CP+ 2018: First look at new Tamron FE-mount 28-75mm F2.8

Apparently the Sony 24-70 2.8 GM is rather soft compared to the 10-year-old Canon, and given the popularity of 2.8 standard zooms if this is any better, or at least comparable at a far lower price point it should do extremely well. Sony glass has made their systems cost-prohibitive for a lot of people who've liked the look of the A7 series - does make me wonder whether they've been subsidising their bodies with expensive lenses, so how does that model change with Sigma and Tamron undercutting them?

For me though, losing the 2mm on the wide end turns this lens from 'brilliant!' to 'a bit of a compromise'.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

Hi, please could you provide a link where it shows the Sony 24-70/2.8 is soft?

For reference a quick google and the first three that came up all say it’s super sharp:
https://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Sony-FE-24-70mm-f-2.8-GM-Lens.aspx
https://northrup.photo/sony-24-70-f2-8-g-master-gm-review/
https://phillipreeve.net/blog/review-sony-fe-2-824-70mm-gm/

Mar 4, 2018permalink

cricnours

@Rob : look there :
https://www.dxomark.com/sony-fe-24-70mm-f2-8-gm-review-best-zoom-in-the-range/
Clearly not sharper than the Canon, quite in pair with the Nikon, which is not really a beast. As a Sony shooter I can blame this brand to sell very expensive lenses regarding performances. :-((

Mar 4, 2018permalink

https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2016/04/sony-goes-world-class-the-24-70mm-f2-8-gm-mtf-and-variance-tests/

@cricnours
Thanks for the link. An interesting read. Shame they haven’t tested the lens on a higher resolution sensor (like an A7rii or A7riii), so we have a fairer comparison... however it does still look like the Canon lens is sharper.

To me the biggest issue with the Sony is the size and weight. Corner sharpness wide-open is irrelevant to me for portrait subjects, for landscape / architecture id always be stepping down anyway. I’m waiting with anticipation on the results of this Tamron 28-75/2.8 which comes in at only 500g... a much more suitable weight for general purpose/travel.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

brendon1000

Lens rentals tests multiple copies and they found the GM to be every bit as good as any of the competition.

While I find DXOMark sensor testing to be very good their lens testing has been abysmal. Many a times my findings with real world experience completely contradicts their findings.

Mar 4, 2018*permalink

As brenden says Lens Rentals tests multiple copies - 10 of each, in fact.

They are also the only company who test Sony lenses on an optical bench, DXOmark rely on software and sensor based testing.

The 24-70GM is not 'rather soft' compared to the Canon. They found it hair's breath sharper in fact. The takeaway was there's nothing to choose between Canon and Sony at this FL.

They also tested the Canon 70-200/2.8 and found it better than the Sony and the 16-35/2.8 Sony better than the Canon.

Mar 4, 2018*permalink

Hi Rob,
Tony Northrup has done some good comparisons of the Sony, Canon and Nikon
Here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVgNVoWNc7M
And here https://youtu.be/zlRRt7hbryY?t=793 from about 13 minutes.

Of course he may have a dud copy of the Sony, as is always possible any time a lens seems overly soft etc etc.

I'd have cited my source in the original post - but citing any print or YouTube pundit on here always seems to be incredibly divisive. Awaiting 'Tony Northrup is an idiot' flame in 3...2...1...

RubberDials - definitely interesting that the Lens Rentals result was so different. I wonder whether there were QA/variation issues earlier in production which may have since been corrected? Who knows.

Mar 5, 2018*permalink

@FodgeandDurn
Thanks, as always, good to get multiple views. I don't think Tony Northrup is particarly against Sony, in fact he's often quite an advocate so cannot see an reason he'd mark down the lens unless he had good reason to. If it'd been Matt Granger (TheNikonGuy), then that might have been more divisive, although even he as of late seems to be ok with Sony these days. I think when a small subset of reviews show vastly poorer results, then that speaks more around QC issues - that should be unacceptable for a GM priced lens.

Mar 5, 2018permalink

I'm not really in the market for the FE 24-70/2.8 anyway, just too heavy for me (886g). I prefer shooting smaller primes but do own the FE 24-105/4.0 (660g) for when I want the versatility of a zoom. However this Tamron 28-75/2.8 has peaked my interest as it's over 20% lighter (550g) despite being a whole stop faster . If it's sharp wide-open, then F2.8 is already into prime territory for me. I don't really use 24mm on the zoom, i have dedicated wide angle primes for that which go much wider... so 28mm seems a good compromise for weight.

Mar 5, 2018permalink

@Rob
It says right there in the Phillip Reeve review that the GM @70mm/2.8 isn't that good. The copies of Photozone and DxOMark obviously have the same problem. I don't care if the GM is any more or less soft than the L (after all the GM is heavier and pricier). What I care is whether a 28-75mm design is optically better.

Mar 5, 2018permalink

@ibell - that’s not my take away from his review at all:
“The sharpness of this lens is stunning, especially when it’s taken into account, that this is a zoom lens. At least from 24-50mm, this lens can keep up with many of the best prime lenses and it’s the sharpest native 35mm option in the system for landscape photography. Even at its weakest spot, the 70mm setting, the performance is not bad. The center is already very sharp wide open and the FE 2.8/24-70 sharpens up across the whole frame when the lens gets stopped down”

Mar 5, 2018permalink

If you read all the way down to the conclusion, he’s so impressed with the lens that he ends up building his system around it. So I’m not sure at which point you managed to read that he didn’t think the lens was that good... ?

Mar 5, 2018permalink

(unknown member)

I tested GM lens from B&H with different copies but the sharpness is not impressive compared to Tamron and Canon 24-70mm F2.8.

Mar 6, 2018permalink

I like it a lot. Insead of simply adding anonther 24-70mm the offer a different apporach: a lense that seems matched in size for a walkabout or travel situation.
The GM zoom to me is just too big and bloated for a body of this size.
Nice one. Keep it up Tamron

Mar 3, 2018permalink

mikeodial

Another massive lens. This would not be my solution for a walkabout lens on my Sony a7RII

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Its much smaller than the GM isnt it

Mar 3, 2018permalink

mikeodial

Yes, it probably is, just looking for a smaller walkabout, quality lens that takes advantage of the smaller profile of the camera. Right now I have an old (but good) Minolta 35-70mm 3.5 Macro MD manual lens which takes up much less space than this one. It seems we have to go big on all these lenses making the camera much more intrusive and having to make decisions about how much bulk we want to carry around. But that's just my opinion.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Seeky

Your other zoom options are the FE 28-70 or the 24-70 f4 OSS. Both are not massive. The latter is better and faster than the former. You have options.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

The resulte by the 24-105 f4 look very good too

Mar 3, 2018permalink

mikeodial

thanks

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Depends, can you deal with not being able to shoot wider than f4? Most of these zooms for full frame mirrorless are going to be large due to physics. If you want a zoom that shoots 2.8 or wider it’s gonna come at a sacrifice of being bigger and heavier.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

SteveAnderson

Yeah Physics is physics.

If you want a small lens you gotta have a small sensor.

This lens is really very small and light weight. It wont get much better than this for f2.8.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

taruaS

Then you should not have bought a full-frame camera.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

Thus also why it starts at 28mm - it makes making it a bit more compact possible

Mar 4, 2018permalink

Joed700

Only 28mm at the wide end?

Mar 3, 2018permalink

ijm5012

The lens is a 28-75, so looks like it. Well done detective!

Mar 3, 2018permalink

SteveAnderson

Its an excellent portrait lens.

24mm isnt very wide either, so i prefer this, and an actual wide lens like Tamron 15-30/2.8

Mar 4, 2018permalink

waldoh

Hoping this zoom matches the quality of the G2 zooms for a similar price.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Makes perfect sense to me. I mean 24mm isn't that wide and interesting, and this lens is ideal in a two lens kit with the 12-24mm or 14mm/18mm/21mm primes.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

DesoloZantas

Awesomely designed just wish it had OIS in it

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Barney Britton

It doesn't really need to, thanks to Sony IBIS but it's possible that VC might be included in hypothetical Canon / Nikon versions.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

DesoloZantas

Panasonic and Olympus prooves you can never have too much stabilization

Mar 3, 2018permalink

marc petzold

Barney, IBIS only onto Mk. II & III, i do have the original A7, for instance.
But this Tamron isn't wide enough for my needs.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

zzzxtreme

Marc, I'm afraid us owners of Mk1 will be forgotten. We don't get amymore firmware and perhaps no more lens with oss

Mar 4, 2018permalink

DesoloZantas

I know you all are flaming this idea but watch Sony do it in the future just like how they didn't believe in touch screens and in camera stabilization. But they got it now, this is innovation, it's gonna happen. Sony is about finish hitting the sealing soon watch, once the perfect the video capability they focus on lens innovation.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

Awesome. Expanding and growing options for Sony E-mount users! Love it. This Tamron looks good.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

JoeTheSemiPro

Mixed feelings. Zoom range is great for my every day use, f2.8 is plenty in most situations, and makes it easier to shoot a few videos as well (though no optical stabilization in lens, just in body).

However, I shot a lot with my 55mm 1.8 which ... and how often would I regret not having the sharpness of the 55 when using the tamron?

At the lower end, I have the 16-35 f4, with image stabi. At 16mm I can even shoot vlog style videos, and it also takes nice pictures at 35.

For portraits, is 70mm going to be enough? I'd probably regret not putting on my 90mm 2.8, which is just so sharp with nice bokeh ...

Sure, it's great to have one lens for travel, but often the 55 1.8 works fine in many situations.

Difficult problem ...

Mar 2, 2018permalink

taruaS

Sharpness is the most overated aspect of lenses. Perhaps for product photography it is required but many of the greatest photographs ever taken are quite soft with very poor dynamic range. People often only worry about technical aspects if they have no vision, no subject, no talent.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

paul wassermann

Difficult problem for you, but not for many others who don't have the zooms and primes you already use. Strikes me as a excellent value for those who don't have the Sony 2.8 24-70

Mar 3, 2018permalink

I have the same setup along with 12-24G. Simply missing faster 35mm, and 16-35ZA isn't really that ideal @ 35mm/4, at least for my copy.
Either this Tamron, 16-35GM, or some sort of 35mm/1.8 prime will eventually replace my 16-35ZA.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

JoeTheSemiPro

Ibell: The sony 35 1.4 is nice, but really expensive and heavy. I was tempted by the cheap 35 2.8 from rokinon or whoever makes it, but at this point, my set up has too many lenses...

If the Tamron is really sharp, I might just get it.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Searching

Small zooms that extend barrels belong in the Smithsonian.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

I mean basically every single 24-70 lens extends from the barrel....

Mar 2, 2018permalink

TatoCharrua

Which one Does not?..and the 18-105 isn't Fe

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Seeky

Good point, luckily Sony treats us with the Sony FE PZ 28-135mm f/4 G OSS which doesn't have an extending barrel.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Seeks, that lens is DEFINITELY not a small lens though.... if you want to start talking about larger zooms then yes plenty of them don’t extend from the barrel.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

Searching
Very few zooms don't extend. Most people like extending zooms because they are smaller when not extended which is good for packing and traveling.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

maksa

You had this lens in your hands and you don’t know, what is its thread diameter?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Are you saying that when you try out a lens briefly at a show you always check the thread diameter?

Mar 4, 2018permalink

M Chambers

What's the price point?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

carlgorski

28 really?

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

I definitely will buy it if the price is right. F2.8 and smaller and lighter than the Sony GM?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

@carl: yes really. Why should the copy something that already exists twice?
This is less Bulky due to the 28

Mar 3, 2018permalink

sportyaccordy

I'm still miffed it's 28 at the wide end. Hopefully someone follows up with a 24-xx F/4. Happy they have made this though and that there appears to be a signal that Canikon will be jumping into the fray. In the meantime I will keep adapting my 24-105 STM and shooting fast native primes.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

They want to sell you a something-28mm UWA later on down the road, that's why.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

sportyaccordy

They could still sell an xx-24 later on. Or an xx-28.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

jc1000

Sorry, don't want to carry two lens. 24-70 is the proven sweet spot of a workhorse lens.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Mared

This lens is going to be a home run for Tamron. Just look at it - we all know it's going to have very good performance and it will be priced below $1500 which makes it extremely attractive to many, many Sony shooters who don't want to fork over for the GMaster. I'll buy this lens just because of size/weight factor - it's going to be a great addition along with my G Master - can't wait and I'm not a Prima Donna - I'll be able to soldier along without the missing 4MM when I don't have the GMaster attached to my A7R3...

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Photomonkey

Sell a lens and get Sony’s 24-105 f4. It is reported to be excellent.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Lucas_

Heavy...!

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Vanitas Photo

If the extra 4 mms ensure better IQ I am totally happy abou it.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

I have a 24-105 for my A99ii. Previously my widest was 28mm. Quite honestly I don't see a major difference between 24 and 28.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

CaptainCrunchy

I bought the Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 with a NIkon mount for $200 on sale a few years ago. With the mirrorless mark up and possibly improved glass this should sell for under $600,
Did they mention the price yet?

Today for anyone wanting to get in to FF photography, The D610 can be had for $600 and a similar Tamron 28-75 F/2.8 for $200. That is a formidable combo. Add an $80 50mm F/1.8 prime and you are set with some of the best IQ around.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

brendon1000

You do realise that its likely that over the 15 years that the Tamron lens was released Tamron may have updated the optical formula to something better ?

This lens other than the focal length bares little comparison to the older 28-75mm f2.8 DSLR lens.

The older 28-75mm is a pretty good lens no doubt but this one should be much better and it will be priced much higher than $600.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

@CaptainCrunchy
It's a new design - the article tells you that.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

carlgorski

D610 for $600? Where?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

multisystem

If you see a D610 in good condition for $700 grab it. It's an excellent camera and with the same quality lens won't be that much behind a D850 in actual visible IQ on a web page.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

JoeTheSemiPro

D610? Google 'spots on sensor'. Great camera, but no warranty, no deal.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Hannu108

It was the D600 that was plagued with the oils spots.

I did your 'spots on sensor' Google search and two first pages I checked had no D610 hits. There were stories of different Nikons, Sonys, Pentaxes and even Leicas with 'spots on sensor'...

Mar 3, 2018permalink

multisystem
For a web page a cell phone image is competitive with a D810. ;-) A D810 is massive overkill for a web page image.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

This is the best preview we can get of the future CaNikon mirrorless mounts. Tamron wouldn't settle down on the optical design of this zoom lens if they didn't know what CaNikon are planning for, as the real volume is in those 2 systems, no matter what Sony has been doing for the last 5 years. What do I see? That the new CaNikon mounts will also be telecentric, just like E mount, so the expected size reductions compared to DSLR lenses are just not gonna happen. BTW, I think that Tamron can actually make a DSLR version of this lens, given how deep the rear "adapter tube" is on this one.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

samhain

What makes you think that, given that Nikon & Canon have been so reluctant to share lens information with third party lens companies in the past? It's possible they've decided to share info for their upcoming future mirrorless cameras, but history says otherwise.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Barney Britton

More like Tamron is watching the market, and has concluded that Nikon and Canon would be insane not to start creating full-frame mirrrorless cameras at some point in the near future.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

It's easy with Nikon, as they have OEM'd them for quite some time now, but they must surely have rumaged through both's patent filings to at least get a nice guesstimate.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

@CaptainCrunchy
'Tamron wouldn't settle down on the optical design of this zoom lens if they didn't know what CaNikon are planning for.'

Sorry but the Batis line is e-mount only. Not only would Tamron quite obviously make a lens designed for only one mount - they just did.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

That's Tamron OEM-ing a prime for Zeiss, they just do what the customer asks them to. Hopefully the Batis line can be mfg. in future CaNikon mirrorless mounts, too.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

davev8

no canon FF MILC will be EF mount

Mar 2, 2018permalink

ecka84

@Barney Britton
Yes. But what if Nikon and Canon actually are insane? :) They have already missed so many time points in the recent past, since 5 years ago. It's not even funny anymore. Leica is making FF mirrorless cameras now, but not Canon or Nikon. That's ridiculous. Pentax tried not making a FF DSLR at all costs for as long as they could, and now what? Nobody really cares about the K-1, it's too far behind, with poor lens selection and no new third party optics. If, let's say, Canon releases a FF M camera tomorrow, why would anyone expect them to treat their FF mirrorless differently from their APS-C mirrorless? Who would seriously consider to invest in a "system" of two slow primes and bunch of kit-lenses? Jeez ... there are more cameras than lenses in EF-M system. Literally (or numerically :D) 7 lenses vs 8 cameras. Are they nuts? I think that's a valid question.

Mar 3, 2018*permalink

davev8

ecka84 about the Canon M lenses .....look at the sony APS-c lenses tell me how many sony has that a 1 sharp 2 compact 3 affordable ....i think you will find lenses with ALL 3 traits canon has many more ...and as sony has not released a APS-c lens for 4 years that's not going to get better for sony uses that brought in to MILC for a compact system...i whild like you to give me a number ...i think sony sort of have 1 lens ....after being accustomed to the M lenses the only sony i would be happy with a canon badge is the sony E 50mm F1.8 OSS

Mar 4, 2018permalink

ecka84

Honestly, I couldn't care less about the APS-C. Sony has twice as much E lenses (6 primes, 9 or 10 zooms) and plenty of third party options, but I'm not going to use any of those. I'm talking about the commitment and rational investment. Even if there will be a FF Canon M camera soon, we'd still be forced to use all kinds of adapters on it for a the next decade or so. And maybe I could live with that. But I really can't imagine Canon putting their best tech into such camera (at least making it a mirrorless 5D4). I'm afraid that it would be 6D2 kind of failure all over again, escorted by a boring "compact" kit lens. Because in their mind, we, enthusiast photographers do not exist and there are only consumers and professionals. All the mirrorless system compactness trend is just one big stupid mistake. Fortunately, now Sony kind of sort of starting to realize that, judging by their newest, thicker a7 series with larger batteries and stuff.

