ustjwenew wrote:
Are we sure that Tamron has a proper license agreement with Nikon? If yes then indeed they should be made aware in advance about the software changes. If not then they can only blame themselves.
For me this is a reason to stay away from Chinese non licensed lenses because they can stop working after every firmware upgrade.
Yes, just look at the bottom of their product pages.
Jman13 wrote:
That sounds a bit like they were blindsided. Which is not a good look for Nikon.
What evidence do you have that it's Nikon's fault?
What if Tamron (and others) didn't implement Nikon's mount protocol properly and now it bit them in the ass? It takes two parties to properly dance the cross-vendor backward compatibility.
Remember, none of these companies can afford A-players in software development. Or even B-players. Best software engineers work at companies with $1M revenue per employee. That's not Tamron. My bet is they are not handling some kind of an edge case properly, and got exposed in the latest firmware.
It is a far more probable explanation than Nikon intentionally breaking backward compatibility.
I didn’t say it was intentional. I said it wasn’t a good look, and it’s not. If you have one of the two biggest third party lens makers licensing your mount protocol, and you release a major update, you should do QA testing with some of those lenses. Then if there is an issue you can let Tamron know. I know I’d want that to happen if I were in charge because it affects the consumer. And whether it’s your own lenses or another company’s, releasing an update that then causes major issues with your customers’ gear is a bad look.
Given that Tamron’s statement didn’t come out until several hours after the first reports, and they don’t know why it’s happening, tells me that Nikon didn’t do that at all, and IMO that’s a failure on their end. Tamron pays to license the Z mount, and they should have a reasonable expectation of continued compatibility. That warrants at least some internal testing for major updates.
I also think your characterization of their engineers is frankly unfair and off the mark as well. Not every good engineer wants to work for some giant megacorp. I know, because I am an engineer, and I’m MUCH happier working for my 70 person company than I would being a nameless number at a 900 person firm, and the work is more rewarding too because you aren’t pigeonholed like so many are at large firms, doing the same stuff over and over.
I am sure that Tamron is working on firmware updates that will fix any compatibility issues with the Z8 FW 3.0 and this will likely be resolved quickly. Of course, it's also possible that some functions may not be physically possible on certain lenses, for example, the distance encoding on early Nikon D lenses was very coarse and to use it for this purpose of limiting the focus distance range might not work as users would want. I am sure that newer lenses have more precise distance encoding but since it has not been used for a lot of practical purposes in cameras, it may not have been a big priority for lens makers to ensure high accuracy.
Often it seems that software developers are happy when things appear to work correctly when tried in practical use rather than ensuring very rigorously that specifications are followed. Nikon has around 400 lenses of their own to support in some manner and I am sure their focus is on trying to get things to work correctly with their own lenses first and foremost. Third-party lenses are not their main priority. Nikon's lineup includes, as we know, some lenses which are joint efforts by Tamron and Nikon and Nikon guarantees compatibility with those (unless specified otherwise). I guess the issue here is that the Nikon versions of a few of these lenses do not have the latest optics and so users are opting to buy the Tamron version which may be subject to some compatibility glitches that affect users - likely very temporarily, until fixed.
Jman13 wrote:
I didn’t say it was intentional. I said it wasn’t a good look, and it’s not. If you have one of the two biggest third party lens makers licensing your mount protocol, and you release a major update, you should do QA testing with some of those lenses. Then if there is an issue you can let Tamron know. I know I’d want that to happen if I were in charge because it affects the consumer. And whether it’s your own lenses or another company’s, releasing an update that then causes major issues with your customers’ gear is a bad look.
Given that Tamron’s statement didn’t come out until several hours after the first reports, and they don’t know why it’s happening, tells me that Nikon didn’t do that at all, and IMO that’s a failure on their end. Tamron pays to license the Z mount, and they should have a reasonable expectation of continued compatibility. That warrants at least some internal testing for major updates.
I also think your characterization of their engineers is frankly unfair and off the mark as well. Not every good engineer wants to work for some giant megacorp. I know, because I am an engineer, and I’m MUCH happier working for my 70 person company than I would being a nameless number at a 900 person firm, and the work is more rewarding too because you aren’t pigeonholed like so many are at large firms, doing the same stuff over and over. ...Show more →
Some tamron lenses work after the update, some don’t. That sounds like a Tamron issue to me and something QA testing may not have been able to identify.
It’s all speculation without knowing the update processes. I’d be surprised and disappointed if Nikon sent Matt Granger the 3.0 update a month in advance but kept Tamron in the dark.
old-gregg wrote:
What evidence do you have that it's Nikon's fault?
What if Tamron (and others) didn't implement Nikon's mount protocol properly and now it bit them in the ass? It takes two parties to properly dance the cross-vendor backward compatibility.
Remember, none of these companies can afford A-players in software development. Or even B-players. Best software engineers work at companies with $1M revenue per employee. That's not Tamron. My bet is they are not handling some kind of an edge case properly, and got exposed in the latest firmware.
It is a far more probable explanation than Nikon intentionally breaking backward compatibility.
Considering how complex cameras, lenses, and modern software have gotten, I am not surprised that occasionally there are breaking changes. Usually, I wait a few months before trying new major Software releases. We will never know if it was on Nikon or Tamron, but hopefully, at least Nikon gave Tamron a beta build of the Z8 firmware to test before release. At the end of the day Nikon must know that third party lens support, even indirectly, is a major advantage of Nikon Z over Canon RF. Personally, I wish Nikon would fully open their mount to third party lens companies. Hopefully, then issues like this would be less likely.
I do disagree with your comment about all A or B engineers working for major companies. Many extremely talented engineers work for smaller companies. Most successful startups are not started by C and D engineers. Many talented engineers are more interested in making something they're passionate about than being able to say they work at some mega company. I have also met engineers who have worked at mega companies that were definitely not A or B level. My experience is that it's best to judge an engineer's skill, not their resume.
The interesting piece of data with Z8 3.0 is that it seems to have affected both officially licensed partners (Tamron) and non-licensed chinese adapter brands equally. This implies that Nikon has substantially changed the body>lens relationship (especially given the warnings about not having 3rd party adapters or glass mounted during the upgrade) and didn't properly update their mount specs which they would provide to licensees.
It's also interesting how quickly a few non-licensee companies got firmware updates out for their products, implying that the change was trivial to understand and work around.
I agree that it's a bad look for Nikon, breaking a pretty long streak of well-executed updates to their software. It takes a certain absurd brand loyalist set of blinders to say it's anyone's fault but Nikon.
DWOfPaul wrote:
We're in agreement here. Start-ups, when executing properly, also provide outsized benefits and enjoy hiring top talent. My point was that Nikon or Tamron don't have access to that talent, and given how hard it is to maintain cross-vendor backward compatibility, it's unrealistic to expect them to execute flawlessly.
RoamingScott wrote:
The interesting piece of data with Z8 3.0 is that it seems to have affected both officially licensed partners (Tamron) and non-licensed chinese adapter brands equally. This implies that Nikon has substantially changed the body>lens relationship (especially given the warnings about not having 3rd party adapters or glass mounted during the upgrade) and didn't properly update their mount specs which they would provide to licensees.
It's also interesting how quickly a few non-licensee companies got firmware updates out for their products, implying that the change was trivial to understand and work around.
I agree that it's a bad look for Nikon, breaking a pretty long streak of well-executed updates to their software. It takes a certain absurd brand loyalist set of blinders to say it's anyone's fault but Nikon....Show more →
Without factual investigative details, forming a conclusion on the event and fault is kind of absurd.
RoamingScott wrote:
I agree that it's a bad look for Nikon, breaking a pretty long streak of well-executed updates to their software. It takes a certain absurd brand loyalist set of blinders to say it's anyone's fault but Nikon.
It's honestly hard to say. Communication protocols are often very complex, and fairly often, businesses only implement the parts that are required for their products to function. Disclaimer: I have no insight into Nikon protocols, but here is a logical situation I could see having happened. Nikon may have a request for what a lens's minimum focus distance is. In the past, it was not required, so most lens makers did not include it. For the new focus limiter to work, though, this command is now a necessity. So now, if you have the focus limiter on and a third party lens that did not implement the command, the camera has no idea how to properly adjust the AF to stay in the distance range. In a case like this, it would definitely make the lens manufacturer at fault.
RoamingScott wrote:
The interesting piece of data with Z8 3.0 is that it seems to have affected both officially licensed partners (Tamron) and non-licensed chinese adapter brands equally. This implies that Nikon has substantially changed the body>lens relationship (especially given the warnings about not having 3rd party adapters or glass mounted during the upgrade) and didn't properly update their mount specs which they would provide to licensees.
I agree that it's a bad look for Nikon, breaking a pretty long streak of well-executed updates to their software. It takes a certain absurd brand loyalist set of blinders to say it's anyone's fault but Nikon....Show more →
How do you know Nikon didn’t properly document their mount spec changes?
Isn’t it just as likely that the Tamron engineer in charge didn’t understand the document Nikon updated or overlooked the impact of some changes on their implementation?
What makes the odds of a Nikon mistake higher in your mind?
I haven't seen anyone with a now malfunctioning third party lens or adapter specify their procedure for updating the firmware, lens attached, no lens attached. Perhaps those with issues didn't follow the update process?
The firmware update document states in RED the following:
"Caution: Updating the Firmware
Do not update the camera firmware with lenses other than Z-mount NIKKOR lenses or mount adapters other than FTZ II/FTZ attached; failure to observe this precaution could result in camera malfunction."
JBPhotog wrote:
I haven't seen anyone with a now malfunctioning third party lens or adapter specify their procedure for updating the firmware, lens attached, no lens attached. Perhaps those with issues didn't follow the update process?
Post #4 in this thread pkmx says they were aware of the warning about upgrading with the lens attached (presumably meaning they heeded it) and their lens still has problems.
My Tamron 35-150 A058Z got recognized by Z8 v3.0 after updating the lens firmware to version 2. So try updating the lens firmware if you have one. For other Tamron lenses without a firmware update I think the only thing you can do is wait.
I updated my Z8 and my viltrox e-z adapter didn't want to work at first with my Sony 35 GM, but after a battery pull and removing and remounting the lens several times, it finally recognized it and worked fine. Before that, it was "stuck" in manual focus.
Not sure if someone has already posted it already. I found this posted on an asian site in regards to the Megadap ETZ21 Pro. It works for me in preliminary testing with the Sony 300mm F2.8 GM. It also works with the 2x TC.
