p.25 #2 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Fred Miranda wrote:
On the contrary, they may actually raise the price.
Voigtlander has done this a couple times in the past for their E-mount lenses. (supply and demand)
Yes, I can’t ever see a company lower a price if they are selling out at their existing price...that’s just giving revenue away.
p.25 #3 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Heck for all we know the first pre- orders are under priced and raise it on second batch. Makes you wonder when they send out a official statement there not going to fill the pre orders. One sign they priced it too low. I would have paid 999 for it or maybe 949.00 might fit better.
Kind of like the Batis 135 in reverse. If they put what I thought was fair at 1799 than we may never have seen that heavy discount recently. It’s a guessing game no question on OEM pricing there products. There’s cost versus revenue and what the market is willing to bear,
p.25 #4 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Fred Miranda wrote:
On the contrary, they may actually raise the price.
Voigtlander has done this a couple times in the past for their E-mount lenses. (supply and demand)
I don't think Tamron will change its price for this item. This is their first zoom lens for FE and they want to learn what price market is willing to accept. Given its success, they may decide to price the next release a bit higher to rake in the profit. Unlike an OEM, I find Tamron's price seem to be fairly flexible and they are a large player in the value space. Tamron very often utilizes mail in rebates or instant rebates to incentivize sales, which makes me believe their cost maybe lower than other OEM (or just more efficient? )
p.25 #5 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Fred Miranda wrote:
On the contrary, they may actually raise the price.
Voigtlander has done this a couple times in the past for their E-mount lenses. (supply and demand)
Tamron is honest, I dont think they'll do it, but it may affect future releases.
When tamron released the 150-600, they were out of supply for half a year from what I recall, they didnt raise prices. I used one for a few months, then sold for a profit, that's how bad supply was at the time.
p.25 #6 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Other lens manufactures should take note of the E-mount success.
Sony should also take note itself and start focusing a bit more on mid-range lenses -- something they never quite did even in DSLR days. It was generally either cheap zooms or $1K+ high-end lenses. I think the A7III coupled with the FE 50mm 1.8, FE 85mm 1.8 and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 are what will finally take the Sony mirrorless system mainstream. For the first time we are in a territory where you don't have to pay a large premium to get a good body and good set of lenses in the Sony system.
p.25 #8 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Fred Miranda wrote:
I don't think they will raise the prices either but I'm sure they won't lower it.
100% agree. Maybe only through rebates. They have control how often those can occur. Tamron used to offer spring rebates on my of their Canon/Nikon mount offerings. I guess we won't see a discount on this one until next year? A shame. :-)
p.25 #12 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Geoff CB wrote:
Just got a backordered notice from B&H. Placed my order the day presales went live around 1 p.m.
They send those every set number of days when you place an order before they have stock....doesn't mean you won't be in the first wave (doesn't mean you will either)
p.25 #14 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Jman13 wrote:
They send those every set number of days when you place an order before they have stock....doesn't mean you won't be in the first wave (doesn't mean you will either)
p.25 #15 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
eke2k6 wrote:
Wrong horse? You forget that, as exciting as the new Sony cameras are, this is still very much an echo chamber. Sony's marketshare barely even crosses the double digit percentage threshold. The return on investment for 3rd party manufacturers would simply not have been worth it in the past.
Canon and Nikon still *vastly* dominate the market, which means that DSLR-mount lenses will thrive far more than any FE lens, at least for now. In fact, the A9 was the landmark camera that solidified Sony in the professional market, and made everyone take note. Every Alpha camera is benefiting from those innovations now. By my count, that was hardly even a year ago.
Let's not kid ourselves about just how much we think the boat was missed. The boat is barely even leaving the harbor.
First: the assumption that market share governs volume of new lens purchases. This isn't necessarily true. I own and love my Nikon camera. But I'm not buying more lenses for it. Why? Because the ones I have for it are more than adequate to satisfy even the 45MP beast that is the D850. And if I do want a new lens, I'll buy one used because the new ones don't necessarily add that much value (either in image quality, AF speed, or weight) than their predecessors. Indeed, I suspect many if not most CaNikon users who aren't being paid full-time for their work are buying lenses off the used market. And even those sales aren't exactly thriving. Have you tried to sell a well-regarded Nikkor f/2.8 zoom or f/1.4 prime lately? They're not nearly as easy to move as they were five years ago. But a Zony 55mm f/1.8? It'd be surprising if your listing went for longer than a week before multiple offers came in.
Second, the trends in the overall share of dedicated camera sales definitely point to a major shift towards mirrorless. The DSLR installed base may be much larger but it isn't really growing. Mirrorless cameras like the Sony are increasingly taking a bite out of the rarified DSLR market while also attracting new photographers looking to do more than their cell-phone can offer. And in that second space mirrorless can leverage a distinct advantage - the potential for lighter and smaller cameras. Setting aside the Sony f/1.4 GM behemoths, there are a number of Sony and 3rd party lenses for the EF mount that can preserve the relative size advantage Sony has over its DSLR competitors. And there is no doubt in my mind that mirrorless can offer much better low-end options as compared to low-end DSLRs with their awful postage-stamp-through-a-tunnel viewfinders.
p.25 #16 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Arka wrote:
There are a couple of flawed assumptions here.