Mar 4, 2018*permalink

milkod2001

I presume if it will perform at 24-70 g2 levels it would cost around $1500 to start with and after a few months will go for $1200. This lens could be great value compared to 24-70 GM if it will perform well.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

I surely hope it will be cheaper than that. At $1500 it makes little sense for anyone to prefer to buy it ... a little cheaper but starting at 28 instead of 24.
My guess and hope is that it will be max $999 at launch (basically competing against the sony F4 version) and, probably in the future we will see a 24-70/2.8 SP version at around $1.500.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

brendon1000

From rumors it seems this will match the price point of the 24-70mm f4 at launch i.e. $1200 which feels a little steep but hopefully the price will settle down to below $1k after a year.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

@badi
It's much lighter than the GM. If it also fixes the soft 70mm corners, sunstars, etc of the GM, $1500 is easily justified for me. I doubt any 24-70/2.8 SP will be lightweight.

Mar 5, 2018permalink

LHMF

It looks like a suitable/organic build for the sony alphas then the Sigmas with the "extention tube". But the optical results must be as good as the Zeiss (except the 24-70mm/f4), Sony or Sigma Art lenses.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

walker2000

Does it support Sony in-camera lens correction?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

QuietOC

It should. So far third-party E-mount lenses have included lens compensation.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

Droster

Anyone wanna hazard a guess of the filter size? 72mm?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Kharan

I'd say smaller, maybe 62mm.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Lucas_

Awesome clean design. I hope it's light as it looks. Let's see the price! May be a good replacement for my not-so sharp Sony/Zeiss FE24-70 f4...!

Mar 2, 2018permalink

I doubt it will be sharper than the 24-70 - that's a very sharp lens. It's a lot easier to make a good 28-70 than a 24-70 though.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

petros vittas

why they don't put f stops on the ring for video? so difficult? click less for video use.
like 35,50,85 zeiss so useful

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

Sutlore

Looks so compact, lighter than 24-105 as well. WOW!

Mar 2, 2018permalink

kribee2

Next a E mount (aps-c) 17-50 2.8 would be nice

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

Kharan

YES!

Mar 2, 2018permalink

That is an optically superb lens.
I've bought it (the IS version) for canon years ago, but unfortunately it just focused where it wanted two. If there was some bright and colorful thing anywhere in the image it simply ignored my selected focus points :) ... had to go for the twice as expensive canon 17-55/2.8 ... I simply hope that in the word of focusing directly on the sensor tamron will finally make the focusing to work :)

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

GabrielZ

Nice lens, I wonder if it performs better than the Sony equivalent?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Well since there isn't a Sony equivalent, the answer has to be - yes.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Diablorini

I think it is awesome that both Tamron and Sigma are now officially offering FE lenses, I have yet to have a bad experience with high end Tamron lenses for A mount and see no reason why that would change for FE.

One can hope that this means that from this point forward we can expect to see FE being part of the supported mounts when new lenses are announced from Tamron, and Sigma, at least that is my hope and what I think is the real story of these last few days.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Lucas_

IMO Tamron, although later, is showing a better design approach than Sigma by making a new design for FE instead of a simple adaptation on their DSLR Art line - too large and heavy for the quite smaller Sony mirrorless cameras! I liked Sigmas a lot when I had Minoltas and several Sonys DSLR's, but now with the A7xx.., I only kept the superb 150mm F2.8 DG HSM Macro plus the Sony EA-LA3 adapter.

Mar 4, 2018*permalink

Diablorini

yeah I have that same lens, the 150mm Macro, and the Tamron 70-200 and the Sony Sal 70-400G2 among others which I use on the A6300 with the LAEA3, works great I think.

One can hope that either Sigma or Tamron's next 150-600 comes with E mount :)

Mar 4, 2018permalink

JEROME NOLAS

If it is "sharp as hell" might be a ticket to Sony FF league for many ...:)

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Ilia Snopchenko

Looks very sexy - and this is from someone who digs the styling of the older Tamrons.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

aris14

A clever dad and mom of a clever family, I guess.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Kitschi

what a bulky lens, there i see no reason for putting this on my A7II instead of taking my Nikon D7100 with better AF

the same problem most of the zoom lenses from Sony for E-Mount have, big and bulky

so I go on with my Loxia 50 and other primes lenses from the past

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Brandneutral

A bulky lens? Compared to what? Not sure if serious.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Donnie AI

I am a D7200 shooter, And having shot with Nikon's 24-70 and the 17-55 (Which I think is about the same size of this), I think this lens combined with the Sony FF bodies, shouldn't be that bulky, I even think it's lighter than my Nikon combo.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

dextonsweden

I have the D7100 with Sigma 17-50/2.8 OS, it's a (765+565g = 1330g) combo. My A7RM2 and this Tamron 28-75/2.8 would be a (625+550 = 1175g) combo.

So the Tamron is a bit longer but I don't see that being a major issue. After all this is a FF lens and provided this Tamron isn't super terrible at f/2.8-3.5 it will offer IQ advantages over my Nikon+Sigma combo.

My guess for the price would be $800-1000. Not over $1000 with "only" a 28mm wide.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

Banhmi

<$2000 A7III + Tamron saying: "this lens will form the basis for a new range of lenses in the future, designed for full-frame mirrorless" = Sony FF looking pretty attractive!

Mar 2, 2018permalink

I read that as "we are testing the waters with this lens and if we sell enough of this to make a decent profit we'll announce a few more in future".

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Jonath

I read it as "we know that Nikon and Canon will release FF Mirrorless bodies so we want to get ahead of the game by designing zoom lenses optimised specifically for these types of cameras". So I'd assume some optimisation for shorter flange focal distance and as the article says, silent motors for the more hybrid video / photo usage.
Does make Sigma's 'Samyang-a-like' extension tube decision seem a bit half-baked, especially when you see Tokina optimising for those shorter flange distances too with the Firin.

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

For me the 3 series of the A7 is finally a mature system... i am not and never was into Sony, but this had finally converted me. Happily i am not in a hurry, so i'll just wait a bit more ... when A74 will come out, i'll probably get the A73 + this tamron for a combineed price of around $2000 ... i think that's about it for me :)) good buy canon, good bye Fuji :)

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

EcoR1

Dpreview! Stop spreading misinformation. There is no freaking “FE-mount”. There is only E-mount. You are confusing people and because of it there are frequent forum post like this: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4260185

Mar 2, 2018permalink

jasonzhusj

it's E mount, but FE help indicates it's image circle is large enough for the full frame censor

Mar 2, 2018permalink

FE is a lens designation such as Di, DX, FX etc. There is no FE-mount, its a e-mount lens. Just like there is no DX-mount and FX-mount. It just F mount.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

EcoR1

@jasonzhusj. FE-mount doesn’t help anyone, it creates confusion as you can see from the post I linked. FE is only a lens family name that mostly Sony uses from their full frame E-mount lenses.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Andrei C

Correctly will be Tamron FE 28-75mm F2.8

Mar 2, 2018permalink

100% Agree. It is an FE E-Mount lens. Not FE-Mount lens. You would think dpreview out of everyone would know the correct terminology!

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Mark Ross

Oh come on, we know it means "full frame E mount" - FE mount is just more concise way of saying it. Stop being so pedantic.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

leonche64

There was one person confused and it was explained in a single post.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

jasonzhusj

why are you so easily confused

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Wanderer23

Yawn

Mar 2, 2018permalink

anwiko

Don't panic, there are adapters for everything in the Sony world.

Mar 3, 2018permalink

I'd far prefer it was easy to distinguish full frame and crop lenses than some ultimate pedant land where everything is just 'E-Mount'.

Whenever I think about ordering a Pentax K1/II I need to delve deep into arcane forum threads to discover which K mount lenses cover the 35mm image circle, and then make note of them on a spreadsheet. Thank bloody heavens DPReview have made it easy to know what we're dealing with right here in the title.

Very very few people buy FE glass for crop Sony bodies, and those who do are power users, as opposed to casual snappers accidentally ordering $2000 FE glass for their A6000.

There are very few cases where pedantry ought to win out over user-friendliness. Areas such as neurosurgery I will grant you.

Mar 4, 2018*permalink

Can you imagine if a tech website referred to Mac computers as "Mack computers"? Yes, we alp know Mack probably means Mac, but why use lazy unofficial terminology if youre supposed to be a website that expertises in that topic? Get it right.

Mar 4, 2018permalink

Mar 4, 2018permalink

That's a flawed example though. Calling a Mac a 'Mack' would simply be a mistake, it would not be a defensible editorial decision taken to provide accessibility and clarity. Referring to Full Frame E-Mount as FE-mount is useful and clear shorthand.

A quick look around the web shows that plenty of other sites are doing the same thing.

I can't see a single reason why adhering to the 'technical terminology' would be more useful than the shorthand, which allows you to see in one word what would otherwise have been a full sentence.

Mar 5, 2018permalink

Both are incorrect uses. There is no such thing as FE-Mount. End of story.

Mar 5, 2018permalink

Rich Evans

If it is half as good as the GM then we know it will kick some ass. Let's hope the price is also good since it is still a Tamron.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

They claim it's as good as GM :O

Mar 2, 2018permalink

The fact that they didn't include it in the "SP" group, as well as the 28mm starting point hint towards a much lower price. Historically tamron lenses were very good optically even the asking price was much lower.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Rich Evans

@nand I'll belibebit when I see bit.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

So will I, just mentioning what they claimed that's all...

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Rich Evans

Sure thing. :)

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Brev00

Tamron is no longer the value oriented company it once was. Their newer lenses are not as expensive as OEM lens but are much higher than in the past. Have the 70-200 2.8 for example. I would expect the price of this lens to be a significant bump up from the earlier versions. Maybe in the $699-$799 range.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

https://m.ebay.es/itm/Tamron-AF-28-75mm-F-2-8-XR-Di-LD-A09-Lens-Nikon-Mount-Ship-From-EU-Nuevo/252699628324?hash=item3ad6125324:g:lb4AAOSwXxhZ-v3Y

Hope it is a high performing one across the range. Have been looking for something covering 35-50mm to complement my 12-24G and 70-200G, but
35mm F2.8 is F2.8 and replaceable by such a welterweight zoom
35mm F1.4 is too bulky for a prime
24-70GM is fine at 35mm but not good at 50-70mm, so essentially a bulky and heavy 24-35mm
So either this + 12-24G or 16-35GM + 70-200G for casual travelling

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

TonyPM

I suppose it is going to be expensive at first, but when it hits the $300 price point, it's going to be a best seller. Just give Canikon time to get into the FFMless world....

That means the next decade.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

alextardif

Why would a high performing, full frame, F2.8 zoom hit $300? Didn't think this one through, did ya?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

darlot

I think he has a point, remember the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 at $300-$350 range that was shaper and lighter than the Canon 24-70 MKI ? The Tamron has a macro mode mode which allows the lens to focus closer than the Canon 24-70.

I still have both lenses and the Tamron is still my fav for travelling.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

TonyPM

Alextardif remember it's not an SP lens. Tamron has the SP 24-70 2.8 VC and then they have their 28-75 2.8 on various reflex mounts. The 28-75 is the cheaper version.
When FF mirrorles gets to be the norm Tamron will come up with the SP 24-70 2.8 .

Mar 2, 2018permalink

alextardif

Alright, well maybe I'm wrong... though I'm quite certain if this lens gets anywhere near $300 Tamron won't know how to make them fast enough. There's not a single emount FE zoom worthy of mention that's ever been anywhere near this price point, by a long margin.

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

TonyPM

Just to show what I mean.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

alextardif

Ok, don't get carried away... the lens you're trying to compare it to is like, what 10-12 years old or older? Still listed on B&H for $500-450. That's far from reality of what this new lens will cost at launch, or even a year down the road. Again, do you really think a lens that Tamron claims to be a contender with the likes of Sony's GM 24-70 (which costs $2,200) to go for $300 in the near future? Especially when there's NOTHING like it in the native format? Anyway, this is turning into a pointless debate, so I'm out. Peace.

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

@alexatardit - yes, that's what he said in the first comment later = "That means the next decade."

Anyway, now the full price of the old tamron is $450 on bhphoto and you can probably get one in used and good condition for $200 ... also keep in mind that the new one has also a bit of weather sealing, and of course the "all new design", which will get the price up a bit, etc.

My personal opinion is that it has to be a little cheaper than the sony 24-70 F4 version to be really attractive. So that would be around $7-900 - at launch or after the A73 get also a bit cheaper :))

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

ttran88

E mount is the mount of the future!!

Mar 2, 2018permalink

ozturert

But not today, you say :)

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Featherchaser

The future is a dystopia then.

