# Tamron Teases New Lenses



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 15, 2016)

```
<p><a href="http://www.canonrumors.com/sigma-to-announce-two-new-lenses-on-february-23/">Not to be outdone by Sigma</a>, Tamron is now teasing what looks to be a pair of lenses for CP+. Tamron Switzerland posted the teaser on their <a href="https://www.facebook.com/479287858772601/photos/a.512988925402494.124215.479287858772601/1137716979596349/?type=3&theater" target="_blank">Facebook page</a> and it shows the bottom of two lens barrels. Is Tamron readying their 85mm prime?</p>
<p>It looks like we only have to wait until February 22, 2016 for the unveiling.</p>
<p><em>Thanks Matt & Christian</em></p>
<span id="pty_trigger"></span>
```


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 15, 2016)

or maybe 24mm or wider prime? tamron certainly could bring a fast wide lens to compete with sigma or canon.


----------



## ecka (Feb 15, 2016)

I hope it is 85mm and a new FF 60/2 VC USD Macro.


----------



## AtSea (Feb 15, 2016)

The sheer amount of choice we as photographers now have between lenses, bodies, and types of cameras is either making it the most glorious age of photography... or the most frustrating :/


----------



## chrysoberyl (Feb 15, 2016)

I hope for a 400 or 500mm prime. Mainly because I don't want a dust-huffer.


----------



## jebrady03 (Feb 15, 2016)

AtSea said:


> The sheer amount of choice we as photographers now have between lenses, bodies, and types of cameras is either making it the most glorious age of photography... or the most frustrating :/



Both! And it's awesome-horrible!


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 15, 2016)

ecka said:


> I hope it is 85mm and a new FF 60/2 VC USD Macro.



I have the Tamron 35 f/18 VC and it is amazing. I just love it. That said, they will be hard-pressed for the 85 f/1.8, since the rivals by both Nikon and Canon are very good and superb value. Still, if they pull off sharper wide-open, VC and weather sealing...... Hmmmmmm!!!

The Canon is a bit softer wide-open that one might like (IMHO), though by f/2.2 it is brilliant, but excellent AF speed, while the Nikkor is really good optically, even wide-open, but the AF speed leaves a lot to be desired. If by some miracle they announce an f/1.4, it will pre-order...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Feb 15, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> If by some miracle they announce an f/1.4, it will pre-order...



Their recent patent was for 85mm f/1.4 w/ VC.


----------



## Chaitanya (Feb 15, 2016)

ecka said:


> I hope it is 85mm and a new FF 60/2 VC USD Macro.


I really would love a FF 60mm macro with silent focusing motors and image stabiliser. Which ever manufacter makes it first will get my money, but I am skeptical if Sigma/Canon/Tamron will bring out such a lens anytime soon.


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 15, 2016)

3kramd5 said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > If by some miracle they announce an f/1.4, it will pre-order...
> ...



Now if they can produce the goods, AND keep it at a maximum of US$1000.... gimme, gimme, gimme, I want, I want, I want.


----------



## slclick (Feb 15, 2016)

Their graphics are certainly better than the Sigma teasers but will the optics be as well? Looks like they're continuing the line of Di VC silver ring lenses, which are no ART level glass but a very good value all the same. This is great for competition!


----------



## ecka (Feb 15, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > I hope it is 85mm and a new FF 60/2 VC USD Macro.
> ...



I'm not sure about that. Some say that Canon 35/2 IS is actually a better lens than the Tamron 35/1.8 VC, because it is sharper, with much less CA, smaller/lighter, better focusing and just as bright at F2 actually, while it costs the same or even less sometimes (like $50 less, if memory serves). Of course, Tamron seems tougher, has weather resistance and closer focusing (extra magnification), but ... different people have different opinions.
I just want it to be 85mm to provoke Canon updating their 85/1.8 , so I could choose. Specially if Sigma makes one as well, I mean a sub-$1k Art lens.
The current Tamron 60/2 almost covers the FF circle. Just saying, it would be a very interesting and unique option.


----------



## ecka (Feb 15, 2016)

Chaitanya said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > I hope it is 85mm and a new FF 60/2 VC USD Macro.
> ...



Yes, it's almost too good to be true


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 15, 2016)

ecka said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



Indeed they do. I would refer you to Dustin Abbot's excellent review:

http://www.canonrumors.com/reviews/review-tamron-sp-35mm-f1-8-di-vc-usd/

Or one I posted myself:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/57279454


----------



## StudentOfLight (Feb 15, 2016)

I'm expecting:
SP 24mm f/1.8 VC 
SP 85mm f/1.4 VC

I'd also be happy with: 
SP 22mm f/1.8 VC
SP 90mm f/1.8 VC


----------



## Frage (Feb 15, 2016)

I love when imaging companies release these bad made CGI´s.


----------



## mrsfotografie (Feb 15, 2016)

I suspect that it'll be another pair of sister-lenses that share development, like the 35 and 45 mm. Possibly 65 and 85 mm...


----------



## Khufu (Feb 15, 2016)

mrsfotografie said:


> I suspect that it'll be another pair of sister-lenses that share development, like the 35 and 45 mm. Possibly 65 and 85 mm...


 Maybe 85mm and 100mm, like the Canon EF twins but with VC!

I hear good things about Tamron's 90mm Macro VC...


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 15, 2016)

Khufu said:


> mrsfotografie said:
> 
> 
> > I suspect that it'll be another pair of sister-lenses that share development, like the 35 and 45 mm. Possibly 65 and 85 mm...
> ...



And the close-focusing! Beaucoup bokeh!


----------



## 9VIII (Feb 15, 2016)

Canon Rumors said:


> Not to be outdone by Sigma



At this point everyone is being outdone by Sigma.
If they ever do release a body that's moderately affordable then Sigma will be competing as a system producer, not just a third party accessory company. They're on the cusp of becoming much more than what they have traditionally been. I hope they learned a lot from the SD1.
I'm hoping that they've been holding back the 85A to coincide with the release of their new system. If that lens is something truly spectacular like the 50A was, then having a body that it works flawlessly with would compound interest in both products.
And it's a good question whether anyone really wants to buy any 85mm lens if autofocus struggles.
Given that even Canon has trouble with their 85f1.2, if Sigma could say that they have the best fast aperture 85mm solution on the market when using the full Sigma system, that might actually be a reasonable selling point.

At this point I think Canon should really reconsider their policy on sharing autofocus algorithms, if the lens industry is getting so competitive that "first party" isn't the premium that it used to be, then working with Tamron and Sigma to keep people on EOS might be a good idea.

What would be super cool is if all these third parties could work together to make a shared standard. Nikon and Canon will never share a mount, but imagine if Sigma, Tamron and Tokina all went out and started supporting a system of their own design?


----------



## kevl (Feb 15, 2016)

9VIII said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> > Not to be outdone by Sigma
> ...



I can't agree. 

Check every review of Sigma's Art lenses. They are amazing for Sigma lenses. They are sharp and contrasty and resolve a lot of information. 

There's just one big problem, the autofocus is not nearly as consistent as Canon lenses. An amateur can afford to take 5 frames to make sure they get the shot. Last weekend I shot a 3 day conference with national leaders of a political party. I had to get the shot the first time, on the fly, while things were happening. 

I'm constantly tempted by the Art lenses, but then I go do a job like this and I realize I just don't have the freedom to miss another 10-20% of shots.


----------



## 9VIII (Feb 15, 2016)

kevl said:


> There's just one big problem, the autofocus is not nearly as consistent as Canon lenses. An amateur can afford to take 5 frames to make sure they get the shot. Last weekend I shot a 3 day conference with national leaders of a political party. I had to get the shot the first time, on the fly, while things were happening.
> 
> I'm constantly tempted by the Art lenses, but then I go do a job like this and I realize I just don't have the freedom to miss another 10-20% of shots.



That's what I said:


9VIII said:


> And it's a good question whether anyone really wants to buy any 85mm lens if autofocus struggles.



thus:


9VIII said:


> if Sigma could say that they have the best fast aperture 85mm solution on the market when using the full Sigma system, that might actually be a reasonable selling point.



And:


9VIII said:


> What would be super cool is if all these third parties could work together to make a shared standard. Nikon and Canon will never share a mount, but imagine if Sigma, Tamron and Tokina all went out and started supporting a system of their own design?


----------



## slclick (Feb 15, 2016)

Everyone is outdoing Sigma? That's just plain silly. Unless you expect them to put out ART lenses once a month...Tamron is by no means a Sigma competitor, if that's what you're getting at. They are ramping up their lens catalog with better offerings but they still have a long way to go to get to where Sigma has gone in the past two years. I'm happy these have come out and I hope they stay in the sub $600 range to offer good to better glass fitting in between Canon non L and L prices with near Sigma quality. Of course they won't have Canon AF speed and accuracy, and why people still expect it from 3rd party is beyond me. The camera world is just plain unrealistic in their wants and desires I guess.


----------



## cookestudios (Feb 15, 2016)

kevl said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Canon Rumors said:
> ...



This, exactly. It's exactly the reason I don't trust my Sigma 35 when shooting weddings. I reviewed the new 35L for FS a while back, and the AF alone was enough for me to justify the price.


----------



## MintChocs (Feb 15, 2016)

AtSea said:


> The sheer amount of choice we as photographers now have between lenses, bodies, and types of cameras is either making it the most glorious age of photography... or the most frustrating :/


And is giving me a serious case of G.A.S, my bank account will start to take heavy damage!


----------



## steliosk (Feb 15, 2016)

anything at f/1.4 is very welcome

probably, i won't resist to 50mm and 85mm if there are sharp and effective and not hazy wide open


----------



## TeT (Feb 16, 2016)

slclick said:


> Their graphics are certainly better than the Sigma teasers but will the optics be as well? Looks like they're continuing the line of Di VC silver ring lenses, which are no ART level glass but a very good value all the same. This is great for competition!



Your right it is no ART: at f2 the 35 Tamron is better in the corners at f4 they are same in center. Sigma seems to stay slightly ahead mid frame though... Did we mention 3/5 the price...

Not slamming you, but using your post to point out that Sigma is not all that it was a year ago ... 

Yes it is great for competion


----------



## slclick (Feb 16, 2016)

TeT said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > Their graphics are certainly better than the Sigma teasers but will the optics be as well? Looks like they're continuing the line of Di VC silver ring lenses, which are no ART level glass but a very good value all the same. This is great for competition!
> ...



What exactly so you expect from them?


----------



## 9VIII (Feb 16, 2016)

cookestudios said:


> kevl said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...



Ok, using less words this time...

Sigma should release their own enthusiast-level body at the same time as they release the 85mm Art lens so that people can buy a camera that will autofocus properly with it.


----------



## TeT (Feb 16, 2016)

slclick said:


> What exactly do you expect from them?



Exactly what they (Tamron) are doing, give us a cheaper quality option with better than decent auto focus. Until recently the cheaper option was the ART series.

Now the better cheaper option is Tamron...

(I was originally pointing out that Tamron is a better value than the Sigma as well as overall a better lens)


----------



## slclick (Feb 16, 2016)

TeT said:


> slclick said:
> 
> 
> > What exactly do you expect from them?
> ...


Far too soon to tell. T has far fewer lenses and the corners vs center reviews are few and far between. I'm not declaring Tamrom a winner in anything, yet.


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 16, 2016)

slclick said:


> TeT said:
> 
> 
> > slclick said:
> ...



"Still, from the initial aperture through to f/4, the Tamron is ahead in sharpness, at least from mid-field to the corners on account of the Sigma’s slight astigmatism. The Sigma has slightly higher peak sharpness (at f/2.0), but it doesn’t match the Tamron for uniformity until f/8–f/11."

http://www.dxomark.com/Reviews/Tamron-SP-35mm-F1.8-Di-VC-USD-Nikon-mount-Shooting-for-the-top/Tamron-SP-35mm-F1.8-Di-VC-USD-Model-F012-Nikon-versus-Sigma-35mm-F1.4-DG-HSM-A-Nikon-versus-Nikon-AF-S-NIKKOR-35mm-f-1.8G-ED-Serious-contender

"When it comes to the performance on the edge of the APS-C sensor once again the tested Tamron manages it very well. Even at the maximum relative aperture it exceeds significantly the decency level (...) better than the Canon 2/35 IS and noticeably better than the Nikkor 1.8/35G. What’s important, this time the Tamron was also able to defeat the Sigma."

