p.1 #1 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
Except for the Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD, there is no 70-300 lens available for Z mount. (And there are very few alternatives in other mounts, as well.) This seems odd, as this was an ubiquitous lens in the DSLR days.
My problem with this lens is that it does not have image stabilization (VC in Tamdon-speak). I am not confident that the IBIS in Nikon Z bodies is very effective at longer focal lengths (much above 120mm or so), and, of course, the Z50II does not even have IBIS for still photography.
For now, I continue to use the last DX VR equipped Nikon F-mount 70-300, which was a pretty good lens. But the FTZ makes the combo cumbersome.
So, my question is, will Tamron update the 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD and add VC, or is there no longer sufficient market for this lens focal length?
p.1 #6 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
mklass wrote:
That doesn't address my question. Perhaps you should start your own thread,
Well, my previous post addresses your request. A stabilized 70-200/4 with a 1.4x TC would do exactly what you’re asking Tamron to do. Actually, it would do even more, since a maximum aperture of f/4 can come in handy at 200 mm.
In any case, if you really want a stabilized 70-300, buy a used AF-P 70-300 VR FX: it’s a great value for the price. It's also relatively compact and lightweight, and a valid option for travels: https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/z-mount-lens-articles/z-mount-travel-lens-combos.html
Finally, I’d like to point out that your question can’t be answered here, unless one of us works in Tamron’s marketing department, and is authorized to reveal their future plans. The combined probability of those two events is practically zero.
So, in conclusion, this thread is completely pointless.
p.1 #7 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
Ripolini wrote:
Well, my previous post addresses your request. A stabilized 70-200/4 with a 1.4x TC would do exactly what you’re asking Tamron to do. Actually, it would do even more, since a maximum aperture of f/4 can come in handy at 200 mm.
In any case, if you really want a stabilized 70-300, buy a used AF-P 70-300 VR FX: it’s a great value for the price. It's also relatively compact and lightweight, and a valid option for travels: https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/nikkor-lenses/z-mount-lens-articles/z-mount-travel-lens-combos.html
Finally, I’d like to point out that your question can’t be answered here, unless one of us works works in Tamron’s marketing department, and is authorized to reveal their future plans. The combined probability of those two events is practically zero.
So, in conclusion, this thread is completely pointless.
...Show more →
If you read my original post, you would have noticed that I said I already have the F-mount DX 70-300. I mentioned that using it with a FTZ is cumbersome. A 70-200 f/4 with TC would also be cumbersome. And a 70-200 f/4 is likely to be significantly more expensive that a 70-300.
You would also have noticed that I asked for speculation, not a knowledge of Tamron's decision making. After all, these forums frequently contain speculation and opinions not based on insider knowledge.
p.1 #8 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
I don't see it coming anytime soon. To me all that stuff is rather small. Slow xx-400 or xxx-500 are more popular nowadays. It's more likely there will be a newer camera with IBID. If size is important you get more reach with Fuji X.
p.1 #9 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
Tamron already makes a 50-300mm with VC, so they might bring it to Z-mount eventually. Probably depends a bit how they think about rolling out their new design language and if that means there will be a "G3" round for most lenses anytime soon.
That said I think the market for 70-300mm lenses has shrunk significantly - driven by availability of cheaper and lighter options stretching to 400-500mm and an overall smaller market that is focusing more on higher end products. So wouldn't necessarily hold my breath..
p.1 #10 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
Ripolini wrote:
My question is, will Nikon ever make a compact Z 70-200/4 S VR that accepts TCs??
What is the appeal of a 70-200mm f4 when the compact & excellent 70-180mm f2.8 (both Nikon version and Tamron G2) already exist? E.g. Sony's 70-200mm f4 is neither smaller nor lighter
Pretty sure that one of the next lenses from Nikon will be a 100-400mm II with significant weight reduction - probably landing around 1kg-ish.
I could definitely see someone doing a 100-400mm lens with slower aperture on the long end (f6.7?) around 800g. Sony's is f8 and 650g, Canon's version is similar. Further eating into the 70-300mm market..
p.1 #11 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
fjablo wrote:
What is the appeal of a 70-200mm f4 when the compact & excellent 70-180mm f2.8 (both Nikon version and Tamron G2) already exist? E.g. Sony's 70-200mm f4 is neither smaller nor lighter
The Nikon 70-180 isn't neither VR, nor S. It's also the optically outdated version of the Tamron G2. I see no "excellence".
I don't like Tamron lenses, and the bokeh of the 70-180 G2—with onion rings—isn't really what I'm looking for in a lens of that type.
All the major manufacturers have a high-end 70-200/4 lens with image stabilization in their lineups. Only Nikon has resorted to Tamrikon. Unheard of in the days of SLRs! Nikon used to be the epitome of photographic excellence; if it still were, it wouldn’t have to buy third-party lenses and slap its own name on them. How ridiculous!