The future is choice-less? Such a stupid comment. MFT offers smaller and lighter lenses and DSLRs offer competing / better bodies for much cheaper (also with much better battery life) and medium format offers much higher resolution. But you're saying people won't care for any of that in the supposed future?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

JLRodriguez

In 2-3 years this will completely change out. The new a7III have enough battery than a DSLR.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Which DSLR body is better and much cheaper than A7III?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

KristinnK

Not necessarily better, but probably similarly good for much cheaper: Nikon D750.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

milkod2001

@KristinnK
D750 is over 4 years old and still fantastic. I own one and find very hard to find camera to upgrade to justify the cost of switching.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

TatoCharrua

No switch MF/AF?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

No and no focus hold button. Disappointing.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Actually I think users need to put pressure on third party manufacturers about this. A customisable lens button is part of the e-mount spec really. An aperture ring would be nice but it's understandable if it's not there, but a focus hold button always should be.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

virtualreality

Focus hold is outdated (same goes for focus and recompose).
Modern AF result is better when refocus.
There is a refocus button on the body BTW so you can tell the camera not to refocus unless...

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

@virtualreality
It's just called a focus hold button, it's fully customisable. That's the point of it.

You can set it to turn on Eye AF, Zebras, audio levels, viewfinder grid - whatever you want. It's really useful.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

virtualreality

Well you could consider calling it a custom button instead. Why create confusion?

Mar 2, 2018permalink

TatoCharrua

Actually is a prototype and they state that "* Specifications, appearance, functionality, etc. are subject to change without prior notice.",....so they can surprise us with a custom button and a switch....and that would be sooooo great!!

Mar 2, 2018permalink

@virtualreality
It doesn't create confusion, any more than Tv instead of S creates confusion for Canon users.

The button, in common with most things that have a name, retains the one it was born with. In the UK a TV listings mag is called the 'Radio Times' because when it launched the TV hadn't been invented. Everyone understands that it doesn't just provide radio listings.

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

silentstorm

I was hoping Tamron to re-release an improved version of their 28-100mm F2.8 lens from the old days. Great range & fast.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Brandneutral

That would be a big lens.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

silentstorm

In the film days it wasn't a big lens. Since this is not SP lens, Tamron technically could produce something similar.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

jwasturias

That would be a good range.
28-75 is a bit compromised either side for me.
For me it needs to b a minimum 28-85, which was a common range in the olden days, but not often in f2.8.
I use the Minolta 28-135 f4.0 -4.5 via the LA-EA4 adapter on my A7r.
Excellent lens, except for minimum focus distance and flare and video..

Mar 2, 2018permalink

kobakokh

We must ask to Tamron for create 24-120/4 or 24-105/4 normal quality and cheap lens for both of systems and iuts will be top sales product by Tamron.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Elgsdyr

Well, if they'll be making some affordable quality tele zooms I'd be happy to slap them on my APS-C a6000.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

Between this and the Sony 24-105/4 G , I see very little reason now for the Sony-Zeiss 24-70/4.

(Of course, this statement is conditional on how image quality turns out on production copies)

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

privater

You can barely find any contemporary lens worse than 24-70/4 ZA...I'll give Tamron a thumb up.

Mar 2, 2018permalink

http://www.opticallimits.com/sonyalphaff/867-zeiss2470f4oss?start=1
http://www.opticallimits.com/canon_eos_ff/798-canon2470f4?start=1

Oh yeah? Do you consider the Canon 24-70/4L a contemporary lens because the Sony is much better.

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon-EF-24-70mm-F4L-IS-USM-on-Canon-EOS-5DS-R-versus-Sony-FE-Carl-Zeiss-Vario-Tessar-T-STAR-24-70mm-F4-ZA-OSS-on-Sony-A7R-II__1074_1009_1253_1035

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

I actually owned the FE2470z and was pretty happy with it, especially in terms of it's rending, colour output, micro-contrast and sharpness... etc. Also, it was super light for a FF zoom lens and complimented the FE55/1.8 nicely. If it'd been a kit lens people would have been gushing over it I think. However, at the price it was launched, and the reported QC issues, I fully understand the harsh treatment it received.

I sold it within a year, however, due to relatively slow apperture / Zoom-range ratio - as I found it was more fun for me to carry two small bodies with primes (an RX1 and an A7) than single body with zoom and prime. The extra stop of light / reduced DoF of the Tamron would make a good travel combo though.

Mar 2, 2018*permalink

ozturert

Zeiss is superb in the middle zone of the frame, but bad to really bad in other zones (you don't even need to go to edges to see high levels of blur).

Mar 2, 2018permalink