"On the edge of the frame the Tamron prevails over the whole group of 35 mm lenses"

http://www.lenstip.com/455.4-Lens_review-Tamron_SP_35_mm_f_1.8_Di_VC_USD_Image_resolution.html


----------



## ecka (Feb 16, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > AlmostDecent said:
> ...



Thanks for the link and the review . Seems like a nice lens, just like most of them are really. However, my little 40 pancake still is an indisputable champion, in many ways, for me . I think the question is - "Is that the best set of compromises for most of us". I really don't like the high CA and PF produced by this Tamron lens, so I may not be in the majority. No lens is perfect, but I just really don't want to pay $600 for it  because I know how much time it takes to fight those CA and fringing while editing.


----------



## captainkanji (Feb 16, 2016)

I can't wait for some new 85s to come out.


----------



## Stanmade (Feb 16, 2016)

My guess would be a 55, 58, or 60mm 1.8 vc and a 80 or 85mm 1.4 vc (since they just patented it). Cant wait to see what they are and if/how they will stack up to Sigmas announcement.


----------



## pknight (Feb 16, 2016)

ecka said:


> No lens is perfect, but I just really don't want to pay $600 for it  because I know how much time it takes to fight those CA and fringing while editing.



Really? It takes 2 or 3 clicks in Lightroom to remove all CA and fringing in any photo. You might have to nudge a slider if it is really bad. These problems are non-issues for me any more, simply because they are so simple to deal with .


----------



## StudentOfLight (Feb 16, 2016)

Of course I want a couple of fast primes, but I was just reading the teaser title again: "A New Chapter" ... and thought perhaps they are updating a couple of their current lenses.


----------



## lloyd709 (Feb 16, 2016)

A 65 1.8 with close focusing (like the 45 but not necessarily macro) would stir things up a bit I think. I've got the 45 1.8 and the close focusing is the real making of this lens.


----------



## slclick (Feb 16, 2016)

StudentOfLight said:


> Of course I want a couple of fast primes, but I was just reading the teaser title again: "A New Chapter" ... and thought perhaps they are updating a couple of their current lenses.



You might be onto something there, Sigma did the same thing...if only they'd do it with the 85


----------



## ecka (Feb 16, 2016)

pknight said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > No lens is perfect, but I just really don't want to pay $600 for it  because I know how much time it takes to fight those CA and fringing while editing.
> ...



That only works for slight CA and PF, not for OMG ones from Tamron . And if there's something purple in the frame other than PF, you can't do any easy fixing without affecting it. Even the A-Brush at 100 defringe doesn't cut it.
Did you actually try it, or are you just assuming?


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 17, 2016)

ecka said:


> pknight said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



He is actually wrong. It doesn't take 2-3 clicks. It takes zero. I have CA removal settings in LR that are automatically applied to the images upon opening them, which leave zero CA, green or purple. Attached is a crop of the exact LR parameters I use. Please note the Green slider is set to 40/90 (not the default 40/60).

I can show images of before (with CA) and after should you wish.


----------



## ecka (Feb 17, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > pknight said:
> ...



O.K, sure.
Try this one
http://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/tamron_sp_35mm_f1_8_di_vc_usd/sample_images/tamron_sp_35mm_f1_8_di_vc_usd_39.jpg


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 17, 2016)

ecka said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



I cropped the relevant part, which I presume is ok. The only change made to the image was to apply the CA fix that is in my import preset. The before, with purple fringing visible, and after without the fringing.


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 17, 2016)

ecka said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



Just to verify another case from the same samples source (http://img.photographyblog.com/reviews/tamron_sp_35mm_f1_8_di_vc_usd/sample_images/tamron_sp_35mm_f1_8_di_vc_usd_48.jpg) but with green CA, here is how it looks before and after (again a 100% crop):


----------



## ecka (Feb 18, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > AlmostDecent said:
> ...



You cheater :
It looks worse than it was before. Flower colors are affected by the "easy fix". What about purple clothes, lipstick, cars, jewelry, etc.?


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 18, 2016)

ecka said:


> You cheater :
> It looks worse than it was before. Flower colors are affected by the "easy fix". What about purple clothes, lipstick, cars, jewelry, etc.?



Cheater? I gave you pure unmodified crops of my results other than what I said, and the results looked fine to me. No?

I did not post the entire images simply because 1) it was a 50MP image, which is bloody huge, and 2) it was a close-up on the flower so 80% of the image is a severely out of focus background.


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 18, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > You cheater :
> ...



Ok, I went back and revisited it and I see the problem you are having, but don't have an explanation. As I said, I have a Tamron 35 preset (just as I have presets for other lenses). It automatically applies +20 contrast, +10 clarity, +12 vibrance, turns on lens corrections, and adds those CA settings. 

If I apply this preset, and then turn the contrast, clarity and vibrance to zero (leaving only the CA fixed), I get exactly what I showed you. 

HOWEVER, if I take the image, and only manually apply the CA, the results are not the same. Attached is the full flower, again cropped from the original 50MP image, but 100% and unresized, and fixed just as described.


----------



## ecka (Feb 18, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



Still, the problem persists.


----------



## ecka (Feb 18, 2016)

Try this one.
http://pliki.optyczne.pl/tam35/tam35_fot13.JPG


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 18, 2016)

ecka said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > AlmostDecent said:
> ...



Sort of. Some weird behavior from LR or ACR, but at least I hope it showed two things: 1) no cheating was involved, and 2) it remains very clean after.


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 18, 2016)

ecka said:


> Try this one.
> http://pliki.optyczne.pl/tam35/tam35_fot13.JPG



Obviously since the section of image is so small compared to the overall frame (1000 pixels of the 6000), one needs to reduce the fringe. Aside from that:


----------



## ecka (Feb 19, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > Try this one.
> ...



So now, do you agree that it is not a zero click solution? Sometimes it can be a real headache. Those are just a quick search samples, but there are situations when the CA and fringing is just too much and you have to paint it out of there, literally.


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 19, 2016)

ecka said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



Perhaps zero click was a bit excessive, but hardly the Mission Impossible you painted. Even in your last request above, all I did was take my default setting, set the green to zero (down from +5), and lower the purple to +2 instead of +5. In your last example, you can't even see the fringing unless you are literally zoomed to 100%, and if you are planning on using an image where that is relevant, I would assume the rest of the post-processing will also be more than zero clicks as well. It literally took me a couple of seconds, so very far from a headache.


----------



## ecka (Feb 19, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > AlmostDecent said:
> ...



What you did is you didn't actually remove the CA and fringing , while still affecting everything from pink to purple. OK, let's leave it there, I see you are too stubborn to admit anything .


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 20, 2016)

ecka said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



Funny I was going to say the same thing. i showed you your images perfectly cleaned, and proved not only it could be done, but easily. In not one instance did you show any issues with my results, other than to say you found them so unbelievably good, I could only be cheating.


----------



## ecka (Feb 20, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > AlmostDecent said:
> ...



You are wrong. Ignoring the problem doesn't make it go away. Your effortless method doesn't work on images with purple object in it, without making a mess.


----------



## AlmostDecent (Feb 20, 2016)

ecka said:


> AlmostDecent said:
> 
> 
> > ecka said:
> ...



It does, and I proved it. If you had a criticism of the corrected images I shared, by all means. 

BTW, regarding the CA compared to rival lenses, quoting LensTip (for example):

"The Canon 2/35 IS had very similar results in this category but its maximum level was a bit higher." (i.e. worse)
"The Nikkor AF-S 1.8/35G fared worse practically at all aperture values"
"Once again the Sigma A 1.4/35 is the most serious rival of the Tamron – it had results of 0.03-0.06% which were only slightly better depending on the aperture value."

http://www.lenstip.com/455.5-Lens_review-Tamron_SP_35_mm_f_1.8_Di_VC_USD_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html

http://www.lenstip.com/365.5-Lens_review-Canon_EF_35_mm_f_2_IS_USM_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Feb 21, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> 3kramd5 said:
> 
> 
> > AlmostDecent said:
> ...



85mm f1.8 VC... my dream lens comes true


----------



## ecka (Feb 21, 2016)

AlmostDecent said:


> ecka said:
> 
> 
> > AlmostDecent said:
> ...



Can't you see Canon's better? Sigma's better too, btw.
You can stop now, I'm not buying it.

http://www.lenstip.com/359.5-Lens_review-Sigma_A_35_mm_f_1.4_DG_HSM_Chromatic_and_spherical_aberration.html


----------

