# Patent: Tamron 85mm f/1.4 VC USD



## Canon Rumors Guy (Jan 25, 2016)

```
The photography world is (im)patiently waiting for Sigma to release the 85mm f/1.4 Art series, but it looks like Tamron could beat them to it with an 85mm f/1.4 of their own, along with the added bonus of vibration control. <a href="http://egami.blog.so-net.ne.jp/2016-01-25" target="_blank">A patent for such an optical formula</a> from Tamron has appeared.</p>
<p>Patent Publication No. 2016-12082 (Google Translated)</p>
<ul>
<li>Published 2016.1.21</li>
<li>Filing date 2014.6.30</li>
<li>f = 87.5187</li>
<li>Fno = 1.4578</li>
<li>ω = 13.8585 °</li>
</ul>
<p>We haven’t heard anything about a 85mm f/1.4 Art series lens being announced by Sigma any time soon. We think such a lens would be perfect for introduction at Photokina in September 2016.</p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## addola (Jan 25, 2016)

I wouldn't be amazed if they did. Tamron made the 24-70 VC long before Nikon did their VR version.


----------



## mclaren777 (Jan 25, 2016)

I want Canon to make an 85mm f/1.4 with BR optics more than I can express.

Its new 35mm lens is outstanding and I want Canon to keep developing this technology!


----------



## jebrady03 (Jan 25, 2016)

If nothing changes in the market prior to this lens launching (assuming the patent turns into a marketable product), this'll be my first Tamron lens.


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 25, 2016)

I'm still not terribly impressed with their 45mm lens, especially the CA.
It will be interesting to see if they can make an 85f1.4 that's compelling for more than just the addition of stabilisation.
On the other hand, Zeiss is the only one with a modern 85mm on the market, if Tamron beats Sigma to the punch they could benefit.


----------



## TeT (Jan 25, 2016)

jebrady03 said:


> If nothing changes in the market prior to this lens launching (assuming the patent turns into a marketable product), this'll be my first Tamron lens.



Based on the recent 35mm & 45mm offerings by Tamron you will not be disappointed...

regarding the CA on the 45mm... have not noticed it as much as I thought I would but 85mm could potentially evidence some as well


----------



## douglaurent (Jan 25, 2016)

This is what I've been waiting for for years. Stabilized primes are the way to go. As good as the new fast primes of the past years have been from Sigma etc, they are all not the perfect solution for eternity because of missing stabilization. 

Of course it's also highly welcome for video. And if you look at a Batis 85/1.8 that has stabilization coming from a Sony body and from inside the lens, each huge bulky DSLR 85mm without any stabilization looks like a less useful tool from an old era.

As good as the Otus 85 and equally good Milvus 85 are, in the end I tend to use them only for tripod landscape work. No stabilization and no autofocus is very limiting, and the handheld the advantages of the great optics are eliminated fast because of that.

I also don't think anybody needs to wait for a Sigma Art 85. The recent Sigma 85/1.4 beats all Canon and Nikon 85mm lenses and seemed to be the first lens that was designed by the new engineers behind the Art label, that Sigma just started a bit later than the release of their 85mm. I am sure Sigma will come out with an update of that lens soon, but more because the buyers need the signal "now it's Art branded", and not because the quality step from the old lens model will be as huge as in the case of their older 20, 35, 50 etc models which really had designs that where not done by the engineers behind Art.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Jan 25, 2016)

9VIII said:


> I'm still not terribly impressed with their 45mm lens, especially the CA.
> It will be interesting to see if they can make an 85f1.4 that's compelling for more than just the addition of stabilisation.
> On the other hand, Zeiss is the only one with a modern 85mm on the market, if Tamron beats Sigma to the punch they could benefit.



Well, Tamron's 45mm is sharper than every 50mm apart from the Otus. I bet their 85 VC will perform well. AF consistency & speed is the real question.


----------



## douglaurent (Jan 25, 2016)

The Tamron 45/1.8 VC for some reason feels like the best stabilized lens on one of the Sony A7II bodies (although it's combined with a Metabones adapter). The Tamron superzooms also show better stabilization on a GH4 (with Metabones adapter) than all the micro four thirds-zooms by Panasonic.

So it seems Tamron knows how to handle this. On the other hand also the stabilization of the new Nikon 24-70/2.8 VR and 200-500/5.6 is probably the best stabilization that Nikon lenses ever had. The conclusion is that, as in optics, there has also been some good step forward in stabilization technology, independent of any certain company.

It also seems all brands do optimize their lens stabilization more for video use. I can see that at some point in the next decade nobody wants to buy a body or a lens anymore that doesn't offer stabilization. It's stupid not to have that option, unless you are working with tripod only.


----------



## mackguyver (Jan 25, 2016)

This is certainly exciting news given what I've heard about their newest VC lenses. I am still waiting for a 135 f/2 IS someday, so any step in that direction from any vendor is great. Besides, that would be a 135 VC on a crop body


----------



## drob (Jan 25, 2016)

mclaren777 said:


> I want Canon to make an 85mm f/1.4 with BR optics more than I can express.
> 
> Its new 35mm lens is outstanding and I want Canon to keep developing this technology!



The problem with Canon doing it is that they'll charge you an arm, a leg, maybe a kidney...I'm not a pro so anything over 1K for a prime lens is outside my budget. If I can get a quality prime with VC for <$1K, especially at f/1.4, I'd be golden. I'm really surprised that Sigma hasn't come forth with their 85mm offering yet. It will be interesting to see what comes out of this rumor.


----------



## Maximilian (Jan 25, 2016)

To me this patent fits 100% well into Tamrons new prime lens strategy. 
I am quite sure that this will become reality and I'd be pleased to see Tamron and Sigma putting pressure in another focal length where Canon seemed to be resting on their decades old lenses. 



mclaren777 said:


> I want Canon to make an 85mm f/1.4 with BR optics more than I can express.


I suppose that the BR tech will be a feature only for the L lenses for some time. 
I don't know if people would like to see a 85/1.2L II to be replaced by a 85/1.4L even if it has BR.

I am longing for a much better corrected successor of the 85/1.8. 
But if this becomes reality, I wouldn't expect it to have IS and/or BR. 
But even without these features I want to see a 85/1.8 II - soon!


----------



## Simen1 (Jan 25, 2016)

I hope they make a version without VC to reduce the cost, and fit it with K-mount.

I already paid for stabilization once, why would I pay for a redundant one?


----------



## wockawocka (Jan 25, 2016)

I'd be happy with a set of L series 1.8's ( 35, 50, 85 )

Why Canon haven't made them yet is something I wonder about.


----------



## jebrady03 (Jan 25, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> I also don't think anybody needs to wait for a Sigma Art 85. The recent Sigma 85/1.4 beats all Canon and Nikon 85mm lenses and seemed to be the first lens that was designed by the new engineers behind the Art label, that Sigma just started a bit later than the release of their 85mm. I am sure Sigma will come out with an update of that lens soon, but more because the buyers need the signal "now it's Art branded", and not because the quality step from the old lens model will be as huge as in the case of their older 20, 35, 50 etc models which really had designs that where not done by the engineers behind Art.



I'm hesitant to buy the Sigma 85 because it's not compatible with the dock, especially after not having the dock for the 35A and I ended up selling it and then I did have the dock for the 50A and it turned it from a lens I was going to send back into a lens I love. Also, I haven't seen one on the used market and that's typically where I buy mine to avoid depreciation as much as possible, especially in 3rd party lenses where there's a REALLY good chance I'll be replacing it with a Canon lens ASAP.


----------



## et31 (Jan 25, 2016)

Tamron has created a great 24-70mm and 70-200mm set with VR, along with their new 15-30mm (which has potential compared to the Nikkor or Canon versions).

Honestly, my Sigma 85mm f/1.4 lens has done wonders already.
On the other hand, Tamron creating this lens will also give photographers a bigger market (hopefully with respectable optics). You never know!


----------



## zim (Jan 25, 2016)

Just wondering, do Tamron focus and zoom rings work in the same direction as Canon?


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jan 25, 2016)

The good side of this news is that Canon will feel compelled to take the rabbit out of the hat ... We will probably see a Canon 50mm F1.4 Image Stabilizer. Not a hypothetical F2 Image Stabilizer, but *F1.4*.

So I would have to separate me from my beloved Sigma 50 Art.


----------



## axtstern (Jan 25, 2016)

Recently Tamron kicked out 4 Canon lenses out of my camera bags.

On the cheapo front that is their 18-200 for the M. The first one was a disgrace which was awfull to use and probably killed my first Generation M. But I ordered it again when I got my M3 and for this camera it is acceptable at least more acceptable than the 17-55 and 55-200 combination from Canon I used before.

On the more expensive side the Tamron 24-70 VCD and the 15-30 VCD kicked out the first generation 24-70 L 2.8 and my old 17-35 L.

Tamron has really stepped up the game. The new Tamron lenses all seem to be no brainers: Do not overdue on the Price, step up the Quality, Offer what the Amateurs want...

I'm happy with Sigmas new lenses but raising the optical formula from better than I Need to out of this world is not as attractive as making a decent optical formula twice as usefull by either adding Stabilisation or making the lens twice as fast.

Now i would love to see the old TAMRON 28-105 2.8 Dinosaur to apear in the new design with VCD
Followed by the 85mm VCD
And finally attacking the Lord of the Rings with a 135mm 2.0 VCD or a even bolder move to attack the older sister of this lens with a 200mm 2.8 VCD


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jan 25, 2016)

I knew this was coming, but I'm happy to hear the announcement go public. I was a little down after my first (own, non review) copy of the 45 VC didn't focus very well in my recent shootout. I sent it back to Tamron, and they agreed that the focus was off, so I got a second copy sent to me. It took me a little more work than usual on one of my bodies to find the right AFMA value, but I now have it dialed in and it is incredibly accurate on all three bodies that require AFMA - even in demanding event work. I'm back to being encouraged about the SP primes and will look long and hard at this 85 when it comes out. In the meantime the Milvus 85 is on its way to me for review, and I'm already prepared to be very tempted by it.

I do think the 85 VC needs to focus a little faster than the 45 VC. There are a few moments in fast paced action (indoors) that I'm wishing for faster AF.


----------



## JohanCruyff (Jan 25, 2016)

mackguyver said:


> This is certainly exciting news given what I've heard about their newest VC lenses. I am still waiting for a 135 f/2 IS someday, so any step in that direction from any vendor is great. Besides, *that would be a 135 VC on a crop body*


A 135mm F/1.4 in terms of light, but a 135mm F/2 (more or less) IS in terms of depth of field! Very interesting!


----------



## tr573 (Jan 25, 2016)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> I do think the 85 VC needs to focus a little faster than the 45 VC. There are a few moments in fast paced action (indoors) that I'm wishing for faster AF.



This is the first thing I thought on seeing this news also Dustin. The 45 I don't mind so much because I won't really use that lens for anything fast, but in order to displace my 85/1.8 this fella is going to have to be a heck of a lot faster to focus than the 45 is.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 25, 2016)

drob said:


> mclaren777 said:
> 
> 
> > I want Canon to make an 85mm f/1.4 with BR optics more than I can express.
> ...



I'm in the same boat. $1k is about my limit for a prime lens.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 25, 2016)

tr573 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > I do think the 85 VC needs to focus a little faster than the 45 VC. There are a few moments in fast paced action (indoors) that I'm wishing for faster AF.
> ...



That's a good point. 

I really love the 85mm f/1.8 but it can be a tiny bit soft wide open, has fairly bad CA, just loses that punch a little. With what we're seeing in the latest primes I can't help but think a new 85mm would just have better sharpness, micro contrast etc. 

