Tamron Primes - 35mm and 45mm VC.

heartyfisher

I am rather patient and I have been searching and waiting for a 40mm prime for what seems like forever.. I was just about to give up and just about to grab a 35 18G dx and use it as an "optical zoom" 35-40mm :-) BUT Now .. the new 35 and 45mm tamron primes with VC !! I am sold !!

I think I will be getting the 35mm .. bec I recently realized that in fact the FX sensor size is slightly smaller than the old Film frame so a 35 will be almost exactly what I want a 40mm to be ! this would be my "Normal" and my lowlight lense .. its perfect !! when I traveled there were many many times I couldn't take the pictures i wanted bec I was not allowed a tripod in a very dim place. This will be the perfect lense for it .. !!

esquilo

It's about bloody time someone released a decent 45 mm prime for Nikon! The diagonal of the FX-sensor is 42 mm so a 50 mm lens is just a bit too long to be a decent prime. This Tamron looks really promising. I think it's the first time I see stabilizer in a f/1.8 lens.

PB_PM

I'll get excited if the performance is good, and they are less expensive than similar Nikkors.

heartyfisher

I'll get excited if the performance is good, and they are less expensive than similar Nikkors.

Dont think it will be winning any sharpness awards .. I would be very happy if it equals the 35 DX 1.8 .. Its main awesomeness would be its Low light functionality F1.8 + 2-3 stop of VC !! Makes it the best Lowlight lense.

Coastalconn

@heartyfisher I am hopeful these will actually be uber sharp lenses. There was a rumor a while back when the 15-30 came out that Tamron was working on 2 primes that could resolve the 42+ MP of the Sony.. http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr4-new-tamron-prime-lenses-will-resolve-the-new-close-to-50-megapixel-sony-ff-sensor/

This is a focal length I don't use with my birds, but if the price is right I might actually pick one up to play with...

heartyfisher

Uber sharp with VC .. Sounds painfully expensive :-)

Photobug

I spent over 60 minutes with the Regional Tamron Sales representative and a factory tech support guy and they have no idea on arrival of the 35mm lens. They confirmed that the rumor is true.

I like Tamron lens and what I found it interesting while eating lunch with them two people brought their Tamron lens to the traveling show and they both had mechanical issues with their lens. In addition I was playing with the 15-30 F2.8 FX lens and took it off their D700 and told him there was some thing wrong with the lens - the manual focus was extremely stiff. He checked the lens and said it must have been dropped and replaced it on the display table for people to use.

This really surprised me since I have never heard of anyone having issues with Tamron lens.

The other piece of news that almost cost me some money, the local dealer has 4 Tamron 150-600mm lens in stock. At the show, they were giving out $95 rebates on this lens. $70 discount for USA buyers and $25 off for anyone buying today.

heartyfisher

:-) 190 off :-) lol costs money to save .. :-)

Photobug

Yea it's true. The sad point is that money is not budgeted until 2016 and now with Nikon releasing a new telephoto, I have time to assess both lens.

Coastalconn

Seems like these new Tamron's might win some sharpness awards after all.. Pretty surprised they are weather sealed as well.. Seems like they are made to compete.. Wish the price point was a touch lower but time will tell..

heartyfisher

The MTF for the 35 is totally awesome for DX. For FX ... will have too see if the edge drop off is bad when the reviews get published .... However, looks like it may be best value SHARP "Normal" for high MP DX shooters !! the close-up capability would be nice for hands and rings and other details where you want the back ground blurred.. will definitely keep an eye on this one :-)

Photobug

Seems like these new Tamron's might win some sharpness awards after all.. Pretty surprised they are weather sealed as well.. Seems like they are made to compete.. Wish the price point was a touch lower but time will tell..

Typically after the introduction of a new lens it gets added to the list of lens eligible for rebates. They must run 4 to 6 rebates per year. The 150-600mm lens was on the market for 15-18 months and it's now eligible for a rebate.

heartyfisher

Its got fluoride coating on the front element too .. especially good for those who dont use "protective" filters :-)

NSXTypeR

45mm is an odd focal length to use. Why did they do that?

haroldp

45mm is actually the calculated 'normal' (based on image diagonal) FL for 35mm.

