New Tamron Z Lens

After the 28-75mm 2.8 'rebadged' Tamron became a Nikon, there's this...

 

Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD Lens for Nikon Z

 

I wonder how many more Tamrons will be released in Z Mount and whether Sigma will decide to join the party?

It looks like there is cooperation between Tamron and Nikon. Tamron will probably only introduce Z mount lenses that don’t directly complete against similar Nikkor lenses.

 

This 70-300 looks like a low-end zoom that is only f6.3 at 300mm and has no optical stabilization @ $500. It looks like there is plenty of room for a Nikkor 79-300 that is f5.6 with VR, maybe even an S lens at close to $1000.

 

About ten years ago I tested a Tamron 70-300 in the F mount. Optically it was quite good, but construction is below average.

It looks like there is cooperation between Tamron and Nikon. Tamron will probably only introduce Z mount lenses that don’t directly complete against similar Nikkor lenses.

 

This 70-300 looks like a low-end zoom that is only f6.3 at 300mm and has no optical stabilization @ $500. It looks like there is plenty of room for a Nikkor 79-300 that is f5.6 with VR, maybe even an S lens at close to $1000.

 

About ten years ago I tested a Tamron 70-300 in the F mount. Optically it was quite good, but construction is below average.

 

I had the same experience. I got decent photos with it, but was disappointed in the build. Seems it was more "thrown together" than carefully assembly. A/F was quite noisy.

That Tamron 70~300 has been available in Sony mount for some time. Along with the 28~75 f/2.8 and matching 17~28 f/2.8. Their stylings are almost identical and they all have a 67mm filter thread.

None of them have VC because the cameras they're aimed at have excellent IBIS.

 

I have the twinned 17~28 and 28~75 for my Sony. They're more than adequately sharp and fairly compact by today's standards. No complaints about them so far.

 

Would I consider adding the 70~300? ...mmmm...maybe. I'd have to see some results first. The f/6.3 long-end aperture is a bit off putting, but if the IQ is good wide open it might be better than a bulkier f/4 lens that needs some stopping down before it delivers decent IQ.

 

And it's all relative. I have an old 300mm f/2.8 Tamron SP that had stunning performance in its day, but doesn't hold up on a high-res digital sensor until about f/5.6. It also weighs a ton and needs a hefty tripod. Not the sort of thing you just throw in the bag on the off chance of needing it. Whereas I can see that new Tamron being regularly toted about.

Among Nikon Z camera bodies, at least so far every FX body has IBIS, but every DX body does not. Nikon IBIS works quite well for shorter lenses, but so far, every Z Nikkor lens that reaches 200mm has optical VR, including e.g. the 24-200mm super zoom, and every Z Nikkor DX lens also has optical VR because the bodies don't have IBIS. (However, among shorter Z FX lenses that do not reach 200mm or above, only the 105/2.8 S macro has optical VR.

 

I think the lack of VR will be a major negative for the Tamron 70-300 for quite a few people, since IBIS is not going to be sufficient once you exceed 100mm, 150mm and the DX bodies don't even have that.

I think the lack of VR will be a major negative for the Tamron 70-300 for quite a few people, since IBIS is not going to be sufficient once you exceed 100mm, 150mm and the DX bodies don't even have that.

I disagree about its potential popularity. Not everyone is looking for ultimate sharpness, and those that are will probably go to the trouble of using a tripod or monopod, or some other means of camera support, and also look to be spending a lot more money than that Tamron costs.

 

Let's face it. It's a 'walk around' lens, carried on the off-chance that you'll need a bit more reach. Not a serious birding or wildlife lens. And IME IBIS works more than well enough - at least on Sony cameras - that, as long as you don't expect ridiculously long exposures to turn out pin-sharp, a handheld 300mm lens is entirely usable in normal daylight. Neither is Nikon's optical VR entirely foolproof either.

 

Lack of IBIS in DX bodies? That's an entirely other issue, and one that Tamron had no hand in. However, Tamron have shown themselves more than capable of producing VC lenses that perform equally as well as Nikon's VR on the F mount.

 

As I see it, having already developed the lens for other mounts, it just makes sense for Tamron to try to expand their market to Nikon Z users as well. Who doesn't benefit from such a widened choice?

Who doesn't benefit from such a widened choice?

Nikon's profits?

Nikon's profits?

At least to me, there is cooperation between Tamron and Nikon for these lens introductions. The Nikon 28-75mm/f2.8 clearly has the optics from the Tamron generation 1 lens for the Sony E mount. (If Nikon's objective is to provide a good, lower-cost f2.8 zoom, they should have at least use the generation 2 optics from Tamron.) This lower-end 70-300 with the obvious drawback without optical VR leaves room for Nikon to produce a higher-end 70-300 that is f5.6 on the long end and definitely with VR, but that could be a US$1000 lens.

 

If there is indeed close coordination between Tamron and Nikon, Tamron probably will not migrate every single Tamron Sony E mount lens to the Z mount to avoid major competition against equivalent Nikkor lenses. Tamron will only fill certain holes in Nikon's own Z lens lineup.

Nikon's profits?

I'd say that Nikon will likely profit from licensing the Z mount to Tamron. Nikon will likely get paid a royalty per copy that Tamron sells.

 

I worked for Ford and we not only licensed our intellectual and physical property to others, but we also paid certain suppliers to use their products in our cars. The first tilt steering wheels were patented by GM's Saginaw Steering Gear and we paid them for each one we installed in Fords until the patent lapsed. The same thing was done for Toyota's sliding door mechanism used on full-sized vans and minivans.

The Nikon 28-75mm/f2.8 clearly has the optics from the Tamron generation 1 lens for the Sony E mount. (If Nikon's objective is to provide a good, lower-cost f2.8 zoom, they should have at least use the generation 2 optics from Tamron.)

Indeed!

 

A curious 'oversight'?... I don't think so!

 

licensing the Z mount to Tamron

Interesting business model. Is that how the other lens makers operate with Sony I wonder?

One theory I heard is that since Tamron announced the 2nd gen 28-75/2.8 for Sony E, somehow they had over-produced the lens elements for gen 1 and had a pile of them sitting around. Nikon is probably the only logical buyer for those 1st gen lens elements so that Tamron and Nikon worked out a deal. If that is indeed the case, Nikon probably got those optics on the cheap. But please take this entire theory with a grain of salt. I cannot at all verify whether that is true or not.

 

What we need to keep in mind is that the flange distance for Nikon Z is 16mm, Sony E is 18mm; Canon RF and Leica L are both 20mm. Therefore, it is difficult to migrate a lens designed for Sony E to Canon RF because it would stick out by 2mm. Perhaps it is easier for a long tele but not a 28-75. That is why Nikon is pretty much the only destination for those Tamron optics.

 

Incidentally, somehow the Tamron 70-300 for Sony is $499 but at least initially, it is a lot more expensive $699 in the Z mount. This screen capture is from B&H:

 

somehow the Tamron 70-300 for Sony is $499 but at least initially, it is a lot more expensive $699 in the Z mount

Ha! Typical Nikon premium pricing....:)

 

No, wait......:D

Incidentally, somehow the Tamron 70-300 for Sony is $499

Hmph, it's priced at over £500 here in the UK, both fittings!:mad:

Nikon's profits?

Well, if Nikon can't be bothered to cater to their less well-off customers... "There's many a mickle mak's a muckle"

 

WRT the Mk1 v Mk2 Tamron-made 28-75 F/2.8 zoom: I perhaps jumped too early on the Sony version and have the Mk 1 model. Quite honestly, it's difficult to see how the first version could be improved on. The extreme edges and corners are slightly soft at 75mm and f/2.8 (and pixel peeping at 60 megapixels) but that's about the only criticism I can level at it.

 

Plus it was obviously good enough to get Nikon's endorsement. Otherwise Nikon would have designed and built their own 'gap filler' - wouldn't they? Which would probably have only been an f/4 or f/3.5 variable-aperture zoom.

Therefore, it is difficult to migrate a lens designed for Sony E to Canon RF because it would stick out by 2mm.

There aren't that many designs that end dead-flush with the mount, and 2mm is easily fixed by a small element protector tube within the mount flange. After all, there's no mirror to hit.

Nikon might be saving quite a lot by not making second tier lenses, knowing that people who will want those might opt for brands like Tamron anyway. And that people who can and want to spend lots to get a Z9 will not be wanting to compromise on lens quality, to save a few cents. So no or very little income lost, and no money wasted making cheaper versions of lenses.

So no or very little income lost, and no money wasted making cheaper versions of lenses.

It's really a case of what other Tamrons are made into Z mount.

 

Tamron have some very nice primes....:cool:

Edited September 6, 2022 by mike_halliwell

Tamron 70-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD for Nikon Z mount | Wex Photo Video

 

Oh, Woopey Do.. Dollar to Pound parity... :(

 

Arse Biscuit.....!

Tamron 70-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD for Nikon Z mount | Wex Photo Video

 

Oh, Woopey Do.. Dollar to Pound parity... :(

 

Arse Biscuit.....!

Nothing unusual. About 20 years ago, once I was reading some British photo magazines inside a bookstore. All the prices in the advertistments looked right to me, similar to what I was reading in US magazines; however, the currency was the Pound vs. US$. At the time I think one Pound was like $1.5. Today, 1 Pound is US$1.15.

Nothing unusual

True! But it makes the Nikon version ridiculously expensive compared to the Sony one @ £529....:(

Tamron 70-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD for Nikon Z mount | Wex Photo Video

 

Oh, Woopey Do.. Dollar to Pound parity... :(

 

Arse Biscuit.....!

'Ow f*cking much!? :mad:

 

I found that Cotswold cameras are offering it for 440 quid. Much more like it, and having bought from them before, I'm tempted... by the Sony version of course.

by the Sony version of course

Indeed!

 

T'other price was WEX.

 

£355 from E-infinity. Very grey, but reliable in my experience.

I think I'll experiment with my 'old' 70-300 SP VC F-mount Tamron via an adapter on the Sony before I jump.

My aging hands are getting very shaky these days, and although I'm pretty confident that IBIS will cope... better to be sure first. A (fairly) light and compact lens going up to 300mm would be nice to have.

That Tamron 70~300 has been available in Sony mount for some time. Along with the 28~75 f/2.8 and matching 17~28 f/2.8. Their stylings are almost identical and they all have a 67mm filter thread.

 

With an aperture of f/6.3 at 300mm, the entrance pupil is just 48mm. Having a 67mm filter thread is really oversize for this lens. It's nice that they keep a consistent filter size across their lenses, but if they are going to make a 70-300mm zoom - especially one without VR - then it would be nice if it were 1/3 stop faster than f/5.6 and not 1/3 stop slower.