However, what I love about the current 85 is how fast/accurate it focuses. I use this lens a lot outside for tracking kids, activities, etc. and wouldn't want to give up that ability.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jan 25, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> tr573 said:
> 
> 
> > TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> ...



Exactly. The 35 VC is fine, but the 45 VC, while accurate to focus (now), can frustratingly make you wait sometimes for it to be ready to fire.

Still, I am personally more excited about an 85 VC than a Sigma 85 ART, because my experience says that I CAN get a Tamron that reliably focuses for me, but the only Sigma I was absolutely confident in its focusing was the 150-600 SPORT.


----------



## Nininini (Jan 25, 2016)

I wish Canon made an IS version of their small 85 and 100mm f/2.0.

That tamron isn't going to be much smaller than my zoom. The tamron would need to have perfect AF, the DOF is going to be razor thin.

I understand why Tamron their AF system isn't that great now, Phase detect isn't that simple to implement, the camera needs lens-specific information, when the phase detect sensor isn't in phase, it need to be able to tell the lens, exactly how far it should move its elements. I believe most Tamron and Sigma lenses often can only use contrast detect, that's why focus often bounces back and forth like a point and shoot.

The camera shares information between the phase detect system and the chip inside the lens. Tamron has to reverse engineer what the camera is saying. But each time Canon updates their chips, or makes a new camera, it says something that the chip in the Tamron lens might not understand. This is why Tamron lenses that focus on one camera, often stop focusing at all on newer cameras.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 25, 2016)

I'm pleasantly surprised by f/1.4. I was expecting a 1.8 VC. Hopefully Tamron opts for a non-close focus optical design with faster focus and maybe focus limit switch on top of that. My 100mm macro and 135L are lighting fast in terms of focus and I'd want a 85 that can match that performance. 

W.R.T. Tamron SP series... 
This will likely be my 5th Tamron SP purchase. So far I've only had one issue which was with the 24-70/2.8 VC which was covered by the massive warranty. My most recent SP purchase is the 35/1.8 VC. I'm quite happy with my 35/1.8 although I can notice a slight lag with AF compared to my 35L. I'm much happier with the Tamron wide open performance and lower CA to forgive the slight AF speed loss. I don't use the 35VC for indoor sports or any tracking type photography so it's no real issue for me.

An 85/1.4 by comparison would be nice for indoor sports shots in tighter venues, where the 135/2 or 200mm f/2 would be too long. However then one would expect AF performance to be fast and precise more like the 70-200mm VC than the recent close-focus 35/45mm VC designs.

I'd pay $800-$1,000 if the AF is fast and reliable and IQ improves slightly on the 35VC.


----------



## Nininini (Jan 25, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> I'm pleasantly surprised by f/1.4. I was expecting a 1.8 VC.



I would have preferred 1.8

Now the AF is going to have to be perfect to justify the extra weight and price, and I doubt it will be.

You can still get away with a tiny bit of front or back focus on a 1.8, but with 1.4 at 85mm, lol no, AF will need to be perfect.


----------



## PhotoCat (Jan 25, 2016)

I have been waiting for ages for this! I want one!  
What have you been Canon?


----------



## Nininini (Jan 25, 2016)

tr573 said:


> in order to displace my 85/1.8 this fella is going to have to be a heck of a lot faster to focus than the 45 is.



The thing is also, the 85mm f/1.8, and the 100mm f/2.0, are also some of the fastest focusing lenses canon has. The focusing motor in those lenses is super fast.

But, the tamron has VC. I hope Canon makes IS versions of their lenses.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 25, 2016)

douglaurent said:


> This is what I've been waiting for for years. Stabilized primes are the way to go. As good as the new fast primes of the past years have been from Sigma etc, they are all not the perfect solution for eternity because of missing stabilization.
> 
> Of course it's also highly welcome for video. And if you look at a Batis 85/1.8 that has stabilization coming from a Sony body and from inside the lens, each huge bulky DSLR 85mm without any stabilization looks like a less useful tool from an old era.
