Reading mode: Light Dark

Tamron's rumored 14-200mm and 14-300mm lenses--who's excited?!

Go to last post
OrdinarilyInordinate

OrdinarilyInordinate

Veteran Member
Messages
3,741
Solutions
17
Reaction score
1,347
I'll be interested to read specs, reviews and user experiences on both lenses when they appear.
 
OrdinarilyInordinate said:
http://www.43rumors.com/tamron-patents-an-extreme-14-300mm-micro-four-thirds-lens-design/

I hope they get made and don't cost an arm and half a leg... 14-300mm would be such an excellent situational convenience, as long as Tamron manages to keep it light. Although it did well with making a reasonably sized and weighted APS-C 18-300mm recently.
Click to expand...
I will continue to patiently wait (and my pocket book with even more patience) for the Olympus 300mm 1:4 PRO lens.
 
I have the original Olympus 14-150mm for the times I need an all purpose zoom and have been considering the latest version for weather sealing, but having seen this Tamron rumor I'm going to wait. I don't really use superzoom lenses that much either, but the convenience such a lens can bring for certain touristy situations is difficult to shrug off. 14-300mm would be quite interesting. If it's extra soft at many focal lengths (or costs $1000), I'll skip it. I don't mind the lack of weather sealing on such a multi-purpose lens, if it's going to help keep the cost down.
 
Last edited:
Roger Engelken said:
OrdinarilyInordinate said:
http://www.43rumors.com/tamron-patents-an-extreme-14-300mm-micro-four-thirds-lens-design/

I hope they get made and don't cost an arm and half a leg... 14-300mm would be such an excellent situational convenience, as long as Tamron manages to keep it light. Although it did well with making a reasonably sized and weighted APS-C 18-300mm recently.
Click to expand...
I will continue to patiently wait (and my pocket book with even more patience) for the Olympus 300mm 1:4 PRO lens.
Click to expand...
300mm pro lens is something entirely different... A very specialized lens. Direct contrast with a "superzoom" lens. Other than both ending at 300mm, they don't have much else in common.
 
Last edited:
I am. If they can make 300mm a bit sharper then the Panny 100-300mm @ 300mm and can burst faster I'll pick one up.
 
OrdinarilyInordinate said:
http://www.43rumors.com/tamron-patents-an-extreme-14-300mm-micro-four-thirds-lens-design/

I hope they get made and don't cost an arm and half a leg... 14-300mm would be such an excellent situational convenience, as long as Tamron manages to keep it light. Although it did well with making a reasonably sized and weighted APS-C 18-300mm recently.
Click to expand...
It's nice that they're using lens stabilization on this, which is a must IMO. But 14mm at the wide end will probably KILL the long end unless this lens is going to be a monster size. I don't think a 14-300mm lens (a 21X zoom) will compare at 300mm to our existing 300mm lenses (because of their lower zooms), even though these lenses are not considered stellar at the long end.

There's no way a 21X zoom is going to get you those tack sharp BIF shots you crave. To be fair, Panasonic did create an amazing 14-140mm lens that's tack sharp at 140mm and 14mm, but I think there's a big difference between 10X and 21X. Besides that, the 14-140mm II from Panasonic is unique among long zooms for its sharpness at both ends. It would be very tough to exceed it.

So, no, I'm not excited about these lenses (jack of all trades but master of none?), but I like the fact that Tamron is on board.
 
Those are as unexciting as their 14-150 superzoom for MFT. And with cameras like Panasonic FZ1000 or Sony RX10 on the market, I don't see slow superzooms for MFT making much sense.

I don't understand Tamron at all. There's a whole in the MFT system in regards to fast variable aperture zooms. There's another whole on the telephoto end. But no, they decided to make exactly the same superzoom as Olympus and Panasonic offers. And even price it the same.

I just don't get it. If they'd made a decent weather-sealed 12-50 or 12-60 with f/2.8-4.0 aperture, that would be a bestseller. Instead, we get another redundant lens, and some patents for even more fairly useless lenses. I doubt Tamron will get anywhere in MFT world. They'll probably give up on it after their first try, as I just don't see how their 14-150 could sell in any meaningful numbers.
 
produce a very lightweight 250 or 300, f/5.6 or f/6.7 of reasonable quality and price to complement my 14-150 and 9-18!

