Jump to content
Welcome to the NEW Photo.net! ×

Tamron 70-300mm for Z Mount.... Not a Re-Badge.


mike_halliwell
 Share

Recommended Posts

Whoa! That's going to put a cat among the pigeons.

 

Edit: Wait. Was there ever a plan for Nikon to re-badge this lens? It's just an existing Tamron lens with Z mount, isn't it? As posted previously.

Edited by rodeo_joe|1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this was just the official announcement...!

 

TAMRON’s first “Nikon Z mount system” compatible lens

70-300mm F/4.5-6.3 Di III RXD (Model A047)

It is not like Nikon is releasing the same Nikon branded lens- or what?

No, but it's the first Fully Auto lens by a big manufacturer.

 

The assumption is it's sanctioned by Nikon.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please let us know when third-party lenses start really being "re-badged" so they can be avoided, LOL...

 

Lord knows what those would be copied from....

Why the sneer at 3rd party lenses?

Because the Nikkor badge is no guarantee of greatness.

 

I just put my Sony-mount Tamron 28-75mm zoom up against a raft of 50 mm Nikkor primes. At f/2.8 the Tamron beat all of those f/1.8, f/1.4 and f/1.2 primes hands down, at like-for-like apertures. Those old primes just can't hack it on a 60 megapixel sensor.

Edited by rodeo_joe|1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the sneer at 3rd party lenses?

Because the Nikkor badge is no guarantee of greatness.

 

No, but to be fair one should compare like with like. Lenses designed for mirrorless have distinct advantages due to the shorter flange distance and the fact that all of them are relatively new products benefiting from current technology.

 

I just put my Sony-mount Tamron 28-75mm zoom up against a raft of 50 mm Nikkor primes. At f/2.8 the Tamron beat all of those f/1.8, f/1.4 and f/1.2 primes hands down, at like-for-like apertures. Those old primes just can't hack it on a 60 megapixel sensor.

 

Why not try the Nikon Z 24-70/2.8 S or the Z 50mm f/1.8 S; both are excellent lenses. In fact for my purposes the 24-70/2.8 has been so good that I barely use the f/1.8's, which is a surprise considering how much in the past I've preferred prime lenses.

 

I am sure that I can find a 1970s Tamron lens which is not as good as the latest Z Nikkor.

 

The reason people generally have preferred the camera manufacturer's own lenses is that there is typically a comprehensive lineup of the latter which covers most applications whereas third party manufacturers often aim at making cheaper rather than better lenses. Sometimes they made a better lens but typically not across the whole lineup. Sigma has made excellent Art line of prime lenses but they're huge and heavy and arguably this creates a new problem (back, shoulder, knee injuries) whereas Nikon mostly try to create balanced designs which consider weight an important factor. I haven't been tempted to buy the Art primes simply because I don't want to go into that direction when it concerns weight, as my back can easily start showing symptoms. Mechanical quality is another factor; I remember about 25 years ago a friend of mine reported that his Sigma lens fell apart (with screws coming off) in normal light use. People remember when they've been scammed by a a low quality product and it can take a long time to shake that impression from memory.

 

I have no doubt the Tamron 28-75 is a good lens - I've played with the Nikon 28-75 and it's very lightweight which makes it pleasant to use. I also find published images from this lens to be pleasing visually. However, some people (many?) seem to consider 24mm a requirement now and don't want to give up that focal length.

Edited by ilkka_nissila
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had one 28-200mm Tamron for a brief time and the problem with it was that at the long end it was very soft and with the slightest of use (carrying it around my neck) the barrel became loose and when I tried to sell it they almost didn't take it as they assumed that I had dropped it because of the barrel movement (I had not). This kind of experience can put off one's interest in a brand. The reason I had purchased that lens was because some magazines recommended it over the Nikon 70-210. Of course I am aware that Nikon too made wobbly zooms for a time (e.g. the first 24-120) and ones which were soft at the long end, and in that sense a brand name is not a guarantee for high quality, but I've generally had good experiences with Nikon lenses and tend to prefer the results from them visually to other brands (I currently own Laowa, Rodenstock and Zeiss lenses in addition to Nikon, so I am not only using one brand).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...