p.1 #1 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
SAR has some info on the new Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD lens that is releasing soon. Thoughts on it? I really wish this went to like 50mm on the long end, but I am intrigued by it anyway. Looks to be fairly compact walk around lens. I wonder if it is internal or external zoom.
p.1 #2 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
Well, I was expecting a different (wider/faster/smaller/?) alternative to 16-35GM, so I'm a bit disappointed.
Pretty sure it's not an internal zoom as they would boast about it already ...
p.1 #5 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
j4nu wrote:
Well, I was expecting a different (wider/faster/smaller/?) alternative to 16-35GM, so I'm a bit disappointed.
Pretty sure it's not an internal zoom as they would boast about it already ...
Yeah if you compare the front construction to the 28-75 (external) and 17-28 (internal), it looks pretty clear that the 20-40 will be external.
This lens is an intriguing option and quite compact for f2.8. If I were only traveling with one lens, 20-40/2.8 is pretty perfect. Still, I’m not sure if I’d give up my 17-28, which I bring alongside a fast normal prime.
p.1 #6 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
grahamgibson wrote:
This lens is an intriguing option and quite compact for f2.8. If I were only traveling with one lens, 20-40/2.8 is pretty perfect. Still, I’m not sure if I’d give up my 17-28, which I bring alongside a fast normal prime.
My sentiments exactly. If the image quality is there, this may be a nice travel or light backpacking lens. But like you, a 50GM or 35GM along with the 17-28 might make me happier.
p.1 #8 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
looks to be the size of the 16-35 G
would love to have it, but 5mm on the long end is probably not enough to tempt me, had it been 50mm I think that would have sealed the deal..... maybe.
p.1 #10 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
Weeeeeow. The only thing that's very confusing for me is that they mention additional wide-angle macro mode in the press text but at the same time only put a ratio of 1:3.8... which, I mean it's not super great.
I think the interest for this type of lens goes up with the IQ. If this is supposed to be a small step up from a kit lens... eh. Dunno how much I'd bite on it to be honest. If they managed to get the level of quality we see in the 35-150 or the 28-75 G2 but with no dip on the long end of the range this is basically the perfect take anywhere zoom lens.
If it's really good, the only thing that would make me happier would be a Sony G badge . I'd definitely be using this thing enough to pay for that extra 5% quality, no questions asked.
p.1 #11 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
hmm... am i the only one finding this range little odd?? I'd prefer 15-30 or 14-28 if they must keep the 2x zoom... perhaps this may be a good zoom range for videography?
p.1 #12 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
choti001 wrote:
hmm... am i the only one finding this range little odd?? I'd prefer 15-30 or 14-28 if they must keep the 2x zoom... perhaps this may be a good zoom range for videography?
As someone who does a lot of family photos this is probably my second choice for a high quality 2x standard zoom after 28-55. Given the prominence of kit zooms and value zooms starting at 28 however, it's probably good to dip into ultrawide territory to distinguish yourself in the market a little. Ultrawide to standard is exceedingly rare.
p.1 #13 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
grahamgibson wrote:
Tamron 20-40 and 70-180 seems like a great kit. Reasonable gapping. Could add a Voigtlander 15 or other small wide prime on occasion.
I’m using Tamron 17-28, CV40, Tamron 70-180 now and I like it.
Tamron alone has now quite a few options to complete the kit, depending on your needs :
* 70-180
* 50-400
* 35-150.
p.1 #16 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
I think tthis is a very useful focal range and reminds me of the f/2 Sigma 20-35mm. The key will be the quality if it is to replace four primes at 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm. My use scenarios would be traveling light or hiking and to pair with a short tele prime.
p.1 #17 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
A lot of people are saying other 16-35 exists, but they are much larger than this lens or max out at f4. This is at least a unique range and a great size, though they really should have went a little longer. I’m fine with 20, but 40 is a bit limiting. I do think this is more useful than the 17-28 for me as I can use it for a general single walk around lens. It’s basically mildly ultrawide to a normal-ish view. I’m not really sure what I would pair it with though. Probably my 85GM, but that’s a little hefty. I would also need to decide between this and the 28-75. My ideal lens would be something at least 24 wide and at least 55 on the long end, but also not huge like the 24-70s. Alas we have more compromises to decide between.
p.1 #18 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
mudlake wrote:
My sentiments exactly. If the image quality is there, this may be a nice travel or light backpacking lens. But like you, a 50GM or 35GM along with the 17-28 might make me happier.
This is exactly my feeling. If the image quality is pretty good, it’ll pair really well with my primes.
p.1 #19 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
I would be surprised if the image quality isn't as good as the 17-28 or the G2 28-75. Tamron hasn't released a bad lens on the e mount.
This small and light lens can be a single lens for backcountry landscapes and astro. With the sigma 90 and some cropping you cover almost everything, fitting in a small hip pack. The 17-28 and CV50 is a similar set up but requires more lens changes and has less reach.
p.1 #20 · New Lens: Tamron 20-40mm F/2.8 Di III VXD, Thoughts?
engel001 wrote:
I think tthis is a very useful focal range and reminds me of the f/2 Sigma 20-35mm. The key will be the quality if it is to replace four primes at 20mm, 24mm, 28mm, and 35mm. My use scenarios would be traveling light or hiking and to pair with a short tele prime.
Ahhh the Sigma 20-35/2 was a legendary lens, I loved it but not the weight.
As for the 20-40mm, maxing out at 40mm is fine, it's a great FL for casual snapshots and travel. Going from ultrawide to wide/normal in one lightweight lens makes this perfect for family outings, parties, food etc. For those use cases - where portability is a concern - I would say the competition include the likes of the Sony 28-60, any of the 24, 28 and 35mm primes, Sony 40/2.5G, and the Sigma/Samyang 45... and none of these give you a 20mm wide angle when you need to fit more into the shot.
Personally I am now quite happy with my Sigma 16-28 / Tamron 35-150 combination and have little desire to go less wide, but had I still been using a 24-70/2.8 as my main lens I would be quite tempted instead to pair a 20-40/2.8 with a Samyang 75/1.8 for an ultra-lightweight, high performance set-up.
...
. I'd definitely be using this thing enough to pay for that extra 5% quality, no questions asked. 
: