Jonathan F/2: Will Sigma replace the part that gets scratched?
You're talking nonsense about it being sigmas responsibility. Its the consumers responsibility to buy compatible products. One of the risks you accept when you buy third party after market accessories, I.E. Sigma lenses, is that they might not be compatible with future bodies for hardware or software reasons. If you don't want to roll that dice buy Pentax lenses for your Pentax camera. It's that simple.
Sigma can't help it if Pentax changed the camera design in a way the broke compatibility with lenses that have already be manufactured and sold. Sigma doesn't have a crystal ball and Pentax is not going to help Sigma steal their lens sales.
In fact Sigma is make a great show of customer support on this issue. Sigma says they will retro fit current lenses which is all they can do and is really great customer support. Sigma would have been well within their rights to make you buy all new lenses instead of letting you retrofit the current ones.
Caerolle: So a short, even-slower-than-usual macro. Should be $200, not $300, I think. But a nice part of the 'fun-sized/priced' M system, and fits the concept very well.
Caerolle, This lens, like most macros btw, is meant for macro work period. IF someone wants to try to use it for something else then it's not going to be as well suited for it as a non macro and/or faster lens depending on what the person is trying to use it for. If said person then tries to say the lens is too slow because they are using for something it was not designed and optimized for they are being silly and/or ignorant at best and just looking for an excuse the deride the lens at worst. This lens is a pure bread macro lens designed to be cheap, fun, and easy to bring along and easy to use. The leds on the front make that obvious. For a lens like that f/3.5 is fine and not a negative at all.
EthanP99: Plastic mount plastic mount plastic mount plastic mount.
Which wont matter at all for who this is for.
Donnie G: High IQ, lightweight, compact size, easy to use without the need for any additional accessaries, cheap to own, and most importantly, fun for photographers of all skill levels to use, carry, and experiment with. People who have never considered buying an EOS M body will buy one now just to be able to use this lens with it. This is how you sell interchangeable lens cameras. Watch the sales figures and learn from the master. :))
lol the EOS M is not and was never meant to be a "professional system." If you want that buy a 5DIII or 1DXII or maybe a 7DII. Those are Canon's pro cameras.
There is nothing worng with f/3.5 or even f/4 for a macro lenses. Most of the time you are stoppoing them way down anyway. All f/2.8 on this lens would do is make it bigger and heavier and therefore far less appropriate for such a small body for very little to no gain for most photographers. You have to look at a lens as a whole package including what it is meant for and the camera it's going on not just the max aperture or as many do, sharpness, to determine what a "good one" is.
Great now all Nikon needs is the ability to set AF fine tune values for at least 3 different zoom settings and at least 3 different distances for each zoom setting for the same lens.
Jozef M: What is a 'kibosh'? If you write for an international public, dpreview, use general English, please.
Why? In less time than your absolutely silly post took to write you could have googled it and found out what it means. Same goes for any word. You might even manage to learn something new that way.
Josh152: I generally prefer 105mm and have been looking at getting the 105mm f/2.0 DC but this is really tempting me due the the VC, better coatings, and weather resistance.
Maybe lol. I'm also hoping Tamron will release one of theses SP f/1.8s in 20mm.
Yeah my real problem is the lens I really want, A modern f/2.0 or f/1.8 105mm with built in motor, stabilization, weather resistance, and modern coatings, doesn't' exist lol.
Serious Sam: Like many had pointed out the pricing/marketing people in Tamron is on drugs. I will stick with my Nikon 85mm 1.8G (cost me a little bit over us$400).
Well like I said it's a balance. It is heavier because it has a metal barrel instead of plastic like the Nikon. It would be even heavier with the same level of build quality and f/1.4. Going for f/1.8 is probably why the Tamron is able to have the metal construction and still have a reasonable weight not much more than Nikon f/1.4. Just look at how heavy the similarly built sigma 50mm f/1.4 ART is and that is a shorter focal length. The 85mm version will undoubtedly weigh even more.
Well the samples I've seen the 105 dc is more than sharp and contrasty enough for me. Plus I love the way it renders a scene. I have the 105 f/2.5 AI-S which I love. The 105 DC seems like it will be very similar IQ wise and I want something that's faster than the 105mm AI-S and has AF. The thing with 85mm is that it just feels too close to 50mm for me as part of a set of primes. It's more like a slightly longer standard than a telephoto. My tentative plan for primes is to have the 20mm f/1.8g, my 50mm f/1.8g though eventually I might replace it with he Tamron 45mm f/1.8 vc, the 105mm DC and the 180mm f/1.8D. A 135mm lens would be too close to the 180mm but too short to replace it.
