p.4 #1 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
If the Tamron 35-150 F2-2.8 had Optical Stabilization I might understand the $2000+ price
otherwise without Optical Stabilization, I will pass
My Zeiss Batis 135mm F2.8 APO OS FE has Optical Stabilization that is very effective combined with in camera sensor Stabilization. Clearly the Tamron will not replace this lens.
p.4 #2 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Immortal wrote:
There are rumors going around that Tamron is going to set the price of 35-150 F2/2.8 at 2000-2200$. Imo that's quite high and will be a non-starter for many people if true. Thou i probably still gonna buy it.
p.4 #3 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
QuietOC wrote:
Think about your eyes. Do you experience your angle-of-view changing while refocusing? Your eyes focus by squishing a soft lens. Squishing that lens changes its focal length/optical power. Your eyes don't push a fixed focal length lens out. Luckily, your eyes don't have a fixed focal length lens. They focus by varying the focal length of a lens that doesn't move axially. The result is that you don't experience optical breathing.
Focusing by extending a fixed focal length optic results in a narrowing of the angle-of-view which is breathing.
No breathing requires focal length change
Constant focal length requires breathing
By definition, extending a fixed lens, like the unit-focused Summicron 50, for example, to focus is changing it's focal length because you're moving the optical center further away from the image plane. The difference isn't really discernible in wider lenses because they don't have to move much to refocus the rays. The difference is more apparent in unit-focused macro lenses and teles, or by putting a lens on tubes or bellows to focus closer.
In order to minimize that, you'd need to shorten the distance between the optical center and the image plane the closer you focus, thus shortening the focal length and increasing the angle of view to compensate. If that's your point, then I can see where you're coming from. However, it seems like Sony overcorrected. You can see it in Christopher Frost's review when he's alternating focus between a close brick wall and then the garden behind it. When he's focused on the wall, the angle of view is obviously wider than it is when he's focused on the garden. You see the same thing to a lesser degree when working with internally focused macro lenses when going from 1:1 to a mid-distance point. I've always called that breathing, just in the opposite direction of a unit focused lens, but perhaps there's another term for it.
p.4 #4 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
rattlebonez wrote:
If the Tamron 35-150 F2-2.8 had Optical Stabilization I might understand the $2000+ price
otherwise without Optical Stabilization, I will pass
My Zeiss Batis 135mm F2.8 APO OS FE has Optical Stabilization that is very effective combined with in camera sensor Stabilization. Clearly the Tamron will not replace this lens.
It was quite obvious from the get go that this lens won't have IS. Tamron lenses with IS have VC in their name. This one doesn't have it so no IS.
Teo Rey wrote:
Yeah my budget's not gonna stretch that far lol
Yeah, sadly this will be the case for many people if the rumors are true. On the other hand i can understand Tamron thinking here. There is no other lens with similar range and F/2-2.8 and it seems this will also have custom buttons etc.. unlike previous Tamron lenses. So this will be first all around Tamron premium lens for Sony.
p.4 #6 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
onthebeam wrote:
What the heck does that mean?
"Rumors going around."
That means zero.
Unless you have substantiation, that does this thread a whole lotta nuthin'.
Rumors mean exactly that... rumors. Source is valid however the note came with afterisk "current line of thinking is....". Like always rumors should be taken with grain of salt.
May or may not be true. You seem "agressive" for no reason. If you want 100% certain wait for Tamron official price, that much should be obvious. We're speculating in this thread on many things not only price and that is ok.
p.4 #8 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
freaklikeme wrote:
By definition, extending a fixed lens, like the unit-focused Summicron 50, for example, to focus is changing it's focal length because you're moving the optical center further away from the image plane.
So, you redefine "focal length" to be something that depends on how a lens is used instead of a property of its physical shape. Rather like Tony N. has redefined breathing to be the opposite of its original meaning.
Aug 06, 2021 at 04:54 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.4 #9 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
freaklikeme wrote:
So what is breathing?
nikon defines it like this, in the example video below: "Focus breathing describes refers to the shifting of angle of view of a lens when changing the focus. In general, as focus is adjusted from close focus to infinity, focus breathing can cause noticeable changes in angle of view."
they don't call it a change in focal length, probably because the definition of a prime lens is fixed focal length.
some primes have focus breathing, others don't, as the video shows.
freaklikeme wrote:
As for the rest of what you've written, it seems to run contrary to what these shooters found in their testing. First video speaks to it at about 25:20,
i didn't see him say anything about focus breathing? did i miss it??
what he did get correct is that focal length is measured at infinity, so if you are shooting big targets at long distances, like cars, people, air shows, etc., you'll have aov that's much closer to the rated 600mm focal length.
freaklikeme wrote:
and the second video is an expansion on what was tested.
tony northrup is not a reputable source of information.
p.4 #10 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
QuietOC wrote:
So, you redefine "focal length" to be something that depends on how a lens is used instead of a property of its physical shape. Rather like Tony N. has redefined breathing to be the opposite of its original meaning.
