Canon Lenses Made By Tamron?

[CoolToolGuy]

I took a road trip today to a camera store that I've never been to before. It is a good store, and I'll probably go back on occasion. :)

I was looking at the Tamron 14mm f2.8, and while discussing the price difference between it and the Canon 14mm, he says there is a good chance that Tamron makes the 14mm for Canon. And, he says, that Tamron also makes some lenses for Nikon. :shock:

This store is not a Ritz, it's a well-respected photo store in the D.C. area. The guy I was dealing with was knowledgable in all the facets of photography that we discussed, and he claimed to get this info direct from Tamron. :?

Has anyone heard of this? He said there are only a few, not like Tamron is making all their lenses, but this is the first time I've heard of anyone making Canon lenses other than Canon (or Nikon). :?

BTW, the 14mm Tamron is a sweet lens, but I couldn't shell out $1200 for it today. :(

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[roanjohn]

I don't think there is any truth to this............

Canon doesn't need Tamron to make thier lenses, I think they are doing fine on thier own.]


Ro1

[robertwgross]

Yes, I would ask that sales guy to substantiate his claim. He may have cooked up that line. On the other hand, Tamron may have cooked it up to tell him. Either way, it would be interesting to find out the truth of the matter.

I lean toward disbelief.

---Bob Gross---

[ron chappel]

I've heard this one for YEARS about some pentax lenses.In fact i recall that both parties even admited at one time that their respective versions of 28-200 were both made by tamron.Usually it's only heard through camera dealers and such.
(and there was an odd end result to that one..apparently the tamron was the better of the two because it had better coatings for that particular model.Usually anytime an OEM gets someone to make them something ,they specify the best for themselves and pay extra.Odd)

As soon as i saw the latest canon kit zooms i thought "TAMRON FOR SURE!"
I don't know this to any even remote certainty but it's just the way they look,are built,their construction techniques and so on...
As for specific models like the 14mm lens you mention...i guess we may not find out with any certainty.

Has anybody elese heard the story that the nikon 80-400VR is made by sigma?
The japanese do this all the time and have done so for YEARS.

[Cadwell]

Companies have been doing this for years. It's common practice in the computer industry, the automotive industry, consumer electronics etc. etc. so why the shock when someone suggests that sub-contract manufacture and re-branding goes on in the camera business?

Canon have been sub-contrators themselves for decades. All the early "HP" laser printers used Canon print engines, for example.

Whilst I wouldn't take one salesmans views as "gospel", I am not in the least surprised by the statement.

[petiot]

Neither am i, even considering it is canon we are talking about.

[Tom W]

Maybe Canon makes lenses for Tamron. ;)

[CoolToolGuy]

Companies have been doing this for years. It's common practice in the computer industry, the automotive industry, consumer electronics etc. etc. so why the shock when someone suggests that sub-contract manufacture and re-branding goes on in the camera business?

Canon have been sub-contrators themselves for decades. All the early "HP" laser printers used Canon print engines, for example.

Whilst I wouldn't take one salesmans views as "gospel", I am not in the least surprised by the statement.

As you suggest, 'outsourcring' goes on in many other industries. And in this case, it might make good business sense for Canon and Nikon. A 14mm rectilinear lens is going to be a fringe product for any camera manufacturer, and is only getting my interest now due to the crop factor. B&H wants $1800 for the Canon, and $1050 for the Tamron, so their sales numbers are probably not real high. The descriptions differ slightly, as the Canon is listed as 14 elements in 10 groups, and the Tamron is listed as 14 elements in 12 groups, so its not like they are the same lens in different skins. But perhaps Tamron has more experience in this range, or perhaps Canon designed it and farmed out the manufacturing to Tamron. Who knows? The ultimate consideration should be whether the lens (or body, flash, whatever), performs up to the level you expect. And for the manufacturers, it is the same. If they can have someone else produce according to their standards, and Canon is willing to put their name on it, it shouldn't really matter. It is, however, curious :?

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[CoolToolGuy]

Maybe Canon makes lenses for Tamron. ;)

Well, I'd hate to see the camera industry go the way of the VCR and DVD player, where they're all made by 3 companies (or whatever) and branded for the marketer, but it is life in the big corporate world. :(

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[gvansmith]

This store is not a Ritz, it's a well-respected photo store in the D.C. area. The guy I was dealing with was knowledgable in all the facets of photography that we discussed, and he claimed to get this info direct from Tamron. :?



I’m just being curious; would the photo store you visited be “Penn Camera”? I visited the Penn Camera store in Laural, MD, and was told something similar a while back. I was told that Tamron produced some of the non-“L” glass for Canon. I never bothered to verify this claim.

[CoolToolGuy]

I’m just being curious; would the photo store you visited be “Penn Camera”? I visited the Penn Camera store in Laural, MD, and was told something similar a while back. I was told that Tamron produced some of the non-“L” glass for Canon. I never bothered to verify this claim.

Well, I don't want to start any rumors, and I don't want to get anybody in trouble for revealing something that was told in confidence, so I cannot confirm that. :)

But I can emphatically confirm that it wasn't 'Pencil Camera'. :wink: And I did buy something at a hobby shop in Laurel, MD on the same trip. :roll:

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[CyberDyneSystems]

I'm guessing the Hobby shop next to a Penn Camera? :roll:

[CoolToolGuy]

I'm guessing the Hobby shop next to a Penn Camera? :roll:

You know, now that you mention it, there is a Penn Camera right next door :!: What a coincidence :!: I'll have to stop in there next time I go down to Laurel.

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[Bubber Jones]

Well, I don't want to start any rumors, and I don't want to get anybody in trouble for revealing something that was told in confidence, so I cannot confirm that. :)


Why in the world would you post something on a world wide message board and be afraid to reveal something that was told in confidence? :D

[Tom W]

Judging from what's on Canon's and Tamron's web sites, the two 14 mm f/2.8 lenses are different.

The canon has 14 elements in 10 groups with 1 aspheric element.
The Tamron has 14 elements in 12 groups with 2 aspheric elements.
The Canon has the auto/manual focus switch on the side in the usual tradition.
The Tamron Auto/manual selection appears to be a push-pull function on the focus ring.
The Canon is 3" wide by 3.5" long and weighs 560 grams.
The Tamron is 3.4" wide by 3.5" long and weighs 661 grams.

I think that they're too physically different to be the same lens. Granted, there's a chance that one or the other manufactures lenses for their "competitor", but I think its safe to say that neither is a rebadge of the other.

[kraterz]

Canon pride themselves on making all their L glass in house, including cutting and grinding glass elements, manufacturing and growing CaF2 crystal, etc. Sounds like the salesman was bored and wanted some fun in life.

I wouldn't be surprised if Tamron or some other company made their cheap junk lenses like the 28-90, 35-80 etc.

[Ballen Photo]

I was looking at the Tamron 14mm f2.8, and while discussing the price difference between it and the Canon 14mm, he says there is a good chance that Tamron makes the 14mm for Canon. And, he says, that Tamron also makes some lenses for Nikon. :shock:


Now I have nothing against Tamron and have owned and used some of their lenses with good results.
I do have a theory on some of these rumors though. What better way to increase the sales of your line of lenses than to spread unsubstantiated rumors that your company just might be the one manufacturing lenses for large, well known and respected companies such a Canon or Nikon? Sounds like there might be a rumor monger in the wood pile somewhere to me.
........Bruce

[CoolToolGuy]

Well, I know it could be true that Tamron is making lenses for Canon under contract, but I'm sure that Canon doesn't want to talk about it, and if it is true they probably have Tamron under a deep NDA, so they won't talk about it either. Clearly, in the Canon-Tamron case, the 14mm is not just rebadged, and its not the even the same configuration. If there is a Tamron-Nikon arrangement, I don't know, 'cause I don't care to get that close to Nikon specs to find out.

I do know the Tamron 14mm looked sweet on the Drebel. I took a couple test shots, but I haven't had time to download them or check them out for sharpness, etc. I also put it on my Elan 7 (but no film) and it was way cool. I'll have to see if I can scrape up the coin. If my Canon rebates arrive soon, it may help tip the scales. :wink:

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[garethhhhh]

OK. So lets assume that Tamron does indeed make certain lenses for Canon.

Does this mean that Tamron's own EF mount lenses will never need to be re-chipped for use on Canon EF mount Cameras, the way Sigma's do, because Tamron know's all Canon's EF lens secrets :?:

[CoolToolGuy]

OK. So lets assume that Tamron does indeed make certain lenses for Canon.

Does this mean that Tamron's own EF mount lenses will never need to be re-chipped for use on Canon EF mount Cameras, the way Sigma's do, because Tamron know's all Canon's EF lens secrets :?:

They're not secrets, just proprietary technology that requires a license fee. Don't quote me as the expert, but the poop is that Tamron and others have shelled out the coin but Sigma thinks they can get what they need by reverse engineering. Unfortunately for Sigma lens owners, they don't always get it right, and rechipping (or worse) happens. :cry:

Have Fun
Rick 8)

[defordphoto]

With "poop" being the keyword here.

Well, I know it could be true that Tamron is making lenses for Canon under contract...

Well, it could be true that Wal-Mart is making lenses for Canon too.

Where did all this come from? Some pro-Tamron salesguy trying to sell you a lens and now has convoluted into this wacky rumor?

I have had Tamron lenses and I have had Canon lenses and they aren't even in the same ballpark. In fact, they aren't even in the same sport.

I'm not bashing you here CTG—not at all—but this is pretty darn far-fetched info to conclude from some salesguy trying to sell you a non-Canon lens.

Did your hair get windblown on that ride your salesperson took you on? :wink:

[CoolToolGuy]

With "poop" being the keyword here.

Well, I know it could be true that Tamron is making lenses for Canon under contract...

Well, it could be true that Wal-Mart is making lenses for Canon too.

Where did all this come from? Some pro-Tamron salesguy trying to sell you a lens and now has convoluted into this wacky rumor?

I have had Tamron lenses and I have had Canon lenses and they aren't even in the same ballpark. In fact, they aren't even in the same sport.

I'm not bashing you here CTG—not at all—but this is pretty darn far-fetched info to conclude from some salesguy trying to sell you a non-Canon lens.

Did your hair get windblown on that ride your salesperson took you on? :wink:

Jim, Wal-Mart doesn't make anything but profit. :P :) :D :lol:

At first I was slightly taken aback, but after thinking about it, I realized that it certainly could be true that a large corporation like Canon is interested in providing the product at the lowest cost, and in the corporate world of the 21st century, the name on the product only means who is selling it, not necessarily who made it. Look at the first Honda SUVs, or any VCR or DVD player. :shock:

A review of my posts on this forum will certainly show that I am a Canon bigot, but my tendency to shy away from non-Canon lenses comes from having been once burned by buying a non-Canon lens that was optically inferior to the competing Canon lens, despite advertising to the contrary. Ultimately, I am interested in performance, and I know I am getting good, and most of the time, outstanding performance from Canon glass, 'L' or no 'L'. :D

In this case, I want a W I D E angle lens. Canon just doesn't have the right thing for me, considering the dreaded crop factor, and so off I go to find somebody else that does. Sigma is a DNQ, because of too many infractions of my rules for operability, but Tamron could be a qualifier. The 14mm I was looking at is pretty sweet, but it costs $1200 ($1049 at B&H), so it requires some thought. The Canon 14mm is the high-cost alternative at $1800, the 16-35 is neck-and-neck with the Tamron in price, but I would rather have a prime for this lens. A used 1D body might be an alternative, since I can get closer to the angle that I want with cheaper lens alternatives. Hmm, which way to go. :?

As it turns out, the Tamron is not a close copy of the Canon, so it is not easy to tell if there is some outsourcing going on there. Some have suggested that Canon manufactures all 'L' lenses, and so be it. :)

A 14mm lens is not a big seller, so while it may rock my socks off, its probably not as key to Canon's profitability as, say the 70-200 f2.8 IS, which they seem to sell a truckload at a time (partly thanks to Dell). In the corporate mentality, one justification for outsourcing is because another company may have a specific capability that allows them to produce a given small-quantity product cheaper. Again, the name on the box does not define the manufacturer, only the marketer. :wink:

Apparently, this rumor has been heard before, but cannot be substantiated. I fully believe that there are more companies that can produce quality optics than the camera manufacturers. Canon will always be my first choice, but as I said, if Canon can't provide what I want, I'll look elsewhere. :)


Have Fun
Rick 8)

[Motorsports Photo]

Japans economy is made up of a whole bunch of small "job shops" That mak parts for larger companies. Not everything that is manufactured for a Japanese company is done "in house" Of course some companies do it more than others but thats no different here either.

I is possible and believable that the same company who makes parts for Tamron could be making parts for Canon. Of course I dont think the same assembly line has Tamron boxes packed at the end of the line one day and Canon the next.

SO there could be some truth to the statement, but how much of it is true (or false) we'll probably never know.

-Pete

[Tomsk]

Another possibilty is that Canon could have designed (for example) their own 14mm AND the Tamron 14mm. Canon decided to keep the 14/10 version whilst selling the design of the 14/12 to Tamron to recoup developement costs. This could of course happen with other similar lenses.

[Tom W]

Japans economy is made up of a whole bunch of small "job shops" That mak parts for larger companies. Not everything that is manufactured for a Japanese company is done "in house" Of course some companies do it more than others but thats no different here either.

I is possible and believable that the same company who makes parts for Tamron could be making parts for Canon. Of course I dont think the same assembly line has Tamron boxes packed at the end of the line one day and Canon the next.

SO there could be some truth to the statement, but how much of it is true (or false) we'll probably never know.

-Pete

Don't forget that some of Canon's kit lenses are not made in Japan. Those are the most likely candidates to be outsourced, particularly if they are made in China where it is less likely that a Japanese flagship company would have their own assembly operation. There is some historical anamosity between the two countries.

[toglenn]

I can remember in the late 40's when I first started in the business, Carl Ziess lens were made and marketed by two seperate Carl Zeiss companys, one in the Russian zone and one in the Free Zone.

The Russian Zeiss lenses were marked Zeiss Jena and came on cameras like the Kine Exacta, and the Free Zone Zeiss company lenses were marked Opton.

There was a big difference in workmanship between the two with the Russian lenses appearing with crude metal finishes when compared with the Opton lenses. I'm not sure how the optics compared.

toglenn