Sony Just ordered a Tamron 50-400

I've been having some fun with panning shots at the track. In order to pan I need something between 50-70mm. Right now I have to switch cameras to the 24-105, then go back to the 100-400 for the coming at you shots. The added 50mm at the short end will be a nice convenience and eliminate camera switching.

By all accounts it's a pretty sharp lens and seems to out-perform the Sigma up to 300mm, then keep pace beyond. It will be here Tuesday and tested at the track this coming weekend. It it tests well the Sigma will be up for sale.
 
Looking forward for your assesment on the thing. That focal range makes it very interesting for landscapes, it could potentially negate the need for a 24-105 in between the tele and wide zooms for landscape use. Did mr. Iversen of youtube fame also just get one of those Tammies..?
 
Well this is presumably an upgrade from the Tamron 100-400. That lens was/ is very good. Seems to have the same specs and size save for 50 at the wider end. I wonder how often that wider 50 will actually be used with this new lens.
 
I tend to follow these threads as what Tamron does with Sony tends to filter down to the Z system, so as a Z owner it's like getting a preview. I don't know if it's the same for the Sony system but the 'native' Nikon Z 100-400 costs a pretty penny and the Tamron which doesn't seem much different to the Nikon one, doesn't (comparatively speaking).
 
Well this is presumably an upgrade from the Tamron 100-400. That lens was/ is very good. Seems to have the same specs and size save for 50 at the wider end. I wonder how often that wider 50 will actually be used with this new lens.
Well, for a landscape photographer it has potential to leave your bag a whole lens lighter. Currently my more comprehensive landscape kit includes the Sony a7R III, Tamron 17-28/2.8, Sony 24-105 f/4 G and a Sigma 100-400 C. It could easily be replaced with a Sony 16-35 f/4 G and the Tamron 50-400. What's left between the two can be cropped without much penalty.

There is a caveat, though. I tend to use the 24-105mm range quite much, and that gap hits a critical spot. It's not uncommon for me to use only the 24-105 on a given photo outing, the 17-28 is the one I use the most after that lens. Switching to that two lens setup would keep me swapping lenses all the time, and that'll lead to missed shots due to laziness. I've been there, I used to use a 16-35 + 50 + 70-210 setup with my Canon 6D, and sometimes with the EOS R also before I got the excellent RF 24-105 f/4 L for that system. If I were of the type of landscape shooters who arrive on a scene, open their bag, pick the lens and body, fit them together, take the shot then dissassemble the whole affair again and move on, that 16-35 + 50-400 setup would make much more sense. But I'm not.

Still, that's a very interesting lens, and judging by the reviews it's also optically excellent. Which is no real surprise coming from Tamron, they've made a bunch of very highly performing lenses throughout the years, and have only been getting better at it.
 
Well, for a landscape photographer it has potential to leave your bag a whole lens lighter. Currently my more comprehensive landscape kit includes the Sony a7R III, Tamron 17-28/2.8, Sony 24-105 f/4 G and a Sigma 100-400 C. It could easily be replaced with a Sony 16-35 f/4 G and the Tamron 50-400. What's left between the two can be cropped without much penalty.

There is a caveat, though. I tend to use the 24-105mm range quite much, and that gap hits a critical spot. It's not uncommon for me to use only the 24-105 on a given photo outing, the 17-28 is the one I use the most after that lens. Switching to that two lens setup would keep me swapping lenses all the time, and that'll lead to missed shots due to laziness. I've been there, I used to use a 16-35 + 50 + 70-210 setup with my Canon 6D, and sometimes with the EOS R also before I got the excellent RF 24-105 f/4 L for that system. If I were of the type of landscape shooters who arrive on a scene, open their bag, pick the lens and body, fit them together, take the shot then dissassemble the whole affair again and move on, that 16-35 + 50-400 setup would make much more sense. But I'm not.

Still, that's a very interesting lens, and judging by the reviews it's also optically excellent. Which is no real surprise coming from Tamron, they've made a bunch of very highly performing lenses throughout the years, and have only been getting better at it.
Have to say, it's very appealing.
 
Laguna Seca is maybe in my future. My son said he wanted to treat me to the Rennsport Reunion in Sept but I haven't heard any plans of late so I'm not sure if we're going or not. I'll probably just make do with my 24-105 on the Riii.
 
It's a tempting focal length - when I was on safari shooting with a Panasonic 50-200, there were a few times where I wished to be able to pull back just a little bit further - sometimes lions/elephants were mere feet away, and even 100mm equiv was too long!

Will be intrigued to see how it performs.
 
It's a tempting focal length - when I was on safari shooting with a Panasonic 50-200, there were a few times where I wished to be able to pull back just a little bit further - sometimes lions/elephants were mere feet away, and even 100mm equiv was too long!

Will be intrigued to see how it performs.
Well all you have to do is visit the showcase!

 
Back
Top