p.19 #1 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
chez wrote:
I'm not judging the lens...it might be a gem. I'm judging Tamron calling the lens the ultimate travel lens which from my viewpoint, it's way to heavy to lug around all day long. I believe even you stated you don't take many of your lenses too far out of the house because they weigh too much. Well this Tamron weighs pretty damn close to the Sony 70-200 2.8 which you claimed was too heavy to carry very far. So from your viewpoint, if one lens weighing basically the same as the Tamron is too heavy to wander away from the home, how can this Tamron be the ultimate travel lens? Isn't it too heavy as well...or were you wrong in the other thread? ...Show more →
QUOTE
Well this Tamron weighs pretty damn close to the Sony 70-200 2.8 which you claimed was too heavy to carry very far. So from your viewpoint, if one lens weighing basically the same as the Tamron is too heavy to wander away from the home, how can this Tamron be the ultimate travel lens? Isn't it too heavy as well...or were you wrong in the other thread?
UNQUOTE
If someone wasting time to explain for you his/her point of view, it is bad manners to answer before you analize the information.
Please show the confirmation that 70-200 is too heavy (you base all you argument on the false fact). If you will not find one - evaluate your behavior.
It is not a lot of fun to argue with person who is not analyzing my arguments.
Behave. I am off from discussion with you.
p.19 #2 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I really hope that some reviews appear as soon as possible so that we can get back to topic rather than discussing who is right or wrong, whether a lens is to big, heavy, etc. or whether Tamron‘s claim is correct that this lens is supposed to be a travel lens. Does it really matter?
If it fits your needs and you‘re okay with the weight and price, buy it. If not, don‘t buy it. Pretty simple 😎
p.19 #3 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
IslandMed wrote:
QUOTE
Well this Tamron weighs pretty damn close to the Sony 70-200 2.8 which you claimed was too heavy to carry very far. So from your viewpoint, if one lens weighing basically the same as the Tamron is too heavy to wander away from the home, how can this Tamron be the ultimate travel lens? Isn't it too heavy as well...or were you wrong in the other thread?
UNQUOTE
If someone wasting time to explain for you his/her point of view, it is bad manners to answer before you analize the information.
Please show the confirmation that 70-200 is too heavy (you base all you argument on the false fact). If you will not find one - evaluate your behavior.
It is not a lot of fun to argue with person who is not analyzing my arguments.
Behave. I am off from discussion with you. ...Show more →
Here is a direct quote from a post you made.
"Just a few, but sooooo nice - Sigma 105 1.4 and 70-200 2.8 GM. All shots have been done at home or near home, those toys are really heavy."
So before you go out trying to make me out as a liar, you should maybe check your post history here on FM.
I'm done with you. Someone who's arogant enough to tell another member to get off his computer and go out and take some photos is rough weather without knowing diddly squat about that member loses are credibility in my books...especially when one has pretty much zero history here.
Don't bother replying...I done with you. The quote tells all.
p.19 #4 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I do find marketing this as a travel lens a bit odd. What does that make the 28-200 or the 18-300? I'd think of this as more of an event lens, personally. That said, agreed that if this fits your needs, it seems like a great option, and ignore the marketing.
p.19 #5 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Unfortunately, the whole useless discussion above stems from the fact that travel is a pretty broad term .
I'd also choose something lighter for my "travel", but I understand people who would take the new Tamron...
p.19 #6 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I would even go so far as to say that it depends on the type of travel. If one of my main intentions is to take pictures, I don‘t really care for weight and size (within certain limits, of course (highly subjective)).
If photography is more or less just a “by-product“, so when I‘m with friends/family or it‘s not my main focus, I‘d opt for the lighter/smaller gear. In my case that means the Leica Q2
However, I agree, I see it as a perfect lens for events, weddings etc. in the first place.
p.19 #7 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
chez wrote:
Here is a direct quote from a post you made.
