Archive 2021 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.41 #1 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
turbodude wrote:
More detail report tomorrow when im not exhausted. I was planning on just shooting the undercard fight with this lens, but it worked so well, i said eff it, and shot the main event with it.
nice set of pics, thx for posting it, especially given that it was shot with this lens.
i'm in awe that you had credentials that let you on the apron for a title fight like that... i used to box in the golden gloves, way before mma, i would kill to be shooting where you were for that fight
p.41 #2 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I think you all should work on your GAS. Me included.
Honestly, pretty much everybody here have already a wide lens. Maybe it's Sigma 14-24, Sony 12-24, Sony G 20 mm, GM 24 or GM 16-35. They all work and will work very nicely with Tamron 35-150/F2-2.8. No need to switch.
I too for a moment thought about buying the GM 16-35 coz "it's perfect with my T35-150" but after few days of thinking im like "Why? You got G 20 mm and Sigma 14-24. That's even more than you actually need".
So instead of buying another lens (GM 16-35) im just gonna sell either G 20 mm or 14-24, im almost proud of myself lol. After that im gonna have 3 lenses in total (G 20 mm or Sigma 14-24 + T35-150 + Sony G 200 - 600). That's actually a pretty good place to be in it, when i think about it.
Nov 11, 2021 at 04:39 PM
osv2 Offline • • • • [X]
p.41 #3 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
wind30 wrote:
I thought Gerald undone is prob the worst lens reviewer most of his reviews are a waste of time
that is the worst post in the thread, by a wide margin, it's your comments that are a waste of time.
so off you go to the ignore filter, with the rest of the trolls.
p.41 #4 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Immortal wrote:
I think you all should work on your GAS. Me included.
Honestly, pretty much everybody here have already a wide lens. Maybe it's Sigma 14-24, Sony 12-24, Sony G 20 mm, GM 24 or GM 16-35. They all work and will work very nicely with Tamron 35-150/F2-2.8. No need to switch.
I too for a moment thought about buying the GM 16-35 coz "it's perfect with my T35-150" but after few days of thinking im like "Why? You got G 20 mm and Sigma 14-24. That's even more than you actually need".
So instead of buying another lens (GM 16-35) im just gonna sell either G 20 mm or 14-24, im almost proud of myself lol. After that im gonna have 3 lenses in total (G 20 mm or Sigma 14-24 + T35-150 + Sony G 200 - 600). That's actually a pretty good place to be in it, when i think about it. ...Show more →
But, but....and hear me out now, buying the 16-35GM and T150-500 could rationalize also purchasing the Kase magnetic 82mm filter setup.
p.41 #5 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
photosbyjaron wrote:
But, but....and hear me out now, buying the 16-35GM and T150-500 could rationalize also purchasing the Kase magnetic 82mm filter setup.
Mate, i laughed out hard, that's a good one, really good one. That's one of the best lens buying rationalization i heard in a long time lol.
p.41 #6 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
osv2 wrote:
nice set of pics, thx for posting it, especially given that it was shot with this lens.
i'm in awe that you had credentials that let you on the apron for a title fight like that... i used to box in the golden gloves, way before mma, i would kill to be shooting where you were for that fight
Thanks man.
ive been working in the industry a while and paid my dues. i was shooting for MGM resorts international for this one. But often shoot for ESPN ringside.
p.41 #7 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
So... I've finally managed to snag a copy .
I won't repeat all that has been said already about GM-level build quality, hefty/solid feeling in hand, silent AF that seems quicker (acquisition at least, did not have a chance to try tracking yet, but we've seen real-life examples of what it's capable of already) than some recent GMs even and stellar IQ. On camera, it basically feels like Sigma 35mmF1.2 (I won't say Bigma as it seems to trigger some people ) , that's regarding my size/weight concerns. It seems to be still ok for me for regular walk-around usage, maybe even travel. My personal threshold seems to be something around 100-400GM, where I find the lens both in size and weight become somewhat obtrusive (maybe I can get used to it one day)...
Now, regarding IQ I unfortunately read about @photosbyjaron issues wide open on the long end, so that's the first thing I tried. Unfortunately#2, I also see a rather massive increase in contrast when stopping down to f4. I'd say it's visible at around 1m focusing distance and is reduced greatly when the focusing distance increases. I really don't know if that's a bad copy or just the way the lens behaves wide open on the long end near MFD... It kinda reminds me of some 85GM wide open shots I saw...
Anyways, maybe you can tell me :
Animated comparison of center at 100% (from 50MP), around 1.25m distance:
And side by side, you can view that in bigger size via the photoname flickr link:
Could anyone check their copy how it behaves at close to MFD wide open at 150mm?
I really don't want to send this one back, but on the other hand I don't want to start using it if it's a dud .
p.41 #8 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Looks like youre good to go. Those look way better than what my first copy looked like. It had a weird haze/astigmatism even at distance. At MFD, most lenses are going to be much sharper stopped down. My issue was haze at 150mm @2.8 regardless of distance. These look like what Id expect. Only zoom lens I know that seems tack sharp at MFD wide open is the 100-400GM.
p.41 #9 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Thank you for sharing the images. I do not see anything alarming about the differences between F2.8 and 4 at 150mm. I will test my copy when it arrives in a few weeks and will share the results.
p.41 #10 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
j4nu wrote:
So... I've finally managed to snag a copy .
I won't repeat all that has been said already about GM-level build quality, hefty/solid feeling in hand, silent AF that seems quicker (acquisition at least, did not have a chance to try tracking yet, but we've seen real-life examples of what it's capable of already) than some recent GMs even and stellar IQ. On camera, it basically feels like Sigma 35mmF1.2 (I won't say Bigma as it seems to trigger some people ) , that's regarding my size/weight concerns. It seems to be still ok for me for regular walk-around usage, maybe even travel. My personal threshold seems to be something around 100-400GM, where I find the lens both in size and weight become somewhat obtrusive (maybe I can get used to it one day)...