Nikon isn't even capable of making a lightweight & stabilized 70-300 for the Z system—so much so that some users have to beg Tamron to make one for them!
mklass wrote:
You would also have noticed that I asked for speculation, not a knowledge of Tamron's decision making. After all, these forums frequently contain speculation and opinions not based on insider knowledge.
If there's room for speculation and far-fetched opinions, I hope everyone can have their say without being told they need to start a separate thread... that wasn't the case.
Go ahead and keep posting the horoscopes.
p.1 #12 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
Ripolini wrote:
The Nikon 70-180 isn't neither VR, nor S. It's also the optically outdated version of the Tamron G2. I see no "excellence".
I don't like Tamron lenses, and the bokeh of the 70-180 G2—with onion rings—isn't really what I'm looking for in a lens of that type.
All the major manufacturers have a high-end 70-200/4 lens with image stabilization in their lineups. Only Nikon has resorted to Tamrikon. Unheard of in the days of SLRs! Nikon used to be the epitome of photographic excellence; if it still were, it wouldn’t have to buy third-party lenses and slap its own name on them. How ridiculous!
Nikon isn't even capable of making a lightweight & stabilized 70-300 for the Z system—so much so that some users have to beg Tamron to make one for them!
If there's room for speculation and far-fetched opinions, I hope everyone can have their say without being told they need to start a separate thread... that wasn't the case.
Go ahead and keep posting the horoscopes.
The 70-180 G2 has VC and tbh the Nikon version does just fine with IBIS. I don't really care about the S designation when the lens is sharp and has nice bokeh in practice - both of which true with the G1 / Nikon-branded version and even better on the G2. I think the only issue is your brand bias
Of course Nikon has the capabilities to make these lenses, but why would they if there is not a big enough market to justify the invest? Maybe a better business decision to let Tamron do it for them.
And btw it's not new to outsource lens design. E.g. the Olympus 75mm f1.8 is a Sigma design. And - funny enough given the topic of this thread - the Nikon AF 70-300mm f4-5.6D ED was a rebadged Tamron lens
p.1 #13 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
fjablo wrote:
Of course Nikon has the capabilities to make these lenses, but why would they if there is not a big enough market to justify the invest? Maybe a better business decision to let Tamron do it for them.
Sony and Canon have taken a different approach.
Nikon did the math and chose the best compromise for its shareholders. But I don't own any Nikon stock (the Del Vecchio family in Italy does, though—good for them).
p.1 #14 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
Ripolini wrote:
Sony and Canon have taken a different approach.
Nikon did the math and chose the best compromise for its shareholders. But I don't own any Nikon stock (the Del Vecchio family in Italy does, though—good for them).
If you cast your brand bias aside you can buy an excellent lens for Nikon for 1.099€ vs 1.549€ for the Sony vs 1.499€ for the Canon. I don’t think consumers are really at a loss here..
p.1 #15 · Speculation: Tamron 70-300mm mirrorless with VC?
So, let’s summarize.
1,099 euros… you’re referring to the Tamron G2 VC with a Z-mount. Right? https://www.foto-erhardt.de/objektive/tamron-objektive/fuer-nikon/tamron-70-180mm-f2-8-di-iii-vc-vxd-g2-nikon-z-mount.html
Now, Nikon sells its Tamrikon G1, a less sharp lens with no image stabilization (made by Tamron in China or Vietnam, according to Thom Hogan), at a higher price—except when it runs limited-time offers, like the one currently running that expires in a week.
What kind of business strategy is that? Do they want to favor Tamron by sacrificing their own sales?
I’m at a loss for words, and I just don’t get it.
Let’s call it like it is: Nikon really messed up with the 70-180/200. Most likely due to financial problems. But let’s not pretend they did it for customers. Nor should we pretend that a 70-200/4 S wouldn’t have a market, because otherwise Canon and Sony are operating in a different market—maybe on Mars or the Moon, I don’t know.
EDIT:
P.S. 2: Tamron does not specify an official CIPA value for the VC on the Tamron G2 VC; several tests provide roughly a 3 stop advantage from image stabilization at 180mm focal length; moreover, the G2 lens isn't compatible with TCs.
Therefore, I’m still convinced that a 70-200/4 S—with optical performance high enough to guarantee good results when used with Z TCs (which the Nikkor Z 70-180 doesn’t provide: "Image quality with teleconverters is worse than expected", see: https://photographylife.com/reviews/nikon-z-70-180mm-f-2-8/4), as well as a state-of-the-art VR system that works in perfect harmony with IBIS to provide up to 6–7 stops of compensation—could actually prove to be a more sensible choice than the cheaper f/2.8 alternatives to the Z 70-200/2.8 S/SII.
