Tamron coming out with stabalized 1.8 primes(35 & 45)

[EOM]

http://petapixel.com/2015/09/02/tamron-sp-35mm-and-45mm-f1-8-pro-prime-lenses-with-stabilization/

mmmmmmm listed at $600 each

 

[robvp]

600 for a 1.8? jesus christ

 

[EOM]

600 for a 1.8? jesus christ

But VC.



Tamron arguably has the best VC in the industry... If they had the 35 and an 85 1.8 VC I'd buy the pair in a heartbeat... I'm pleased with my other Tamron glass.

 

[CuriousMike]

Not long enough.... LOL.

 

[EOM]

Not long enough.... LOL.

Depending on your preferences, you could say Not wide enough..... LOL

 

[Pocatello]

VC is nice, but I don't need it. Personally, I only need IS, VR, VC, or whatever they want to call it, if the lens is over 85mm.

 

[Aharami]

what's the point of VC in a wide prime? although, if the optics is up to par, might get this over the Sigma 35 1.4 Art ($900)

 

[robvp]

VC is nice, but I don't need it. Personally, I only need IS, VR, VC, or whatever they want to call it, if the lens is over 85mm.

Yeah on a prime it seems kinda pointless, you're usually close enough that you don't see much vibration, unless you suffer from serious shaky hands you can just get the nikkor/canon 1.4 and save yourself 300 bucks, their IQ is superb for the price

 

[Aharami]

review with lots of sample pics
http://blog.krolop-gerst.com/technik/review-tamron-sp-35mm-45mm-f1-8-di-vc-usd-english/

 

[Aharami]

you can just get the nikkor/canon 1.4 and save yourself 300 bucks, their IQ is superb for the price

huh? Canon 35mm f/1.4L is $1500 new and the 1.4L II is $1800

 

[EOM]

Yeah on a prime it seems kinda pointless, you're usually close enough that you don't see much vibration, unless you suffer from serious shaky hands you can just get the nikkor/canon 1.4 and save yourself 300 bucks, their IQ is superb for the price

Low light situations like at weddings if you can drop the shutters speed by 3 stops.....and get the correct exposure with no blur....

 

[EOM]

huh? Canon 35mm f/1.4L is $1500 new and the 1.4L II is $1800

I got my nikkor 50 1.4 for 350 a few months ago.... their 35 and 85 1.4s are over 1000

 

[Aharami]

I got my nikkor 50 1.4 for 350 a few months ago.... their 35 and 85 1.4s are over 1000

yea I don't understand their pricing. If they can make a decent 50mm 1.4 at 400 - 500, why cant they make their 35mm 1.4 for around the same price. I dont shoot much with a 35mm, so i guess I havent experienced the magic yet

 

[foghorn67]

Low light situations like at weddings if you can drop the shutters speed by 3 stops.....and get the correct exposure with no blur....

I was a wedding photographer once. I used IS on my short range lenses maybe twice. I used it on my 70-200 quite a lot.
It's more for cityscapes, travel, museum, etc.

 

[foghorn67]

yea I don't understand their pricing. If they can make a decent 50mm 1.4 at 400 - 500, why cant they make their 35mm 1.4 for around the same price. I dont shoot much with a 35mm, so i guess I havent experienced the magic yet

50mm needs less optical correction since it doesn't magnify (much) nor distort for wider angle.
35mm is a wide angle, needing lots of optical correction, especially for large glass.
It's the reason they can pump out 50 1.8 lenses out like newspaper.

 

[TomFoster]

Stabilisation is incredibly useful, I find it handy to have even on my Tamron 24-70 when at the wide end of the lens. Means I can get away hand-holding in situations that would otherwise be impossible. Sure I could use a tripod but having that little bit of extra freedom is incredibly handy.

 

[Aharami]

was gonna pull the trigger on the 35. But can't justify getting it considering it will be of very limited use. Decided on going with the 24-70 f/2.8 instead