Being factually correct is not being a fanboy. I don't even own a Tamron lens. People are confused by the price because Tamron has done something with their new SP f/1.8 primes that a lot of people haven't really understood yet judging by the comments about price.
Unlike Cannon, Nikon, and Sigma they have made high end, pro quality primes in the 35mm-85mm range that are f/1.8 instead of f/1.4. Presumably so they can include all the high end goodies like weather resistance, high end coatings such as fluorine, 9 aperture blades, metal construction, better MF, VC, good bokeh, ect without having lenses that are some combination of being huge, extremely expansive, and heavy as a boat anchor.
This lens and the others in the range are designed to be a better balance of features,size,performance and price than what other manufactures are offering in their high end/pro ranges. The price makes sense when you understand what this lens is trying to be.
Actually the Nikon does not have full weather resistance, only the rear gasket to protect the body. the Tamron has much better weather resistance and much better build quality over all. Plus it has the dock thingy to really dial in the AF, probably better coatings equivalent to Nikon's nano coating, electronic aperture control, and of course the VC which is useful for many situations beyond shooting below 1/100. Such as shooting from an unstable position or while moving or while shooting fast, when you're cold, when you're tired, ect. Basically anytime it's hard or impossible to use perfect technique VC will yield sharper results, even if you are at 1/100. It can also let you use a smaller aperture for DOF in low light situations than you could without it. If the optical quality is as good and the AF is on the same level or better than the other recent Tamron f/1.8 primes, I think the price is fair considering it will be a substantial upgrade over the Nikon in many key areas.
I have no interest in the sigma 85mm Art. It's a safe bet it will be bigger, way heavier, won't have any weather protection not even the rear gasket to protect the body that even the cheapest G series Nikon primes have, and it will lack stabilization.
Basically except for the modern coatings it won't have any of the things the are tempting me to the Tamron 85mm f/1.8 so I might as well just go with the 105mm DC get the focal length I prefer lol. My ideal short telephoto fast prime would be a modern 105mm f/2.0 (or f/1.8 if it didn't add significant weight or size) with modern goodies like a SWM, VR, weather resistance, Nano coating ect. If this Tamron lens was 105mm instead of 85mm I would get it over the 105mm DC without hesitation even if it was more expensive.
I generally prefer 105mm and have been looking at getting the 105mm f/2.0 DC but this is really tempting me due the the VC, better coatings, and weather resistance.
Kodachrome200: the nikon 85mm f1.8g is not just a good lens. it is a superlative lens. i struggle to imagine people will pay this much more for the tamron
The Tamron has way better build quality, VC, looks better, has weather resistance, has better coatings and isn't that much bigger than the Nikon all for a very reasonable price considering what you are getting. If it is optically as good or better than the Nikon and the AF preforms well it will be the one to get and the best value for the money as far as 85s go, unless of course you really want/need the 85mm f/1.4 and can pay for it.
Josh152: So basically Canon finally caught up to the D7100.
Wow too easy lol.
osan: I've just looked through the new Pentax K1 comments and non of the "what, no 4k video" mania is going on there. This is a weird/suspicious state of affairs to say the least.
Its not weird or suspicious. It's because Canon traditionally has been considered the go to brand for DSLR video. They even had a 1DX iteration made specifically for video. So people expected them to be leading the charge into 4K. Whereas Pentax is just barely getting into the FF game. Just finally having a FF camera is a s huge deal for Pentax users and over shadows any missing features.
So basically Canon finally caught up to the D7100.
Photo Pete: Shhh! Don't tell the Full Frame fanboys that their Full Frame is a cropped sensor.
God you m4/3s users like to project your inferiority complex concerning your chosen sensor size on to others. It is really getting old. FF users don't' care at all a bigger format is available. They also know Full Frame is short for the full 35mm frame and as such refers to a very specific sensor size only and is not and never has been meant to convey superiority. They know it was invented to help film SLR users with the transition to digital by using familiar terms like crop and full frame to explain how their lenses would work with the new DSLRs which were APS-C.
But m4/3s users like you seem all butt hurt because you think FF and crop are meant to convey that one is Superior and one is inferior instead. Like you're constantly afraid your camera is being called inferior so you have to prove it's not. Honestly to most FF users posts like yours make m4/3s users seem like a bunch of children that are afraid their sibling got the better toy and are now throwing a tantrum over it.