Now, regarding IQ I unfortunately read about @photosbyjaron@ issues wide open on the long end, so that's the first thing I tried. Unfortunately#2, I also see a rather massive increase in contrast when stopping down to f4. I'd say it's visible at around 1m focusing distance and is reduced greatly when the focusing distance increases. I really don't know if that's a bad copy or just the way the lens behaves wide open on the long end near MFD... It kinda reminds me of some 85GM wide open shots I saw...
I have found this to be fairly common for MFD performance on many lenses. Fortunately, since depth-of-field starts getting a bit thin for my taste at macro distances, I generally stop down a bit, anyway, for those shots, so it has not been a problem. As another poster pointed out, one of the few zoom lenses that does not seem to exhibit this effect wide-open is the GM 100-400mm.
p.41 #11 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Thanks - yeah, I guess I tend to "overtest" my purchases, especially the pricey ones .
@ruthenium, I took the Tamron for a night walk to see how it fares against street lights. I think you mentioned it in one comment, so until you get yours, here's a small album: https://www.flickr.com/gp/j4nu/8o2293
I don't really normally take such photos, as I hate the street light color and I don't really know how to deal with it in post. These are SooC jpegs, so also pretty noisy but I hope they give you an idea.
Most are wide-open, I was able to provoke flare/ghosting in a couple of them, but in general the lens fared pretty well. Probably would have gone a bit better without a protective filter on. Some blooming around the lights is also expected as it's getting cold around here . Last but not least, I think AF worked pretty well in such conditions.
p.41 #12 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Thank you - I appreciate this! Image 4 looks lovely. Was there actually some mist or fog in the air, or the perception of fog is all due to the lens flare?
p.41 #13 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Thanks, yes - there was some mist/condensation in the air...
Edit; and some comments from actual usage:
* zoom action is very smooth but on the stiff side, so that's something to keep in mind if you don't like any resistance when zooming
* MF is super precise (and with very little resistance to turn as opposed to the above), I didn't change any settings yet but it seems to be set to linear and a rather long throw by default. I happen to enjoy longish throws so this feels very good to me
* I'm not sure how effective the included lens hood is. I prefer the style from the recent GMs, but I guess this one looks like it does at least partly due to the range it needs to cover
* I need to play with AF more, but it seems super fast for now...
p.41 #15 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Yup, the weather here is like... gray on gray on top of gray. Like seriously i almost forgot how other colors look like it's been nonstop gray for weeks now.
Anyway, yeah i also think your copy of the lens is fine.
p.41 #16 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
Hehe, thanks.
I think it will be hard to go back to my primes now, given the focal range & aperture package the Tamron delivers... I plan to use it exclusively for some time as I'd like to finally take some photos under regular sunlight .
The thing that stood out for me after this brief time with it is that the photos just look "nice" (similarly to 24-70DN, where the "look" takes precedence over sharpness IMHO). Oh, and the AF. Not sure how accurate it is yet, but it's wicked quick to traverse even large (if not full) distance .
p.41 #18 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
zz wrote:
An interesting comparison:
I was going to get the 28-75 G2 but now I see the 35-150 has a better rendering (at least at 75mm), and almost no compromise on the optical quality, it's really growing on me.
p.41 #19 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
That's my impression as well regarding rendering, not in direct comparison to G2 but in general (from my limited usage so far).
I'd say it doesn't break sharpness records like some primes, but it's really solid in that area and coupled with pleasant rendering that makes for some really nice images.
I don't really have anything to prove that with as there was basically no sunlight here since Thursday, but maybe I can find something from a visit to an indoor kids play center...
Ok, a couple (sorry for that crappy lightning and AWB ):
p.41 #20 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
j4nu wrote:
That's my impression as well regarding rendering, not in direct comparison to G2 but in general (from my limited usage so far).
I'd say it doesn't break sharpness records like some primes, but it's really solid in that area and coupled with pleasant rendering that makes for some really nice images.
I don't really have anything to prove that with as there was basically no sunlight here since Thursday, but maybe I can find something from a visit to an indoor kids play center...
I concur on the rendering front and sharpness front. I intentionally left my Sigma 24-70 at home this last weekend to see if I'd miss it when taking the kinds of pictures I generally take, and I must say that the only time I found the 35mm on the wide end limiting, 24mm would have been limiting as well. Zero sense that I was missing anything on the rendering front - in fact, I really like the way it renders, and having f/2 at 35mm kept my GM in the bag more than it has been since I purchased it. No question that the 35-150 isn't as sharp as the 35GM or as sharp in the center at 35 and 50 as my Sigma, but honestly, the difference between the two zooms wouldn't be noticeable unless standing a few inches away from a 24x36 print. It is definitely replacing my 24-70, and as soon as the 16-35GM goes back on sale, I'll be pairing it and the 35-150 with my 100-400. (I've taken the advice from this forum and killed the GAS driving me to consider replacing the 100-400GM). I'll still bring the 35GM for sunstar shots and when I want to shoot at f/1.4, but this thing will probably spend the vast majority of its time attached to the camera. (I'm also kind of going through a weird phase of not really liking sunstars...and finding them unnatural to the scene. I'm sure I'll get out of it, but I've been enjoying shooting sunsets wide open recently and find it closer resembling real life.)
HDR pano stitch handheld because I was dumb and left my tripod at a different spot
Edited to personal taste. Love the new Lightroom subject/sky masks.
:
zz wrote:
