The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Tamron FE Plans

iiiNelson

Well-known member
not bad at all, it seems the fe mount has good traction now and all in a short time!
Yeah. That’s true. It’s one of the factors that make me hesitant to possibly adopt an additional system to overcome some of my subjective “issues” with Sony. There are rumors of an updated A9 coming later this year and I’m interested in seeing if they’ll retain the identical body size with it or allow it to possibly grow ever so slightly... or if they’ll bring out a separate body to cover those that want a larger option.
 

ggibson

Well-known member
Another here for the 17-28:

https://youtu.be/__NvUK7MHAE

Some of his conclusions seem at odds with the samples he's showing on screen... but it's hard to tell. I don't think the Tamron will truly be as good as the 16-35 GM, especially in the corners. He kind of skips over corner performance for astro, despite having some samples, which is a bit worrying. I sold my Sony 16-35/4 in anticipation of this lens, but if it turns out to only be OK, I might stick with my Voigtlander 15 and add a prime like the 24/1.4 GM.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Another here for the 17-28:

https://youtu.be/__NvUK7MHAE

Some of his conclusions seem at odds with the samples he's showing on screen... but it's hard to tell. I don't think the Tamron will truly be as good as the 16-35 GM, especially in the corners. He kind of skips over corner performance for astro, despite having some samples, which is a bit worrying. I sold my Sony 16-35/4 in anticipation of this lens, but if it turns out to only be OK, I might stick with my Voigtlander 15 and add a prime like the 24/1.4 GM.
Yeah I seriously doubt it’ll be as good as the GM. I think the big benefit is price to performance, speed, and an alternative option.
 

JoelM

Well-known member
The best bang for the buck in this focal range is the Canon 16-35 f4 L. Can usually pick them up used for ~$750 or so plus you'd need the MC-11 if you don't have one already. Since I regularly use Canon lenses on my Sonys, it isn't an issue. Of course, if you need the f2.8, the Sony is quite good. The Canon f4L lens completely outshines their own f2.8L.

Joel
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The best bang for the buck in this focal range is the Canon 16-35 f4 L. Can usually pick them up used for ~$750 or so plus you'd need the MC-11 if you don't have one already. Since I regularly use Canon lenses on my Sonys, it isn't an issue. Of course, if you need the f2.8, the Sony is quite good. The Canon f4L lens completely outshines their own f2.8L.

Joel
The Tamron is going to be $899 new so it’ll retail for about the same price as an used Canon 16-35/4 + Adapter. I agree that the Canon f/4 L zoom lenses are great but I personally don’t adapt lenses all that much any longer. Didn’t have a bad experience but the native experience just works a bit better for me.
 

ggibson

Well-known member
For me, the biggest selling point for this Tamron is size and weight, but price is also a win. There's nothing really like it--420g for an f2.8 AF ultrawide zoom at $900. I will gladly give up some range, especially on the long end where I can crop more easily. Of course those looking for ultimate image quality will go for the 16-35 GM or primes, or those looking for value can find a used Canon (not really any cheaper though if you have to factor the adapter in). The Tamron hits a nice sweet spot in the middle for me, but that's as long as it delivers at least decent image quality (as good as the 16-35/4 would be fine). If corner performance for astro is not great, then the f2.8 spec is less appealing.
 

ggibson

Well-known member
I'm cross-posting some of this text from another forum, so apologies to those who read it twice ;)

I received my lens this week and had some time to shoot it yesterday. Prior to this, I owned the Sony 16-35/4 (sold in anticipation of the Tamron), and I currently own the Voigtlander 15/4.5 III and Sony 28/2 for this range. For practical purposes regarding handling and usage, the Tamron is almost exactly the same size and weight as the two primes put together. Both setups feel small and light! There is an advantage to having two lenses in that I often carry just the Sony 28/2 as a walk-around lens. Or I can skip the 28/2 and carry the Voigtlander 15mm with my Voigtlander 40mm (sharing the same filters too). Whether I will sell these primes and stick with the Tamron, I haven't decided yet.

I compared shots of the two primes against the Tamron and tested the Tamron corners for centering. Mine is well centered, at least testing the extreme focal lengths, 17 and 28.

Between the Tamron and my CV15, you'd be hard pressed to tell them apart aside from the focal length difference. Wide open for both lenses (f2.8 vs. f4.5), the CV15 is just a bit better. Stopped down, there's not really much difference to talk about, but the Voigtlander has more CA. My CV15 has great corners, no smearing.

Against the Sony 28/2, I found the Tamron was better resolving at both f2.8 and f8. Most of the difference is in midfield and edge/corner resolution. Both lenses look good in the center. Bokeh-wise, compared at f2.8 the Tamron is a bit cleaner, but the Sony of course has f2. I would say 95% of my Sony 28/2 shots are family shots at f2 where center sharpness on the Sony is great. There's a bokeh comparison below, and I think the difference is small enough not to matter to me. For environmental portraits with maximum bokeh, I have the Voigtlander 40/1.2. The Tamron does focus more closely than the 28/2 by the way. Overall, I would say that I feel like the Tamron can pretty much replace everything the 28/2 does except for its size. For a look at bokeh--a quick comparison wide open between the Tamron at f2.8 and the Sony 28/2 at f2 with full-size links below (keep in mind there's no profile applied to the Tamron). Don't read too much into the colors, since I've adjusted both quite a bit:


Tamron at 28mm f2.8 by Graham Gibson, on Flickr
Full-size: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48439241986_a961b1806e_o.jpg


Sony 28mm at f2 by Graham Gibson, on Flickr
Full-size: https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/48439390032_277b876c27_o.jpg

And a few more shots--Tamron at 17mm, f2.8:

Cactus by Graham Gibson, on Flickr

Tamron at 28mm, f2.8:

Bokeh test ;) by Graham Gibson, on Flickr

Tamron at 28mm, f2.8:

Bokeh Test ;) by Graham Gibson, on Flickr

Tamron at 17mm f2.8:

Close focus wide angle by Graham Gibson, on Flickr

Tamron at 20mm at f22 (this was actually using Sky HDR, I forget what exposure was used for the sky):

Orinda Hills by Graham Gibson, on Flickr

Tamron at 17mm at f13, Sunstar:

Sunstar by Graham Gibson, on Flickr
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
The Tamron looks excellent and if I choose to stay with my Sony system I’ll probably go ahead and pick up all of the Tamron zooms for convenience. Thanks for sharing though I did see your landscape shots on Flickr already.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Well I just went ahead and bought both the 17-28 and the 28-75. I’ll probably add the 70-180 once available and call it good unless they make a 150-400 lens of reasonable size and speed. I think I’m good on primes though I debate selling the 85 Batis from time to time. I just don’t use it much and would probably get much more use from the 100 STF GM... and I just prefer the focal length.

Im looking to pair the 17-28 with the 55/1.8 for a small walk around kit to do most things with.
 

ggibson

Well-known member
Well I just went ahead and bought both the 17-28 and the 28-75. I’ll probably add the 70-180 once available and call it good unless they make a 150-400 lens of reasonable size and speed. I think I’m good on primes though I debate selling the 85 Batis from time to time. I just don’t use it much and would probably get much more use from the 100 STF GM... and I just prefer the focal length.

Im looking to pair the 17-28 with the 55/1.8 for a small walk around kit to do most things with.
Very nice! I think it's a great lens. I have been bringing mine with the Voigtlander 40/1.2, but I still have the 55/1.8 also. Nice duo. The Tamron has replaced my 28/2.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Very nice! I think it's a great lens. I have been bringing mine with the Voigtlander 40/1.2, but I still have the 55/1.8 also. Nice duo. The Tamron has replaced my 28/2.
I sold my 25 Batis a couple years ago and have wanted an excellent wide again. This seems to fit the bill.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Well both lenses arrived today. I haven’t made time to use them but the build quality is a bit better than I imagined based on the many reviews suggested in my estimation... well based on the short time that I handled them. Two weeks until I’m in Greece and get to have a more full idea on this performance. The 28-75 is a bit larger than I though it would be but not at all unreasonable in size. It’s actually even comfortable to use without the grip which was a pleasant surprise.
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Updates on the latest announcements from the rumor sites.

https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/ful...our-new-tamron-fe-lenses-officially-released/

TL: DR

The Tamron primes all have 1:2 Macro ability and f/2.8 apertures. The 24mm and 35mm will be released in December of this year. The 20mm will come in early 2020. All primes have an MSRP of $349. These all use the 67mm size filter threads like all of the Tamron zooms have so far... kinda makes you wonder if they could’ve pulled off an f/2 for all of these lenses but I won’t complain.

The 70-180/2.8 is in development still but is scheduled for a Spring 2020 release. No pricing announcement yet but it’ll have a 67mm filter thread like the other two zooms... it’ll also have a 33” minimum focusing distance at all focal lengths to give it a semi macro capability. I’m expecting a $1200-1500 price point. It will likely be worth more judging from their zooms. I’ll have some pictures to share of those lenses in the coming weeks.
 
Last edited:

PeterA

Well-known member
Well both lenses arrived today. I haven’t made time to use them but the build quality is a bit better than I imagined based on the many reviews suggested in my estimation... well based on the short time that I handled them. Two weeks until I’m in Greece and get to have a more full idea on this performance. The 28-75 is a bit larger than I though it would be but not at all unreasonable in size. It’s actually even comfortable to use without the grip which was a pleasant surprise.
Looking forward to some shots!!
 
How far we Sony users have come in a few short years. Seems like every week there are interesting new lenses being announced. And something in nearly every price range too!

I'm very anxious to give the 70-180mm a go.
 
Top