> 
> ...



I really don't understand the requirement of fascination of Image Stabilized prime lenses. I regularly use my 85mm f1.2 IIL in very low light conditions (shooting some bizarre weddings in crypts by candle light) and wide open...I don't need the IS baggage. A lens like this requires a shutter speed of 1/85th sec and the ultra bright aperture provides this, which is why it's referred to as a "fast lens". I've owned and used mine in a professional portrait context and I've never once thought that an IS unit would help or improve this lens. I've even used it for landscapes...awesome IQ...but a 70-200 is a lot easier to use. It's a hand held portrait lens, so use it as such. It's so bright...on a sunny day I have to use ND filters to use it wide open...THAT'S BRIGHT. 

The only prime I have which I've thought that an IS would be of occasional use is the 135mm f2L. That's partly due to the longer focal length requiring a higher shutter speed of 125th / sec and the dimmer max aperture of f2. So I loose 2/3rds of a stop due to the higher shutter speed requirement and 1 1/3 stop aperture difference between the two lenses...that's a 2 stop difference and that's big. To render the same exposure under the same light, I would need to shoot the 135L at 4 times the iso. So if my 85IIL uses an iso of say 800 iso (nice and low noise), then my 135L would offer me a relatively noisy 3200 iso. 
My 35mm f1.4 L really doesn't need an IS unit either. Although this lens is 1/3 stop dimmer than my 85IIL, it gains more light because it can be hand held to 1/30th...although I prefer to use it at 1/50th so that my brides look sharp.


----------



## SlydeR (Jan 25, 2016)

But it's still a Tamron. I had bad experiences with Tamron in the past...I will wait for the new Sigma 85mm...hopefully they will make it soon. I don't mind some VC, it will always assist in some way.


----------



## Nininini (Jan 25, 2016)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I really don't understand the requirement of fascination of Image Stabilized prime lenses.



It's pretty simiple for me, often times I am shooting pictures and I see something and I want to take video.

It's rare that you actually have time to switch to an IS lens, by then the moment is usually over.

Video on a 24mm works fine without IS. But shooting video with an 85 or 100mm without IS, looks like you're filming an earthquake.

(and no I'm not spending a whole day stabilizing video in post in software and sacrificing large borders around the video, it's 2016, not the 90s)


----------



## Talley (Jan 25, 2016)

I kicked canon glass out years ago and now all my zooms are Tamron and primes Sigma outside of the 90mm VC macro.

I wouldn't hesitate for a 85 1.4 VC even over an ART 85. Sign me up for that lens.... omg.


----------



## PhotoCat (Jan 25, 2016)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I really don't understand the requirement of fascination of Image Stabilized prime lenses. I regularly use my...



Another reason I can think of is noise. What ISO were u shooting at 1/85 & f1.2? 
With a slower shutter at 1/15S, I can drop the ISO by more than 2 stops and get a much cleaner image.
Higher dynamic range too 
Well, many times f1.4 doesn't give me the DOF I need, not to mention f1.2, so I have to increase ISO agn.

Another time is for motion blur special effect while keeping other things sharp at 1/8S.
(like a spinning bride lol)
Maybe u r super steady but I can't hand hold that for an 85mm.

So IS with prime is definitely useful for me. Having said that, 
I would be happy with just f2.0 for an 85. f1.4 is really awesome, if the Tammy is focusing well


----------



## 9VIII (Jan 26, 2016)

JohanCruyff said:


> mackguyver said:
> 
> 
> > This is certainly exciting news given what I've heard about their newest VC lenses. I am still waiting for a 135 f/2 IS someday, so any step in that direction from any vendor is great. Besides, *that would be a 135 VC on a crop body*
> ...



Which only sort of levels the playing field with full frame, nothing more.
85f1.4 on crop is effectively the same as 135f2 on full frame in every way, use the same ISO and shutter speed on each body, but give the crop sensor an extra stop in aperture, and you have virtually the same image...
Except in this case the 135f2 lens is probably cheaper to make and gives better IQ.


----------



## Wizardly (Jan 26, 2016)

Does anyone have any idea at all what the back focus and image height are for the 85 and 35mm lenses in this patent application?


----------



## In-The-Dark (Jan 26, 2016)

If the AF would be reliable, why not? 
VC/IS is beneficial to allow us to capture images at a much lower ISO, hence, cleaner images . . . .
would also be really helpful for shooters with shaky hands like me.


----------



## ranplett (Jan 26, 2016)

Let's have a vote to see who prefers IS or not. I'll bet 98% of photogs would rather have it, especially on anything 85mm+

These days with the 135 / 2 I'm shooting at least 1/500 to get crisp shots. The 1/FL rule was for back in the days when film resolution was fairly forgiving, unlike current 50+MP images. Also, when shooting a lot of frames (something we didn't do with film), fatigue and bad posture sets in.

Today I was doing some macro work with the 135 and an ext. tube. Zooming in 5x or 10x in live view was a shaky blurry mess. And if anyone mentions tripod, yes, I bring one everywhere and never use it.


----------



## privatebydesign (Jan 26, 2016)

ranplett said:


> The 1/FL rule was for back in the days when film resolution was fairly forgiving, unlike current 50+MP images. Also, when shooting a lot of frames (something we didn't do with film), fatigue and bad posture sets in.
> 
> Today I was doing some macro work with the 135 and an ext. tube. Zooming in 5x or 10x in live view was a shaky blurry mess. And if anyone mentions tripod, yes, I bring one everywhere and never use it.



No the 1/FL rule has nothing to do with MP numbers, it was arrived at by the measure of visual acuity and a 'standard' enlargement size/viewing distance combination, which was an 8"x10" print viewed at 12", or twice the size from twice the distance etc etc. What has changed is that we now enlarge things much more so movement is more visible, fullscreen on a 27" monitor viewed from a few inches is now standard, people taking pictures of birds think nothing of 100% enlargement ratios with an equivalent to 36" prints viewed from inches away.

Use of an extension tube greatly magnifies the enlargement ratio so 1/FL was never the "rule" when tubes were used.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 26, 2016)

privatebydesign said:


> ranplett said:
> 
> 
> > The 1/FL rule was for back in the days when film resolution was fairly forgiving, unlike current 50+MP images. Also, when shooting a lot of frames (something we didn't do with film), fatigue and bad posture sets in.
> ...


Another pearl of wisdom to save in my memory bank.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Jan 26, 2016)

PhotoCat said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > I really don't understand the requirement of fascination of Image Stabilized prime lenses. I regularly use my...
> ...



The problem with shooting anything with an 85mm at 1/15th sec...is subject movement. Even a micro movement in your target will produce a blurred or slightly fuzzy subject image. An IS unit can't freeze a subject still.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Jan 26, 2016)

I can't blame Tamron for jumping on this opportunity, but what I really would like to see is a Tamron prime - 400 or 500mm.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 26, 2016)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > tr573 said:
> ...



Do you think part of the issue with the new Tamron's is the above average focus range? If I recall the MFD on these new lenses allowed one to get into that pseudo macro range. I'm thinking on an 85, they'd go with a conservative focal range to cut down on long throws and maybe only let the lens focus at 3 or 4 feet. Of course adding a bit of macro isn't a bad thing if one includes a focus limiter.

I tend to agree on your 2nd statement as well. I haven't been exposed to as many lens as you have but I have owned a few Tamrons and Sigmas and have gotten my hands on others. My experience has just been that Tamron has figured out the "secret sauce" (or darn close) of the Canon focus system. However, Sigma might be slowly getting there, or at least getting better.

Of course, the real question is, how soon will we see this lens?


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 26, 2016)

I'd estimate that when shooting on 50+ MP full frame that the rule might be more like 1/(3x FL) in order to have a good margin of safety for camera shake. 
1/(85x3) ≈ 1/250s. 

For static people shots I find 1/60s is a limit for subject movement although I'd prefer to photograph them at 1/100s - 1/125s to avoid EFCC excessive focus confirmation chimping.

Given these parameters (250/125 = 1 stop, 250/60 ≈ 2 stops) I would say that an 85mm with IS has some merit even for live subjects given the future high megapixel bodies which know are already in the pipeline.


----------



## wallstreetoneil (Jan 26, 2016)

*can't wait for this lens*

I have converted over to 5DSRs for weddings. My entire lens strategy is based on IS lenses - the only exception is the new 35L II because it is tack sharp at F1.4 and extremely useable at that aperture and my handheld tests show I can get repeated tack sharp images at 1/125th even at the most extreme magnifications.

The old argument reiterated above that IS doesn't matter and 1/FL is fine because it worked in the film days is not a completely honest argument. Why? As mentioned, people generally didn't order enlargements as big as they do today and more importantly, the vast majority, if not nearly all lens back then, couldn't nearly resolve what the state of the art lens can resolve today - so while in theory, film has extremely high resolution abilities - the lenses did not so it is a false argument (most often). 

With a 5DSR, if you had a 85 1.4 IS lens, you could ditch the 70-200 F2.8 IS and just crop if you needed more FL - but you would gain 2 stops all the time - that is an enormous advantage in potential performance. I can't see Canon offering this lens as it could affect sales of their 70-200 F2.8 IS lenses - for Tamron on the other hand, this can be a homerun lens for them.

I know there are new 50L, 85L and 135L lenses coming with the 35L II treatment - and they will be excellent - but if you have a high megapixel camera and want to sell large prints, you would be better to use them on the Sony A7Rii (that is what I do with the 85L II and 135L) - I do not use these lenses handheld on the 5DSR - but I will buy that Tamron the day it goes on sale.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 26, 2016)

GMCPhotographics said:


> PhotoCat said:
> 
> 
> > GMCPhotographics said:
> ...



Which of course comes down to how/what you shoot. For some IS/VC is probably much more useful. For me personally, I'm in your camp. At 100mm or less I really don't have a need for it and serves very little benefit. In fact, it probably makes the lens more expensive, larger/heavier, and is just one more thing to fail. I typically have Av mode, etc min shutter set at 1/60 or so anyway. Sometimes 1/125. Even my 70-200 doesn't have IS and is not a problem. While it would be nice on certain occasions, even in those cases it's probably only saving me a stop at best.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Jan 26, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> Do you think part of the issue with the new Tamron's is the above average focus range? If I recall the MFD on these new lenses allowed one to get into that pseudo macro range. I'm thinking on an 85, they'd go with a conservative focal range to cut down on long throws and maybe only let the lens focus at 3 or 4 feet. Of course adding a bit of macro isn't a bad thing if one includes a focus limiter.


My thoughts precisely:


StudentOfLight said:


> I'm pleasantly surprised by f/1.4. I was expecting a 1.8 VC. Hopefully Tamron opts for a non-close focus optical design with faster focus and maybe focus limit switch on top of that. My 100mm macro and 135L are lighting fast in terms of focus and I'd want a 85 that can match that performance.


----------



## Luds34 (Jan 26, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > Do you think part of the issue with the new Tamron's is the above average focus range? If I recall the MFD on these new lenses allowed one to get into that pseudo macro range. I'm thinking on an 85, they'd go with a conservative focal range to cut down on long throws and maybe only let the lens focus at 3 or 4 feet. Of course adding a bit of macro isn't a bad thing if one includes a focus limiter.
> ...



Haha, sorry I missed your comment. Yes we are on the exact same page. The trusty Canon 85 f/1.8 has a MFD of like 3 feet. Combine that with (relatively) small glass and it's a win-win in the focus department.

To your point about being pleasantly surprised by the f/1.4, Same here. Especially being their 35/45 were f/1.8. Like others here, if this lens is what we are thinking/hoping (especially with the faster focus) and comes in at a reasonable price like in that $600-$800 range, this will end up in my bag.


