Tamron 24-70 rip off?

Started Dec 7, 2012 | Discussions thread
cyainparadise Veteran Member • Posts: 5,577
Wrong information

MITDelay wrote:

wrz wrote:

For me the question is: why it doesn't have stabilization?. It would be great to have optical stabilization in this lens with Sony mount. Maybe Tamron thinks people are too stupid too read manual and switch off in camera stabilization with their lenses. And too stupid to notice their Sony pricing is not fair. On paper this is the best video standard zoom.

Sigma doesn't do this with their Sony mount stabilized lenses...

I am almost certain its becuase sony wants to rip its own customers off. Sony bought tamron so as a sony customer, its not a "3rd" party lens anymore! Of course they can add stablization! but they just used the excuse that alpha cameras already have steady shot to remove it and rip off sony owners. Sony alsways said adding stablization in the body will reduce lens prices, they should stuff this statement up their.... don'tbe mistaken about sony. throughout the company's history they been trying to millk every penny from their most loyal customers like betamax, duo memory sticks, etc. its only becuase canikon beats them in ff cameras that they have to open the hotshoe to 3rd party products on the a99, otherwise....

Sony did not buy Tamron. Sony owns about 11% of Tamron, and is their second largest holder of Tamron's stock.

Just because they own a share of Tamron, doesn't mean they control anything that Tamron does. They may have a seat on Tamron's board of directors that is comparable to the percent of the company that they own, but the BOD do not set the way the company operates. They select the CEO and other high-up execs, but do not have a direct say in the company.

When Bill Gates was CEO of Microsoft, it was reported that he owned shares of Apple. However, he didn't OWN Apple because of it.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow