- Messages
- 5,813
- Edit My Images
- No
No you can't use a t.c with the Sony 70-200 f/4 or the Tamron.
Shame really. I checked a lot of my shots and I use the 200mm of the 2.8 quite a lot so decided to keep hold.
No you can't use a t.c with the Sony 70-200 f/4 or the Tamron.
Anyone moving on a Samyang lens station?
No but I've got one - where are you based ?
So with a max budget of £180 or so I’m looking for a small lens for a photography project involving the yard and horses and the surrounding woods.
Preference in small and light and ok in low ish light. Samyang 35mm, Sony 50mm, what else....?
I've been on the fence about the F4 vs the Tamron, both have pluses and minuses. If the Tamron launched at £1000-1100 that would mean it would come into the £900 range reasonably quickly which would make it very appealing. However, at £1349 it's £500 more than a mint used Sony f4 and as I was on the fence anyway that makes a big difference. Of course, I'm not in any rush at the moment as all events I was going to have been cancelled/postponed so I will bide my time and see what happens to the price of the Tamron.less sharp, larger, not as fast, can't use with TCs.
So doesn't really seem all that favourable to me. I'd rather wait till tamron drops in price than buy and sell. of course that means some waiting time
There was a good video posted on here showing actual test samples of all 3 lenses (tamron and the f2.8 and F4 Sonys), but it's the only one so far. That being said, the differences were at pixel level and I'm not sure you'd see a great deal in the real world. Where the GM was noticeably better was in contrast when shooting backlit scenes.How does everyone know how sharp the Tamron is? I watched the video where the German guy said it’s sharper but that’s just one review? Any others?
I've been on the fence about the F4 vs the Tamron, both have pluses and minuses. If the Tamron launched at £1000-1100 that would mean it would come into the £900 range reasonably quickly which would make it very appealing. However, at £1349 it's £500 more than a mint used Sony f4 and as I was on the fence anyway that makes a big difference. Of course, I'm not in any rush at the moment as all events I was going to have been cancelled/postponed so I will bide my time and see what happens to the price of the Tamron.
Knowing Sigma the weight of their 70-200mm will be right up thereexactly time is on your/our side atm.
No need to jump into making a decision. For all you know there may be even a sigma 70-200mm before you are able get out and do some serious shooting. And if sigma are going to price it as aggressively as their 24-70mm/2.8 then that might be a better option.
edit:
for me the decision is actually between 135GM and a zoom 70-180/200mm zoom.
Knowing Sigma the weight of their 70-200mm will be right up there
Knowing Sigma the weight of their 70-200mm will be right up there
Down south in Eastbourne
I'm not sure why they havent just released their sport lens that they have for canon and nikon. Meant to be very good.
Down south in Eastbourne
There another review of tamron 70-180mm by Manny Ortiz posted on SAR. Not sure if he is any good with reviews but that's another one if folks want to watch
There another review of tamron 70-180mm by Manny Ortiz posted on SAR. Not sure if he is any good with reviews but that's another one if folks want to watch
So with a max budget of £180 or so I’m looking for a small lens for a photography project involving the yard and horses and the surrounding woods.
Preference in small and light and ok in low ish light. Samyang 35mm, Sony 50mm, what else....?
I think he's pretty good, better than a lot.
Yup, he seems pretty chilled and uses his wife a lot.
watched it earlier and was surprised that the focus was better than his Sony fanboys incoming with excusesThere another review of tamron 70-180mm by Manny Ortiz posted on SAR. Not sure if he is any good with reviews but that's another one if folks want to watch
watched it earlier and was surprised that the focus was better than his Sony fanboys incoming with excuses
watched it earlier and was surprised that the focus was better than his Sony fanboys incoming with excuses
watched it earlier and was surprised that the focus was better than his Sony fanboys incoming with excuses
watched it earlier and was surprised that the focus was better than his Sony fanboys incoming with excuses
Internal zooming is overrated IMO.
Internal zooming is overrated IMO.
It really isn't though. Tamron lenses are a bit of a dust magnet as it is, this one is gonna suck in more dust than your average Dyson.
Does the tamron have anything to mitigate dust sucking from the zoom?
It really isn't though. Tamron lenses are a bit of a dust magnet as it is, this one is gonna suck in more dust than your average Dyson.
They're not imo, zoom lenses change the balance and I can imagine as the Tamron doesn't have a trip collar, or any means as to fit one, that it will feel quite unbalanced on a monopod, and the extending zoom will only magnify this. Also as pointed out above, previous Tamrons have been dust pumps so unless Tamron have sorted this with better design then it could be an issue. My 150-600mm was horrendous for this.Internal zooming is overrated IMO.
I don’t know why, but I just don’t like extending lenses. I think ever since some of my Nikon lenses used to just fall back in to themselves I just prefer internal zooms and primes. But that’s just my strange habits!
They're not imo, zoom lenses change the balance and I can imagine as the Tamron doesn't have a trip collar, or any means as to fit one, that it will feel quite unbalanced on a monopod, and the extending zoom will only magnify this. Also as pointed out above, previous Tamrons have been dust pumps so unless Tamron have sorted this with better design then it could be an issue. My 150-600mm was horrendous for this.
They're not imo, zoom lenses change the balance and I can imagine as the Tamron doesn't have a trip collar, or any means as to fit one, that it will feel quite unbalanced on a monopod, and the extending zoom will only magnify this. Also as pointed out above, previous Tamrons have been dust pumps so unless Tamron have sorted this with better design then it could be an issue. My 150-600mm was horrendous for this.
TBH I've never had an issue with other extending zooms, but with the 150-600mm you could actually hear and feel the suction it created I was going to send it back to Tamron for a free clean (I think it was almost an admission of the problem) but I got a decent trade in price so never bothered. It was especially odd as I thought that lens was supposed to be weather sealed, but if you saw how much dust it pulled in it didn't fill you with confidence. For what it's worth though it never affected image quality.Internal zoom is definitely better in terms of reducing the chances of getting dust inside the lens elements, personally I have never liked extending zoom's either. I dislike the suction noise they sometimes have and pretty much everyone I have had eventually had a bit of lens creep even if they didn't when new.
Although I do have a Tamron 28-75 which is an extending zoom. That's the only one I have at the moment though and it is only a back up lens.
That may be true, but all I can speak from is experience. And when I started to suffer with mine and looked around it was quite clear it was a common problem .as per above quote lens rental guys "The most common ‘dusters’ among current lenses all happen to be primes that don’t zoom at all"
The recent tamron lenses are sealed at least ones for mirrorless. I don't think zooming will be cause it to be a dust pump.
been using lenses like 100-400mm and 24-105mm for a while now. No issues with dust.
I'm guessing it will be MF?SAR claim a new voigtlander 35mm f1.2 is on it way
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/leaked-voigtlander-will-soon-announce-the-new-35mm-f-1-2-fe-lens/
time to crack open the piggy bank @woof woof
He says current lenses. So I take it he isn't talking primes from long backThat may be true, but all I can speak from is experience. And when I started to suffer with mine and looked around it was quite clear it was a common problem .
As for primes being worse on the whole, my guess would be that up until recently a lot of primes have not been weather sealed and so that's probably why they're more prone to letting dust in.