In addition to my Sony lenses, I currently have two Sigmas and two Tamrons: the 70-180 f2.8 and 28-75 f2.8. One thing I can't understand is why Tamron can continue to innovate with truly excellent lenses while their front and rear lens caps are true clunkers?
The Sigma caps rival Sony's for great grip and thinness. The Tamron rear caps are ungainly thick compared with Sony's and are just not up to the level of their aesthetically pleasing lens designs. The front caps are a bit better but still thick.
Although I happily keep the Sigma caps on my 105mm f2.8 macro and 100-400mm zoom, those Tamron caps could really use a svelte redesign. In the meantime I bought some extra Sony caps and have banished the Tamron's the inner depths of the lens box in the closet . . .
Am I the only one who notices these things . . . ? Could I be turning into Larry David on Curb Your Enthusiasm?
I agree 100%. The rear lens caps are atrociously tall - I've had more than a couple cases where I had to take the rear lens caps off to make Tamron lenses fit in my bag. I understand that they cut corners to make their lenses more affordable, but I'd expect less plastic to be cheaper than more plastic!
Hmm, so I don't have those lenses but I do have the 24, 35mm 2.8 and 70-300mm. I'm pretty sure it's the same back lens cap. I kind of like them TBH. They seem to be designed to take into consideration the rear gasket as well. If I try any other Sony rear lens cap, it gets really tight about a half a turn in.
It's actually the front one that I think could use a re-design. They don't always sit flush with the front. They have a tendency to pop out slightly once seated.
The worst rear lens cap I can recall using is for the loxia 50mm. I hated that thing as it went on too tight for my liking.
Also, look at it this way. Because they're so thick, you can use them to chock your tires when your doing an oil change. So, you know...kind of a good value I suppose.
If it fits I use it. I am not analretentive enough to insist everything match. YMMV I just grabbed a Sigma 15MM fisheye with tamron lens cap, and a Nokon lens with a Sigma lens cap on the back ends. So far none of them are complaining.
I haven't experienced Tamron lens caps... Sony is definitely the best, Sigma is good (though I wish they'd paint the letters on the front, the single color feels cheap), Voigtlander has been excellent too.
If you really want to get mad try the Batis caps... I thought they were entirely too loose, and frankly feel cheap compared to the rest of the lens. It really adds to the rumors that Tamron makes Zeiss lenses... which isn't a bad thing, most new lenses from these major manufacturers are excellent! Just don't see how a quality lens cap doesn't even cross their minds on products that cost many hundreds if not over a thousand dollars.
onthebeam wrote:
In addition to my Sony lenses, I currently have two Sigmas and two Tamrons: the 70-180 f2.8 and 28-75 f2.8. One thing I can't understand is why Tamron can continue to innovate with truly excellent lenses while their front and rear lens caps are true clunkers?
The Sigma caps rival Sony's for great grip and thinness. The Tamron rear caps are ungainly thick compared with Sony's and are just not up to the level of their aesthetically pleasing lens designs. The front caps are a bit better but still thick.
Although I happily keep the Sigma caps on my 105mm f2.8 macro and 100-400mm zoom, those Tamron caps could really use a svelte redesign. In the meantime I bought some extra Sony caps and have banished the Tamron's the inner depths of the lens box in the closet . . .
Am I the only one who notices these things . . . ? Could I be turning into Larry David on Curb Your Enthusiasm?...Show more →
I have not tried Tamron's caps for Sony E mount yet, but I don't find Sony rear caps to be great.
Perhaps it is a limitation of the mount: The Sony rear caps can be mounted on to a lens securely only in one position. In other two positions, they can be rotated, but they do not hold securely.
When I had Nikon DSLR the Nikon's rear caps and later versions of Sigma rear caps could be closed securely in any of three positions. That is like only thing dislike on E mount.
My only modern Tamron is the 17-28/2.8. I compared its rear cap to the cap of my 1970s 90/2.8
macro, and they are pretty much identical. It appears Tamron has been building their rear caps like this for a long time. Tamron rear cap is ~5/8" high, a Sony rear cap is ~ 3/8".
jstrawman wrote:
Tamron rear cap is ~5/8" high, a Sony rear cap is ~ 3/8".
To me this makes a difference. I was with Nikon for years and the Tamron's seem about as deep. Once I switched to Sony I immediately preferred the slimmed down style.
Tamron only uses the large rear caps for lenses with rubber seals at the lens mount. The smaller caps don't contact the seal. The 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 Di III VC doesn't use the large E-mount rear cap.
runamuck wrote:
If it fits I use it. I am not analretentive enough to insist everything match. YMMV I just grabbed a Sigma 15MM fisheye with tamron lens cap, and a Nokon lens with a Sigma lens cap on the back ends. So far none of them are complaining.
Unfortunately I use all of my lenses so eventually the chonk will be in my face once again
