p.47 #2 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
photosbyjaron wrote:
I would be wary of using behavior at near MFD to test centering and sharpness, as it won't show its potential wide open when close to MFD. I may be saying things you already know, and if so, forgive me, but most zoom lenses tend to have field curvature and the nearer to the lens, the more noticeable the curvature. For example, someone standing 6' away from a brick wall and trying to take sharpness tests is likely testing field curvature more than sharpness. By infinity that shouldn't be an issue, so I would encourage you to make sure your test objects are sufficiently far enough away.
The first thing I would do is test centering outdoors with Fred's method where you have enough light that ISO and shutter speed won't be an issue. Focus once in the center of the frame on something at infinity in a location where other structures at infinity will also be in the plane of focus with sharp edges and detail, and then switch the lens to MF and be sure not to bump the focus ring. Then reposition the horizon at a diagonal and identify two anchor points for each opposing corner, be it a structure or statue or something similar. The anchors will help keep the angled orientation the same throughout. Then move clockwise (doesn't really matter), until each corner of the sensor has shot each version of the scene with the two anchors in each corner. Once you throw them into lightroom, you can check to see if they match. The top left should appear generally the same as the bottom right and top right should appear generally identical to the bottom left. If one is skewed dramatically, it is decentered.
There will almost always be some slight variation, as it is nearly impossible to mass produce a perfectly centered zoom, but if one corner looks like the ugly duckling and decentered enough to affect IQ in your applicable use - seek to exchange. If there is just a slight variation, carry on.
It's hard to judge your images because they appear to be focused on a near round object, and the edge of that ball in some appear to be more in focus than the face, almost as if it back focused. Very important to use a tripod and not refocus when doing a centering/sharpness test. Anyways, hope this helps and hopefully there isn't an issue. ...Show more →
Thanks, I don't want to lead this thread into boring technicalities of lens testing again, so I'll just say I wasn't testing for decentering in the close-up shots I posted (but a rather peculiar issue dependent on the side of the frame the focus was on) .
The hard part is what stays and what goes. I've always used a UWA and a 24-70/70-200 (180 now) trio with faster primes. F/2 at 35mm makes me think I can ditch the 35 - but its so small/light it would be handy for at home stuff where the bigger lens may be cumbersome. But I also have the 24 GM and a a6300 for light carry. Same with the 85/1.8. Lots of overlap, but easy to justify (in my mind anyway) keeping !
p.47 #4 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I put up a couple of test shots in the image thread for this lens. I've also taken a couple candid portraits of the kids around the house and am blown away by the sharpness and separation of this lens when wide-open. I can see why a number of reviews are calling it one of the best portrait lenses.
p.47 #5 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I am following this thread, selling my 24 70 2.8ii and my 70 300 L by Canon for this big glass... The first was also well calibrated by fixation to be able to perform close to a prime, but is too short for my tastes now...
Having a 18 batis in the wide side would make my life easier but I am not sure if this lens perform at the same league of the two canon L glasses..
p.47 #6 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
j4nu wrote:
I take you are the author . Sorry, it might be a Windows (10) issue or more probably my GPU driver (AMD/ATI Radeon) issue. It's just that A7Info does not display images taken upside down in the main window (cropped below):
A7Info is a great software nonetheless of course, thank you .
Edit: just noticed that in the case of "FullSizeRaw..." window, it's the matter of lossy vs lossless compression format.
Thanks for the hint and sorry, I even didn't notice that. You are right, its the matter of the new lossless compression in the A1. I will do my best to correct it in the next version.
Back to the subject: still waiting for the lens, but at least its announced for the end of week
p.47 #7 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
joychris wrote:
The hard part is what stays and what goes. I've always used a UWA and a 24-70/70-200 (180 now) trio with faster primes. F/2 at 35mm makes me think I can ditch the 35 - but its so small/light it would be handy for at home stuff where the bigger lens may be cumbersome. But I also have the 24 GM and a a6300 for light carry. Same with the 85/1.8. Lots of overlap, but easy to justify (in my mind anyway) keeping !
Chris
I’m keeping my 35’s but likely cutting one loose. Oddly the lens I’m keeping is going to be slower than the zoom lol.
p.47 #9 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
joychris wrote:
I'm seriously considering juggling my lineup and replacing the 12-24/4, 24-70/2.8, 70-180 and 35/1.8 with this and a 16-35 GM and going all screw/magnegtic filters since I shoot a lot of video and use vari-ND's heavily.
Cheers
Chris
This is my plan as well. Just received the 16-35GM since it is on sale, and I also have received my order of K&F magnetic filters. (had a tough time deciding among Freewell, Kase, and K&F). I intend to test the setup out extensively this weekend to see how well the filters will work with this setup. If the 16-35 can sufficiently match my Sigma 14-24's performance in the shared range, I'll be switching out to a 16-35/35-150/100-400+1.4TC kit.
I'll start a separate post about the setup and filter usage once I have used it enough for an informed opinion. One of my initial concerns with the magnetic filters was vignetting when stacked. Sadly, there is indeed significant vignetting at 16mm when you have both a CPL and ND stacked (as well as at 35mm on the 35-150). Considering I can see wanting to use 16mm with a ND and CPL often at waterfalls, etc., it's a bit disappointing. I was hoping the vignetting wasn't too bad in that circumstance, but you really need to zoom in to maybe 18-20mm for it to go away. I also have the Kase clip in filters, so perhaps using the ND clip-in and the CPL up front is the winning ticket for shooting waterfalls at 16mm without needing 100mm plates, but I was really hoping the magnetic filters could be a one and done solution. I could have gone with Kase's more expensive 95mm setup, but I don't really want to carry oversized filters/step up rings and not be able to use lens hoods and filters simultaneously. Having to constantly install/uninstall step-up rings would defeat the whole purpose of using magnetic filters, and 95mm filters are pretty large to try to leave on the lens when stored in a backpack. Anyways, I'll see what I think through this weekend. I sadly don't think I'll be getting rid of my Kase clip-in set.
Regardless, and back on point, I love having two lenses for gapless 16-150mm coverage. Way lighter and more compact than my old 14-24/24-70/70-200 setup.
p.47 #10 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
ruthenium wrote:
Sony Sonnar T* FE 35mm f/2.8 ZA?
yes, I know it's not the most popular lens, but I like it and going to keep it. for my personal use it's the 24 compact g, 35 f2.8 za and sigma 90 f2.8, I have no problems using 2.8 primes, I'm happy with the output and really happy with the size.
p.47 #11 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I know how you feel. I keep this lens more or less permanently on my A7III. The 35 mm F2.8 ZA would be difficult to part with, even if it isn't used as much as my other lenses.
p.47 #12 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
photosbyjaron wrote:
This is my plan as well. Just received the 16-35GM since it is on sale, and I also have received my order of K&F magnetic filters. (had a tough time deciding among Freewell, Kase, and K&F). I intend to test the setup out extensively this weekend to see how well the filters will work with this setup. If the 16-35 can sufficiently match my Sigma 14-24's performance in the shared range, I'll be switching out to a 16-35/35-150/100-400+1.4TC kit.
I'll start a separate post about the setup and filter usage once I have used it enough for an informed opinion. One of my initial concerns with the magnetic filters was vignetting when stacked. Sadly, there is indeed significant vignetting at 16mm when you have both a CPL and ND stacked (as well as at 35mm on the 35-150). Considering I can see wanting to use 16mm with a ND and CPL often at waterfalls, etc., it's a bit disappointing. I was hoping the vignetting wasn't too bad in that circumstance, but you really need to zoom in to maybe 18-20mm for it to go away. I also have the Kase clip in filters, so perhaps using the ND clip-in and the CPL up front is the winning ticket for shooting waterfalls at 16mm without needing 100mm plates, but I was really hoping the magnetic filters could be a one and done solution. I could have gone with Kase's more expensive 95mm setup, but I don't really want to carry oversized filters/step up rings and not be able to use lens hoods and filters simultaneously. Having to constantly install/uninstall step-up rings would defeat the whole purpose of using magnetic filters, and 95mm filters are pretty large to try to leave on the lens when stored in a backpack. Anyways, I'll see what I think through this weekend. I sadly don't think I'll be getting rid of my Kase clip-in set.
Regardless, and back on point, I love having two lenses for gapless 16-150mm coverage. Way lighter and more compact than my old 14-24/24-70/70-200 setup....Show more →
You could try something like Revoring, but I guess it's similar to the step-up rings setup, as it also prevents you from using the hood...
p.47 #13 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
photosbyjaron: PolarPro makes Neutral density + polarization filters, or ND/PL filters. For details, see https://www.polarprofilters.com/collections/filters/products/ndpl-filters
I own several PolarPro Quartzline filters - their quality is exceptional. I often have a PolarPro Quartzline CPL filter on the 16-35GM during the daytime. At 16 mm, the added vignetting is almost unnoticeable in the images auto-corrected for the lens distortion in DxO Photolab. Here is an example (no vignetting correction has been applied).
p.47 #14 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
What a beast and I found the perfect bag for it, I can fit the 24g + 35-150 in one form fitting belt bag, even with hood in shooting position. Although it does get tight with second lens.
p.47 #15 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
photosbyjaron wrote:
This is my plan as well. Just received the 16-35GM since it is on sale, and I also have received my order of K&F magnetic filters. (had a tough time deciding among Freewell, Kase, and K&F). I intend to test the setup out extensively this weekend to see how well the filters will work with this setup. If the 16-35 can sufficiently match my Sigma 14-24's performance in the shared range, I'll be switching out to a 16-35/35-150/100-400+1.4TC kit.