No, I'm using the actual definition of focal length, which is the the measurement of the optical center of a lens to the image plane. All lenses, unit focused or internally focused using FLEs, are only at (or near) their advertised focal lengths at infinity.
p.4 #11 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
osv2 wrote:
nikon defines it like this, in the example video below: "Focus breathing describes refers to the shifting of angle of view of a lens when changing the focus. In general, as focus is adjusted from close focus to infinity, focus breathing can cause noticeable changes in angle of view."
they don't call it a change in focal length, probably because the definition of a prime lens is fixed focal length.
some primes have focus breathing, others don't, as the video shows.
i didn't see him say anything about focus breathing? did i miss it??
what he did get correct is that focal length is measured at infinity, so if you are shooting big targets at long distances, like cars, people, air shows, etc., you'll have aov that's much closer to the rated 600mm focal length.
tony northrup is not a reputable source of information.
I never referenced Northrop. Neither of those videos have anything to do with him.
I know all the reviews are saying it's well-corrected for focus breathing, but when transitioning from close-focus to mid-distances, the change in angle of view is fairly dramatic. It just gets wider the closer you focus instead of getting narrower. As I said before, maybe that's not considered breathing. If there's a correct term for it, please enlighten me.
p.4 #12 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I'd consider swapping the 24-70GM for this (even if it's $2k) if they had added VC...but oh well. Would've been nice to be able to do a shoot with one zoom instead of one and 2 extra primes. Maybe v2 in 4 or 5 years will have it. Still, it's nice to see Tamron trying something new/different.
Aug 06, 2021 at 07:26 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.4 #13 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
freaklikeme wrote:
I never referenced Northrop. Neither of those videos have anything to do with him.
my mistake on that one, i should have actually looked at it first :-0
freaklikeme wrote:
I know all the reviews are saying it's well-corrected for focus breathing, but when transitioning from close-focus to mid-distances, the change in angle of view is fairly dramatic. It just gets wider the closer you focus instead of getting narrower. As I said before, maybe that's not considered breathing. If there's a correct term for it, please enlighten me.
i'd call it a trade-off with the lens design, as was mentioned earlier in the thread.
i shoot at long distances, but i'll look for aov changes when i use it tomorrow, i've just never noticed it being an issue.
we were discussing whether focus breathing is considered a change in focal length?
i thought not, in part because if it was some prime lenses couldn't technically be labeled as prime lenses.
p.4 #15 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Immortal wrote:
There are rumors going around that Tamron is going to set the price of 35-150 F2/2.8 at 2000-2200$. Imo that's quite high and will be a non-starter for many people if true. Thou i probably still gonna buy it.
it starts at f2, man. First party f2.8 zooms are $2000-2700 now. There's nothing else out there like this, so it should be priced high. Canon's super short range f2 zoom is $3000.
p.4 #16 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
osv2 wrote:
my mistake on that one, i should have actually looked at it first :-0
i'd call it a trade-off with the lens design, as was mentioned earlier in the thread.
i shoot at long distances, but i'll look for aov changes when i use it tomorrow, i've just never noticed it being an issue.
we were discussing whether focus breathing is considered a change in focal length?
i thought not, in part because if it was some prime lenses couldn't technically be labeled as prime lenses.
You won't see it at long distances. What the two men testing in those videos found was that it was no longer evident past 12m, if I remember correctly. I don't think issue is really the right word, at least not for stills shooters, so much as it's an interesting point of comparison. Under 12m, a 600mm prime may be able to give you a narrower angle of view, leaving your subject larger in the frame than with the 200-600, when shooting both from the same distance. Ultimately, you will be able to match or exceed the magnification of the prime, but you'll have to move a bit closer to do so.
Primes are always single focal length lenses, in that a 35 can't have the angle of view of a 50 or 28 at infinity. Only a zoom can do that. What happens to that 35 as you change your focus distance, though, is a matter of where the optical center of the lens is relation to the focal plane.
p.4 #17 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
tkbslc wrote:
it starts at f2, man. First party f2.8 zooms are $2000-2700 now. There's nothing else out there like this, so it should be priced high. Canon's super short range f2 zoom is $3000.
I know and i have no problem with that. I still gonna buy it day one, coz it's perfect for me. I just think most people are accustomed to Tamron lenses being cheaper than first party glass.
onthebeam wrote:
Would love to see this lens as a 20-135. Now you're talkin'!
Mate with 20/F2 on wide end throu to 135/F2.8 this would be like 2000+ grams with like 90+ filter size. Not really a practical "take me everywhere" zoom which seems to be Tamron niche and they're amazing at it.
p.4 #18 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Is it a Tamron 28-200 f/2.8-5.6 killer, or does the aperture range difference make the two lenses suitable for travel shooters with different needs/conditions?
p.4 #19 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
It's not.
Tamron 28-200 F/2.8-5.6 is super compact and light for a zoom of that range and delivers impressive IQ for the price (which is pretty low). Im using it all the time.
p.4 #20 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
FJR1 wrote:
Is it a Tamron 28-200 f/2.8-5.6 killer, or does the aperture range difference make the two lenses suitable for travel shooters with different needs/conditions?
I plan on buying this lens, it’s not touching the 28-200, which is substantially smaller, wider, and longer. This thing ends my search for the 70-180 f2.8. Might even sell off my 28-70 f2.8, with that lens, in no rush
