
Posts: 87

PostPosted: Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
DavidG1980



Joined: 10 Jan 2017
Posts: 33
Location: Portland, OR

PostPosted: Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
elf



Joined: 18 Nov 2007
Posts: 1345

PostPosted: Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Obviously not a "poor counterfeit product" as the images are quite nice Razz
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ichthyophthirius



Joined: 07 Mar 2013
Posts: 797

PostPosted: Thu Jul 20, 2017 3:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

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.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group