SLR's started at 58mm, and thn 50mm because non retrofocus lenses (like 45mm) could not clear a 35mm mirror and retrofocus designs were more expensive.

'Real' cameras were made of wood.

... H

PB_PM

...45mm is actually the calculated 'normal'...

Correction, 43mm is calculated to be 'normal' on a 35mm frame, but manufactures thought 45mm looked less odd for marketing purposes. Of course 50mm became normal because it looked better, and was cheaper to make.

moreorless

The 35mm is certainly tempting if the performance is good, I can live with some boarder softeness at larger apertures as long as its sharp across the frame by F/5.6.

If that performance is there it looks like it could be a good all rounder, 1:2.5 is pretty good for flower/fungi macro and honestly anything more probably wouldn't be very useable on a 35mm anyway with the working distance.

WestEndFoto

...45mm is actually the calculated 'normal'...

Correction, 43mm is calculated to be 'normal' on a 35mm frame, but manufactures thought 45mm looked less odd for marketing purposes. Of course 50mm became normal because it looked better, and was cheaper to make.

I imagine that with focus breathing, a 45 is sometimes a 43. Practically there is no difference.


Why do you think a 50 is cheaper to make than a 40something?

PB_PM

Why do you think a 50 is cheaper to make than a 40something?

Apparently anything wider than 50mm is more expensive to make. Simply look at the price retail price of the Nikon 50mm F1.8 AIS vs the 45mm F2.8 AI-S P (when both were available new). Other manufactures also made 45mm lenses, and they were always more expensive than 50mm F1.8's. Does that answer the question?

haroldp

A 40 something (+ or - a silly millimeter or two) require a more extreme retrofocus design for the rear element to clear the mirror on a 35mm SLR.

For decent correction, it will have to be a more complex design, and be bigger and heavier and thus costlier.

Look at a Leica 35/2 summicron for rangefinder cameras, it is 1/3 the size / weight of equivalent 35 SLR designs, and sharper as well.

The reason mirrorless cameras like Sony A7 or Fuji's can adapt to RF lenses is that they have no mirror to clear.

Even a 50mm for SLR is slightly retrofocus, A symmetrical double gauss design (Zeiss planar, Leica summicron etc.) to naturally clear the mirror would typically be 58mm, though some 55's do.

The move to mirrorless will enable a new generation of compact, less expensive, and sharper wide angle lenses.

RF cameras could provide the compact and sharp, but the mechanical precision needed to couple to a rangefinder made these lenses very expensive. The closed loop focus mirrorless solves this problem.

Regards ... H

WestEndFoto

A 40 something (+ or - a silly millimeter or two) require a more extreme retrofocus design for the rear element to clear the mirror on a 35mm SLR.

For decent correction, it will have to be a more complex design, and be bigger and heavier and thus costlier.

Look at a Leica 35/2 summicron for rangefinder cameras, it is 1/3 the size / weight of equivalent 35 SLR designs, and sharper as well.

The reason mirrorless cameras like Sony A7 or Fuji's can adapt to RF lenses is that they have no mirror to clear.

Even a 50mm for SLR is slightly retrofocus, A symmetrical double gauss design (Zeiss planar, Leica summicron etc.) to naturally clear the mirror would typically be 58mm, though some 55's do.

The move to mirrorless will enable a new generation of compact, less expensive, and sharper wide angle lenses.

RF cameras could provide the compact and sharp, but the mechanical precision needed to couple to a rangefinder made these lenses very expensive. The closed loop focus mirrorless solves this problem.

Regards ... H

This answers my question by getting to the real engineering and design reason. Thanks.

WestEndFoto

Why do you think a 50 is cheaper to make than a 40something?

Apparently anything wider than 50mm is more expensive to make. Simply look at the price retail price of the Nikon 50mm F1.8 AIS vs the 45mm F2.8 AI-S P (when both were available new). Other manufactures also made 45mm lenses, and they were always more expensive than 50mm F1.8's. Does that answer the question?

Not quite. That is the symptom, not the cause. I appreciate the effort though.