First: And even those sales aren't exactly thriving. Have you tried to sell a well-regarded Nikkor f/2.8 zoom or f/1.4 prime lately? They're not nearly as easy to move as they were five years ago. But a Zony 55mm f/1.8? It'd be surprising if your listing went for longer than a week before multiple offers came in.
I'd argue that there's far more supply of lenses on the CaNikon side. The market is quite saturated, both new and used. Your argument falls apart also with the Nikon D850, a DSLR that's been out of stock for a year due to demand.
Furthermore, the Sigma 35mm Art was announced in 2012, 3 years before the A7RII. Back then neither market share nor product development was convincing enough for a company to sink R&D dollars into the full frame mirrorless market.
Still, in case you missed it, companies like Sigma actually have a pretty decent lineup of excellent lenses for APS-C and M43 mirrorless cameras. Full frame mirrorless is just entering the adolescent phase.
Arka wrote: Second the trends in the overall share of dedicated camera sales definitely point to a major shift towards mirrorless. The DSLR installed base may be much larger but it isn't really growing. Mirrorless cameras like the Sony are increasingly taking a bite out of the rarified DSLR market while also attracting new photographers looking to do more than their cell-phone can offer.
The argument was the current sales. If you were a businessman deciding to get into a market segment, would you buy farmland proven to be fertile, or gamble on previously unfarmed wildlands?
Arka wrote:
And in that second space mirrorless can leverage a distinct advantage - the potential for lighter and smaller cameras. Setting aside the Sony f/1.4 GM behemoths, there are a number of Sony and 3rd party lenses for the EF mount that can preserve the relative size advantage Sony has over its DSLR competitors. And there is no doubt in my mind that mirrorless can offer much better low-end options as compared to low-end DSLRs with their awful postage-stamp-through-a-tunnel viewfinders.
I 100% agree.That's why I've switched. My only remaining DSLR is the Nikon Df, which I'll likely keep forever. Mirrorless is indeed the future.
p.25 #17 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
eke2k6 wrote:
I'd argue that there's far more supply of lenses on the CaNikon side. The market is quite saturated, both new and used. Your argument falls apart also with the Nikon D850, a DSLR that's been out of stock for a year due to demand.
Yeah but that's one body for which there was arguably a lot of pent up demand. And even though Nikon basically built a perfect camera in the D850 (one which I doubt will be bested by any future DSLR product), I still sincerely doubt that it is a huge driver of lens sales or innovation in the lens space. What worked well with the D800 6 years ago will probably work pretty well with the D850. That's certainly been my experience.
The argument was the current sales. If you were a businessman deciding to get into a market segment, would you buy farmland proven to be fertile, or gamble on previously unfarmed wild lands?
Not an accurate comparison in my view. It's more like asking a farmer whether to purchase a fertile but increasingly barren (due to over-irrigation and over-fertilization) piece of land versus striking out into unexplored territory. As you mentioned, there is a saturation of lenses in the DSLR space thanks to a large amount of pre-owned inventory. That makes it tough to generate new sales. I for one can't imagine a lens that I would currently buy for my D850 in new condition.
I 100% agree.That's why I've switched. My only remaining DSLR is the Nikon Df, which I'll likely keep forever. Mirrorless is indeed the future.
For me, it's the D850. I learned during a shoot today why it's still darn useful to keep a camera as good as the D850 in my kit pretty much until it dies. But again, I can't imagine what successor DSLR camera Nikon could make that would persuade me to upgrade. The D850 solves 99% of photographers' problems, though it does so in a package that is still large and heavy relative to the latest Sony cameras, like the highly comparable A7R III.
p.25 #18 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
I agree that mirrorless is the future, though it will be awhile before DSLR's are gone. A good analogy might be made to gas vs electrical engines in automobiles with mirrorless in the role of the electric engine. Gas engines are going, it's just a matter of how soon.
p.25 #19 · In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799)
Totally agree. I wish the 50mm 1.8 was as good as the 85mm 1.8. Also make a 35mm 1.8 and a 135mm F2 all mid range lenses.
curious80 wrote:
Sony should also take note itself and start focusing a bit more on mid-range lenses -- something they never quite did even in DSLR days. It was generally either cheap zooms or $1K+ high-end lenses. I think the A7III coupled with the FE 50mm 1.8, FE 85mm 1.8 and the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 are what will finally take the Sony mirrorless system mainstream. For the first time we are in a territory where you don't have to pay a large premium to get a good body and good set of lenses in the Sony system.