----------



## scyrene (Jan 26, 2016)

GMCPhotographics said:


> douglaurent said:
> 
> 
> > This is what I've been waiting for for years. Stabilized primes are the way to go. As good as the new fast primes of the past years have been from Sigma etc, they are all not the perfect solution for eternity because of missing stabilization.
> ...



Well I have to say my experience was different when I had that lens. 1/80sec was generally not fast enough, partly because the lens is so heavy and compact, making handholding a little harder than many other midrange lenses. In general, I see no disadvantage to adding IS to any lens - I've seen no evidence it diminishes optical performance (as some pro-all manual folk have claimed, for AF too), the weight gain is not much, especially if you knock 1/3-1/2 a stop off the maximum aperture, and the extra cost need not be all that much either (plenty of cheaper lenses have it). And you can always turn it off 

I'm quite surprised you shoot portraits at 1/50. I'm no portrait photographer by any means, but I've found humans require a faster speed than that to ensure a reasonable number of shots without motion blur. But each to their own.


----------



## PhotoCat (Jan 26, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > PhotoCat said:
> ...



I used to think that one needs 1/60s or faster to shoot sharp still portraits to avoid motion blur, until my friend opened up my eyes with the humble Canon 24-105 F4 IS. Well, his 1/15S was by mistake LOL! I was surprised that he had a lot of sharp keepers at 1/15S for still portraits. That really got me thinking about IS! Mistakes aren't always bad as it encourages out-of-the-box thinking!  I do have to admit I personally don't own any full frame IS lenses so my experience with shooting portraits at 1/15S is limited.
Been waiting for Canon 85 f2.0 IS but don't know when it is coming. Looks like Tamron is more experienced in IS technology as demonstrated by the first 24-70 f2.8 VC. So I hope the Tammy 85 VC focusing is good.


----------



## Nininini (Jan 26, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> I'd estimate that when shooting on 50+ MP full frame that the rule might be more like 1/(3x FL) in order to have a good margin of safety for camera shake.



I use 1/3*FL for my 70D too.

I'll take some grain over a blurry picture.

People often say that you should shoot at 1/FL.

But

1. If you look at your own hands, you will see that the amount your hand shakes is not always the same, you can get unlucky easily every couple of shots. Just because 1/FL works once, doesn't mean it will work again.

2. This rule is an old rule that predates high resolution cameras.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Jan 27, 2016)

Luds34 said:


> TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
> 
> 
> > Luds34 said:
> ...



I absolutely do. I think Tamron would have been to include a focus limiter switch in the design of the 35/45 lenses, but I'm also sure that the idea was discussed and then rejected due to some engineering challenge. They have more focus throw between minimum focus and 2 feet than the Sigma ART lenses have for the whole focal range - that is going to affect focus speed. I frankly feel like Sigma cheated a bit on the focus throw to help achieve faster speed, but they may have sacrificed a little focus accuracy in the process (and I'm not just talking manual focus).


----------



## PhotoCat (Jan 28, 2016)

PhotoCat said:


> Luds34 said:
> 
> 
> > GMCPhotographics said:
> ...



An interesting read: "shutter speed for portrait work"

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/2654802


----------



## dlee13 (Jan 28, 2016)

Does anyone think an announcement of this lens would be possible at CP+ (I don't know much about patents)?

I was going to buy the Sigma 85mm f1.4 in 1 week but with CP+ right around the corner, I'm tempted to wait and see if anything is announced.


----------



## AshtonNekolah (Jan 28, 2016)

Talley said:


> I kicked canon glass out years ago and now all my zooms are Tamron and primes Sigma outside of the 90mm VC macro.
> 
> I wouldn't hesitate for a 85 1.4 VC even over an ART 85. Sign me up for that lens.... omg.



I kicked sigma out after using there 50mm, I will take a Tamron over it simple cause Tamron is like canon galss only without a red ring and a L with a L price. This would be a good glass.


----------