Peter Del
 
OrdinarilyInordinate said:
I hope they get made and don't cost an arm and half a leg... 14-300mm would be such an excellent situational convenience, as long as Tamron manages to keep it light. Although it did well with making a reasonably sized and weighted APS-C 18-300mm recently.
Click to expand...
If it wasn't a Tamron there might be something to get excited about.

I can't image the image quality would be particularly good for a lens with that sort of range. It's tough enough for the 10x superzooms to reach acceptable quality, image a 20x+ ultra-zoom?
 
OrdinarilyInordinate said:
http://www.43rumors.com/tamron-patents-an-extreme-14-300mm-micro-four-thirds-lens-design/

I hope they get made and don't cost an arm and half a leg... 14-300mm would be such an excellent situational convenience, as long as Tamron manages to keep it light. Although it did well with making a reasonably sized and weighted APS-C 18-300mm recently.
Click to expand...
If you really want an answer to the title, then: not me. I can't stand superzooms. The size and weight of a telephoto for a lens that gets used mostly at much shorter FLs and is (usually) so optically compromised that it's good at nothing.

For those who like them, of course I hope it's superb and cheap. Adding to the m43 lens arsenal can only be a good thing.
 
I'm certainly interested to see what Tamron can come up with now they seem to be working on stabilised lenses.

Their 14-150mm was very well made, but lack of IS didn't make it a good match for my GM1.
 
Terminal Boy said:
I'm certainly interested to see what Tamron can come up with now they seem to be working on stabilised lenses.

Their 14-150mm was very well made, but lack of IS didn't make it a good match for my GM1.
Click to expand...
The 14-140mm II is an excellent lens and the OIS works well. I bought one for my girlfriend, but I like it, too!
 
jeffharris said:
OrdinarilyInordinate said:
I hope they get made and don't cost an arm and half a leg... 14-300mm would be such an excellent situational convenience, as long as Tamron manages to keep it light. Although it did well with making a reasonably sized and weighted APS-C 18-300mm recently.
Click to expand...
If it wasn't a Tamron there might be something to get excited about.

I can't image the image quality would be particularly good for a lens with that sort of range. It's tough enough for the 10x superzooms to reach acceptable quality, image a 20x+ ultra-zoom?
Click to expand...
True, although the pana-leica superzoom lenses on the Lumix series bridge cameras are quite good. I know there's less glass to worry about with the small sensor size, but I hope some day superzoom lenses will be improved enough for larger sensors.
 
Astrotripper said:
Those are as unexciting as their 14-150 superzoom for MFT. And with cameras like Panasonic FZ1000 or Sony RX10 on the market, I don't see slow superzooms for MFT making much sense.

I don't understand Tamron at all. There's a whole in the MFT system in regards to fast variable aperture zooms. There's another whole on the telephoto end. But no, they decided to make exactly the same superzoom as Olympus and Panasonic offers. And even price it the same.

I just don't get it. If they'd made a decent weather-sealed 12-50 or 12-60 with f/2.8-4.0 aperture, that would be a bestseller. Instead, we get another redundant lens, and some patents for even more fairly useless lenses. I doubt Tamron will get anywhere in MFT world. They'll probably give up on it after their first try, as I just don't see how their 14-150 could sell in any meaningful numbers.
Click to expand...

Agreed, I couldn't understand why they introduced a third 14-150 lens to the field. Why not fast primes? Fast teles? Fill some gaps rather than simply creating "me too" lenses. I wonder how that 14-150 is selling, given that there's no IS?
 
jeffharris said:
OrdinarilyInordinate said:
I hope they get made and don't cost an arm and half a leg... 14-300mm would be such an excellent situational convenience, as long as Tamron manages to keep it light. Although it did well with making a reasonably sized and weighted APS-C 18-300mm recently.
Click to expand...
If it wasn't a Tamron there might be something to get excited about.

I can't image the image quality would be particularly good for a lens with that sort of range. It's tough enough for the 10x superzooms to reach acceptable quality, image a 20x+ ultra-zoom?
Click to expand...

Well, their 75-300mm lens for Nikon DX is supposedly better/sharper than Nikon's own lens in the same price range. So maybe if they build specifically to m43 then maybe they can make a decent sharp lens for this market, also.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top