I'll start a separate post about the setup and filter usage once I have used it enough for an informed opinion. One of my initial concerns with the magnetic filters was vignetting when stacked. Sadly, there is indeed significant vignetting at 16mm when you have both a CPL and ND stacked (as well as at 35mm on the 35-150). Considering I can see wanting to use 16mm with a ND and CPL often at waterfalls, etc., it's a bit disappointing. I was hoping the vignetting wasn't too bad in that circumstance, but you really need to zoom in to maybe 18-20mm for it to go away. I also have the Kase clip in filters, so perhaps using the ND clip-in and the CPL up front is the winning ticket for shooting waterfalls at 16mm without needing 100mm plates, but I was really hoping the magnetic filters could be a one and done solution. I could have gone with Kase's more expensive 95mm setup, but I don't really want to carry oversized filters/step up rings and not be able to use lens hoods and filters simultaneously. Having to constantly install/uninstall step-up rings would defeat the whole purpose of using magnetic filters, and 95mm filters are pretty large to try to leave on the lens when stored in a backpack. Anyways, I'll see what I think through this weekend. I sadly don't think I'll be getting rid of my Kase clip-in set.
Regardless, and back on point, I love having two lenses for gapless 16-150mm coverage. Way lighter and more compact than my old 14-24/24-70/70-200 setup....Show more →
I'm on the fence about which mag filter solution to go with as well. I've thought about the Revoring too. I was wondering about stacking with the magnetic ones. I'd like to move away from more cumbersome 100mm square filters and the bulk of the holder in my backpack, along with a few screw-in filters for something faster/easier and more universal. I'm always looking for ways to streamline my kit and workflow. Curious to see your thoughts after more time using your setup.
I just got an alert the 35-150 is in stock at B&H. So tempting...
p.47 #16 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
I'm sure it has been mentioned in this 47-page thread but man, this really does seem like a perfect travel lens. I usually travel with my 16-35/4, 35/1.8, 85/1.8, 70-180/2.8 and, depending on situation, 100-400.
I can see myself only using the 16-35/4 and 35-150 and being very happy with what I typically shoot on family vacations (solo sunrises, shots of kids during day/activities and at sunset).
Now if Tamron would only come out with a 150-300/2.8 I would have all of my football needs covered and would likely sell the 100-400...
p.47 #17 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
eyal wrote:
I'm sure it has been mentioned in this 47-page thread but man, this really does seem like a perfect travel lens. I usually travel with my 16-35/4, 35/1.8, 85/1.8, 70-180/2.8 and, depending on situation, 100-400.
I can see myself only using the 16-35/4 and 35-150 and being very happy with what I typically shoot on family vacations (solo sunrises, shots of kids during day/activities and at sunset).
Now if Tamron would only come out with a 150-300/2.8 I would have all of my football needs covered and would likely sell the 100-400...
Much to heavy for me as a travel lens. I can see it used for events.
p.47 #18 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
chez wrote:
Much to heavy for me as a travel lens. I can see it used for events.
I was worried about the weight too (I really like the Sony 24-105mm f/4 as a travel lens for it's size/weight/IQ). This one is definitely bigger, but it's pretty nicely balanced. Heavier lenses have been less of any issue for me though since ditching any sort of neck band and using the peak design Clutch hand strap.
p.47 #19 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
hevaKmaI wrote:
I was worried about the weight too (I really like the Sony 24-105mm f/4 as a travel lens for it's size/weight/IQ). This one is definitely bigger, but it's pretty nicely balanced. Heavier lenses have been less of any issue for me though since ditching any sort of neck band and using the peak design Clutch hand strap.
I travel with primes as I can’t stand lugging a heavy lens attached to my camera. I have no problems with weight in my pack on my back, but hanging off my wrist, not a chance.
There is also the issues a big lens pointing at people brings with it.
p.47 #20 · Official: Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD (Model A058)
chez wrote:
I travel with primes as I can’t stand lugging a heavy lens attached to my camera. I have no problems with weight in my pack on my back, but hanging off my wrist, not a chance.
There is also the issues a big lens pointing at people brings with it.
Ah, yeah, you're probably better off with primes then, as long as you're okay with changing lenses
.
!
. Sorry, it might be a Windows (10) issue or more probably my GPU driver (AMD/ATI Radeon) issue. It's just that A7Info does not display images taken upside down in the main window (cropped below):
