p.31 #1 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
lensfan wrote:
Got Tamy an hour ago but not impressed with its performance at 150mm too much so far. How do you see its performance at long end? My reference are Samy 135 and 135GM which are basically pinnacle at this FL and I don't have recent experience with other modern lenses in this range - maybe I was expecting too much? I definitely see a lot of improvement when jumping from 2.8 to 4 and especially 5.6.
If you expect a zoom to out do a prime costing more, think again, it can replace a range of primes, but not really compete with every prime.
p.31 #2 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
j4nu wrote:
This is an image thread after all, so maybe post some comparison pictures to the primes .
I did not have much time with the lens. I performed my standard 'toe hair' test. Each time I delete the test results for obvious aesthetic reasons. However, I know how my toe hair should look in a picture.
I considered it failed my test at [email protected].
I shot some random girls in the pool 30 floors below through window. They were decent but I think I expected more. I might be unreasonable here, expecting both 35GM and 135GM in one lens.
I check Chris Frost's test and I see similar performance on the quartz watch at [email protected] - ?t=464
Looks like to get optimal performance on long end I will be using the lens outside at 5.6.
Third focus hold button felt annoying - I accidentally press it each time I try to reach playback button.
Other than performance wide open on longer end - I don't see what to criticize so far. Maybe the fact it is basically a 70-200 sized lens.
p.31 #3 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
lensfan wrote:
I did not have much time with the lens. I performed my standard 'toe hair' test. Each time I delete the test results for obvious aesthetic reasons. However, I know how my toe hair should look in a picture.
I considered it failed my test at [email protected].
I shot some random girls in the pool 30 floors below through window. They were decent but I think I expected more. I might be unreasonable here, expecting both 35GM and 135GM in one lens.
I check Chris Frost's test and I see similar performance on the quartz watch at [email protected] - ?t=464
Looks like to get optimal performance on long end I will be using the lens outside at 5.6.
Third focus hold button felt annoying - I accidentally press it each time I try to reach playback button.
Other than performance wide open on longer end - I don't see what to criticize so far. Maybe the fact it is basically a 70-200 sized lens....Show more →
My copy of Tamron 35-150 is outstanding in the 35-100 mm range, then softens slightly toward 150 mm at f/2.8.
When shooting at close distances, for best bokeh, the lens can be used wide-open at 150 mm without problems.
For shooting at longer distances, the optimal aperture is f/5.6 on a 50-60 MP camera (diffraction kicks in already at f/8), although f/4 isn’t much worse.
The Sony 70-200 f/2.8 GM II is the other way around: the lens (by looking at my copy) is optimized for the long end but gets slightly softer than the Tamron in the 70-90 mm range especially in the corners. Thus, for shooting at 150-200 mm f/2.8, the Sony is a better choice. However, at f/5.6, both the Tamron and the Sony lenses are nearly indistinguishable in IQ at 150 mm.
p.31 #4 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
ruthenium wrote:
My copy of Tamron 35-150 is outstanding in the 35-100 mm range, then softens slightly toward 150 mm at f/2.8.
When shooting at close distances, for best bokeh, the lens can be used wide-open at 150 mm without problems.
For shooting at longer distances, the optimal aperture is f/5.6 on a 50-60 MP camera (diffraction kicks in already at f/8), although f/4 isn’t much worse.
The Sony 70-200 f/2.8 GM II is the other way around: the lens (by looking at my copy) is optimized for the long end but gets slightly softer than the Tamron in the 70-90 mm range especially in the corners. Thus, for shooting at 150-200 mm f/2.8, the Sony is a better choice. However, at f/5.6, both the Tamron and the Sony lenses are nearly indistinguishable in IQ at 150 mm. ...Show more →
Thanks - do you notice loss of contrast when focusing closely at long end wide open?
Based on your comparison I ordered ThinkTank Holster 30. Is there a convenient way to attach water bottle holder to it?
p.31 #5 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
lensfan wrote:
Thanks - do you notice loss of contrast when focusing closely at long end wide open?
Based on your comparison I ordered ThinkTank Holster 30. Is there a convenient way to attach water bottle holder to it?
To your first question: I have not noticed a loss of contrast at short distances at 150 mm. Having said this, I should mention that I do this normally to produce an out-of-focus background. Also the DOF at 150 f/2.8 is very shallow at short distances. Thus, the objective is not to get most image in focus, critically sharp, but to achieve some sort of overall pleasing visual effect - a smooth bokeh.
I carry the 35-150 in a Manfrotto holster (also the recently acquired Tamron 50-400 fits in this holster, as both lenses are of similar length). The ThinkTank holster I find useful when carrying the 200-600 attached to A1.
p.31 #6 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
Manfrotto seems a bit limiting if used as a single bag while TT is not that big and heavy.
Both holsters work well for 35-150 with hood attached?
ruthenium wrote:
To your first question: I have not noticed a loss of contrast at short distances at 150 mm. Having said this, I should mention that I do this normally to produce an out-of-focus background. Also the DOF at 150 f/2.8 is very shallow at short distances. Thus, the objective is not to get most image in focus, critically sharp, but to achieve some sort of overall pleasing visual effect - a smooth bokeh.
I carry the 35-150 in a Manfrotto holster (also the recently acquired Tamron 50-400 fits in this holster, as both lenses are of similar length). The ThinkTank holster I find useful when carrying the 200-600 attached to A1....Show more →
p.31 #7 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
lensfan wrote:
Manfrotto seems a bit limiting if used as a single bag while TT is not that big and heavy.
Both holsters work well for 35-150 with hood attached?
The Manfrotto holster I am using feels as if it was custom made to carry A1 with the 35-150 with the hood attached. The ThinkTank Holster seems to be designed to provide maximum protection for cameras with lenses that are heavier and longer than the Tamron. It is a bit of an overkill for the 35-150. The Manfrotto holster is a certainly more convenient option to me. When hiking with my camera in the holster, I would normally carry a small light backpack for the various miscellaneous items, like a light rain jacket, a water bottle, another lens, etc.; thus, the holster is used to support the camera system, carry an extra battery, a remote shutter , a filter, and a phone - nothing else. The needs can be different for those who frequently change lenses on the go - then a larger bag would be necessary to carry the camera and all the lenses, but this isn't my style.
p.31 #8 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
lensfan wrote:
I did not have much time with the lens. I performed my standard 'toe hair' test. Each time I delete the test results for obvious aesthetic reasons. However, I know how my toe hair should look in a picture.
I considered it failed my test at [email protected].
I shot some random girls in the pool 30 floors below through window. They were decent but I think I expected more. I might be unreasonable here, expecting both 35GM and 135GM in one lens.
I check Chris Frost's test and I see similar performance on the quartz watch at [email protected] - ?t=464
Looks like to get optimal performance on long end I will be using the lens outside at 5.6.
Third focus hold button felt annoying - I accidentally press it each time I try to reach playback button.
Other than performance wide open on longer end - I don't see what to criticize so far. Maybe the fact it is basically a 70-200 sized lens....Show more →
I think your toe hair test, unless you have very long legs / toes, is about near-MFD performance, which indeed is substantially less contrasty than a bit further away or closed down. My 100-400GM doesn't do that.
I can't comment on your voyeur pics as I don't have experience with those...
I think your toe hair test, unless you have very long legs / toes, is about near-MFD performance, which indeed is substantially less contrasty than a bit further away or closed down. My 100-400GM doesn't do that.
I can't comment on your voyeur pics as I don't have experience with those... ...Show more →
Thank you! I took the lens for a quick spin around billionaires' row and central park this morning. On the back panel of my camera images looked fine. I guess, it was the close focus performance wide open that completely caught me off guard. Very nice to have this range, especially if you have some space to work.
I don't care much about the weight but the size with lens hood attached makes me reconsider my camera bags situation. I have not used anything bigger than 135 1.8 in a while... Sony 20-70 felt perfect for travel but images looked somewhat uninspiring to me.
p.31 #12 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
Just for fun tried the 35-150 with a new foster pup. Very happy with the rendering of the lens but it is not as high a performer on the AF front vs. the 70-200GM II but then again - how many lenses are?
I really wish this lens had a tripod collar. I'd probably use it a lot more.
Out of mechanical sympathy for my lens mount I don't want to carry this lens around without supporting the weight of the lens. I'd carry it like the 70-200 and use the lens foot as a handle.
I have a feeling this little guy will be adopted pretty quickly. We've had him for 2 days and he's got a big fan base around the neighborhood already.
These are just the quickie 2mb Imaging Edge transferred files for social media postings.
p.31 #13 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
My wife and I are currently vacationing in Mexico. I brought along an A7R5, GM 12-24mm f2.8 and the Tamron 35-150mm (first time taking this lens on a trip).
Yesterday, at the Mayan ruins at Chichen Itzá, two security guards claimed that my 35-150mm was a “professional” lens and would not allow me to enter with it. I had to run it to the car. Very frustrating.
Next trip, I think I will take the GM 12-35mm, GM35mm f1.4 and Tamron 28-200mm. I have run into similar problems in the past where security seem to label large lenses as being professional equipment.
p.31 #14 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
InFocus2014 wrote:
My wife and I are currently vacationing in Mexico. I brought along an A7R5, GM 12-24mm f2.8 and the Tamron 35-150mm (first time taking this lens on a trip).
Yesterday, at the Mayan ruins at Chichen Itzá, two security guards claimed that my 35-150mm was a “professional” lens and would not allow me to enter with it. I had to run it to the car. Very frustrating.
Next trip, I think I will take the GM 12-35mm, GM35mm f1.4 and Tamron 28-200mm. I have run into similar problems in the past where security seem to label large lenses as being professional equipment....Show more →
Wow, that's new! Usually they just don't allow taking pictures with a tripod. Never had that kind of issues with 24-70 2.8 and that thing has been places.
p.31 #16 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
InFocus2014 wrote:
My wife and I are currently vacationing in Mexico. I brought along an A7R5, GM 12-24mm f2.8 and the Tamron 35-150mm (first time taking this lens on a trip).
Yesterday, at the Mayan ruins at Chichen Itzá, two security guards claimed that my 35-150mm was a “professional” lens and would not allow me to enter with it. I had to run it to the car. Very frustrating.
Next trip, I think I will take the GM 12-35mm, GM35mm f1.4 and Tamron 28-200mm. I have run into similar problems in the past where security seem to label large lenses as being professional equipment....Show more →
Why does anyone care if it’s a “professional” lens? That’s kind of dumb to me that you can’t photograph ancient ruins with a good lens. You spend all that money to get to places and then they turn your camera/lens away. Dumb.
p.31 #17 · Tamron 35-150mm F/2-2.8 Di III VXD Image Thread
mudlake wrote:
Why does anyone care if it’s a “professional” lens? That’s kind of dumb to me that you can’t photograph ancient ruins with a good lens. You spend all that money to get to places and then they turn your camera/lens away. Dumb.
.
