GMPhotography wrote: eke2k6 wrote: GMPhotography wrote: charles.K wrote: Arka wrote:
Wow. 550g. 2.8. 28-75. If the optics and AF performance are solid, I will buy one of these, particularly at $799. This is the design prioritization I hope most E-system (and mirrorless) lenses adopt - designs that can leverage the small size and lower-weight advantages of mirrorless platforms by being lightweight themselves. This may very well become my first zoom for the E-mount.
Now, what if Tamron could build a 70-200 f/2.8 that weighed less than 750g?
I agree If Tamron can lead the way to truly utilizing the design short distance flange design criteria for more small/light lenses and at great prices they will lead the way that many photographers will move towards. I must say I was disappointed with Sigma's offerings as there was no design optimizations for the FE mounts.
Outside there 135 and 85 Sigma totally blew it with these add ones. They should have started far early and started building FE lenses from the start. Frankly whoever’s decision it was should be let go to find a job somewhere else. They lost a ton of revenue by waiting too long than putting out a band aid solution. I understand size would not matter with 85 and 135 but there wides there is no way I would buy any of them. Sony, Zeiss, VC and now Tamron are killing it.
The 35 Art FE with the add on is the same size as the 35mm ZA. Same story for the 50 Art FE and 50mm 1.4Z.
I’m not going to pretend it’s an elegant looking solution, but Inderstand the decision to repurpose the already fantastic art lenses in order to avoid having to spend the R&D resources/tooling costs required to make new lenses, when they already have the materials in their possession.
I don’t see it like that at all. They took a bad read on the market and did not jump in far early than now. Fire the CEO no excuses here, I’m sorry they screwed up. These lenses are a joke. So how do you explain the 40 1.2 from CV the Laowa 15 f2 the upcoming Laowa 10-18. The Cv 10,12,15. Batis 18,25,85 and 85 all smaller than existing Sigmas . I’m sorry it don’t compute . You want to make revenue than I’m sorry you need to retool.
But this maybe for another thread but I call it extremely lazy and not keeping up with the industry. Just like Nikon and Canon I have no use for them after over 40 years in this business they have become irrelevant. Sad to be honest.
The problem with your logic is that all the lenses you named are either MF, or have apertures 1.8 or smaller. That’s why I did direct comparisons to the 35 and 50 Zony AF lenses with equivalent apertures. Physics still applies, even at these focal lengths. I actually agree with your sentiment on CaNikon, but physics is physics when it comes to lenses.
But I’m really interested in the new Tammy. I’m currently adapting (and am a huge fan of) the old Nikon mount 28-75 as one of my primary travel lenses, and it does double duty between my Sonys and Nikon Df. I just want to see if the optics will warrant an upgrade. I currently get Eye-AF with the commlite adapter and don’t use the lens for anything professional,, so I’m not in any massive need for the new version.
Apr 27, 2018 at 10:10 PM
Previous versions of eke2k6's message #14450346 « In stock: Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 E-mount ($799) »
If Tamron can lead the way to truly utilizing the design short distance flange design criteria for more small/light lenses and at great prices they will lead the way that many photographers will move towards. I must say I was disappointed with Sigma's offerings as there was no design optimizations for the FE mounts.