"Just a few, but sooooo nice - Sigma 105 1.4 and 70-200 2.8 GM. All shots have been done at home or near home, those toys are really heavy."
So before you go out trying to make me out as a liar, you should maybe check your post history here on FM.
I'm done with you. Someone who's arogant enough to tell another member to get off his computer and go out and take some photos is rough weather without knowing diddly squat about that member loses are credibility in my books...especially when one has pretty much zero history here.
Don't bother replying...I done with you. The quote tells all....Show more →
QUOTE
Here is a direct quote from a post you made.
"Just a few, but sooooo nice - Sigma 105 1.4 and 70-200 2.8 GM. All shots have been done at home or near home, those toys are really heavy."
UNQUOTE
Re-read the post and do an effort to concentrare: it is stated clearly that the post is about photos of my daughter only.
You have "done me" in own v special style. Misusing the infornation called LYING, isn't it?)))
And you are done with me, thank you for your valuable time.
p.19 #10 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
IslandMed wrote:
My point seems to be quite clear: versatility of zoom occasionaly is game changer.
Just to be clear -
I personaly own full range of primes and prefer them to zooms for portraits, weddings receiptions (not the dance hall or the wild party) and when I do not need need to carry them long. All primes are GMs or similar level (Zeiss 50 1.4; Sigma 105 1.4);
I collect nice MF primes for fun with MO Trioplan 100 and Helios 44-2 being my favorites;
I am doing all sorts of film photography with Minolta CLE and Mamya 645;
Of cource I have holy trinity of GM zooms plus 100400gm.
And - what is important - I fund all my non-fun gear from photography income. I do weddinds, parties and families professionaly; I sell my backcountry skiing, rock-climbing and windsurfing photos; and I have accreditation in REUTERS.
I used to travel extensively for fun and shooting extreme sports - roughly 10 to 20 trips per year to destinations I love: Alps, Caucases, Egypt, Morocco, India, China, Russian Far East, etc.
Based on above I have the right to assume I have enough experience from both prime- and zoom-worlds. My opinion is based on experience and money earned.
Based on this experience I am risking to make an assumption that 35150 might be really "the ultimate travel lens".
Moreover, without trying to hurt ego of any of forum members I assume that DENIERS (primes forever! zooms sucks!)))) have never been shooting in stressful environments/assignments like fast shooting of numerous decisive moments or in extreme environments. And it might be the case that their real life experience is not enough to issue judgements about Tamron 35150.
I would not mind if you jugde 2875v2 without even trying it.
But, pleeeease, do not judge 35150 - this is INNOVATIVE lens.
My Canon buddy - despite the fact that he is beatifull and respected wedding photographer - was to fast to judge Canon 2.0 zoom as expensive and bloody heavy. It is his main working house now.))))
I hope you appreciate the time of making my point clear and spend some time in the high mountains in winter or time-stressed shooting of decisive moments.)))))...Show more →
I'm going to assume that English isn't your first language and agree with what I think you are trying to say. The lens could be called innovative. It actually reminds me of run of unusual lenses that Sigma produced, including the 24-35mm f/2. That lens was also very large and heavy, but it's a product that nobody else was offering. If nothing else, Tamron should be celebrated for at least trying to mix things up.
p.19 #11 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
New video, jp again, sadly but with something new and useful. This guy shows distortion at almost every focal lenght - wide open and how much he needs to manually correct it in LR.
p.19 #12 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Would/could it vary by copy?
It's a new lens.. so lens profiles for Lightroom and DXO PhotoLabs are not available (assuming... as it's early)
Once the profiles are available... would it be a big deal? Not being combative... just throwing it out there
p.19 #13 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
For distortion is one of the problems I care least, since one can correct it (perfectly?) with software.
Btw. I see it mostly as a portrait lens. Therefore distortion (for me) isn‘t much of a concern.
I‘m still waiting for more pictures to finally see how the quality of the bokeh will be.
p.19 #14 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
hatch1921 wrote:
Would/could it vary by copy?
It's a new lens.. so lens profiles for Lightroom and DXO PhotoLabs are not available (assuming... as it's early)
Once the profiles are available... would it be a big deal? Not being combative... just throwing it out there
Hatch
It's not a big deal unless it's a really strong distortion; you do lose some resolution in the corners after correcting. Nothing to worry about thou. Anyway, it was something new, so it was kinda worth posting until NDA is lifted/full reviews are up.
p.19 #15 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Immortal wrote:
It's not a big deal unless it's a really strong distortion; you do lose some resolution in the corners after correcting. Nothing to worry about thou. Anyway, it was something new, so it was kinda worth posting until NDA is lifted/full reviews are up.
Appreciate you posting the video.. this is a lens I'm interested in and the more info/sample shots the better It's not all that cheap.. .so... I'm sure it's going to be scrutinized a ton...and it should be for $1900
I'm about to make the move over to Sony and I'm looking for something like this lens to "fill the gap" so to speak...
14-24mm
"Tamron here" of something close
200-600mm
This would cover me from 14-600mm with three lenses... with three very minor gaps between.
p.19 #16 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Exactly, lots of time I'm quickly peaking out of a car window, and the difference between f5.6 and f2.8 is so massive when on the run! The 28-200 was a major player for me, but when the light starts to wane, its a huge difference. Ill gladly take a bigger lens to have those extra stops of light.
p.19 #17 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Immortal wrote:
New video, jp again, sadly but with something new and useful. This guy shows distortion at almost every focal lenght - wide open and how much he needs to manually correct it in LR.
The distortion levels look pretty darned good, to me! Fully correcting a lens like this would make it larger, heavier and more expensive. Besides, with lens corrections available, even Sony is allowing for greater distortions on their new lens designs in the interest of making them smaller and lighter. Shot on Sony A7X bodies, after allowing time for software updates, these distortions will be completely corrected with a miniscule negative impact on IQ on the Tamron lens.
Have a look at Dustin Abbott's test of the Sony GM 35mm f1.4, which I find to be an amazing lens. To my eyes, the distortion levels are similar to the Tamron lens (admittedly, a little less). Also, I would like to see the Tamron tested at normal shooting distances, rather than the extreme close-ups tested in the video:
p.19 #18 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Less than 3 weeks from release and not a single reviewer outside of Japan has even seen one of these let alone been given one for review. Meanwhile, the 18-300 which was announced 3 weeks after the 35-150 has been in reviewers hands for a week and their reviews are already going up online. At least some of them should have had the 35-150 by now. Why is Tamron being so secretive with this lens?
p.19 #20 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
InFocus2014 wrote:
The distortion levels look pretty darned good, to me! Fully correcting a lens like this would make it larger, heavier and more expensive. Besides, with lens corrections available, even Sony is allowing for greater distortions on their new lens designs in the interest of making them smaller and lighter. Shot on Sony A7X bodies, after allowing time for software updates, these distortions will be completely corrected with a miniscule negative impact on IQ on the Tamron lens.
Have a look at Dustin Abbott's test of the Sony GM 35mm f1.4, which I find to be an amazing lens. To my eyes, the distortion levels are similar to the Tamron lens (admittedly, a little less). Also, I would like to see the Tamron tested at normal shooting distances, rather than the extreme close-ups tested in the video:
We're very close to full tests/reviews so it's just a matter of a week, maybe two tops. Yes i do agree, like i said - distortion unless extremely strong it's not a problem at all and it looks pretty good here.
Sony primes are obviously excelent overall, even today, doing my dayly walkaround i had 24/F1.4 which i rented from my friend and yeah... while i love my T28-200, there is no contest here. Sony lens is just on another level. However for the price, size and IQ - T28-200 still is my fav. zoom lens. We will see if T35-150 gonna replace it (weight is a non issue for me/doing street photography mostly).
.
