Tamron astonishes the world with price of upcoming 150-600mm VC USD

Kanye wrote in post #16537774
It's still a Tamron.

You damn skippy it is. You DO realize I have the MK2 lens and it's for sale?

Some people just cannot come to terms that the 3rd party groups are really making some LONG strides in quality and "Innovation".

The only thing Canon has going for them is guaranteed price increases!

Talley wrote in post #16538010
You damn skippy it is. You DO realize I have the MK2 lens and it's for sale?

Some people just cannot come to terms that the 3rd party groups are really making some LONG strides in quality and "Innovation".

The only thing Canon has going for them is guaranteed price increases!

What makes you think you're the expert, anyway?

Kanye wrote in post #16537998
Because you get what you pay for.

This is a truism for almost anything.

So everything you buy in life, is a top-of-the-line model? You're either very rich, have nothing, or very numb upstairs.

Oh, i forgot.. you have a 50/1.4. Why didn't you buy the 50L or a Zeiss or Leica 50?

http://www.tamron.com.​hk/
download the Fukuda tif files
they are shot with a 1Dx ad 600mm
i just did edit some in PS. and its not bad ad all
i thinks the pictures are done with a "beta" lens, the serial is Nr.: 0000000000

Fukuda_09 and 10 is the hawk F7.1
Fukuda_09 is the fox ad F9
Fukuda_12 is the seaeagle ad F6.3

All who can afford big whites please don't come here and tell others, you get what you pay.
I think Tamron/Sigma are doing good for everyone, at least giving enough competition to Canon/Nikon to reduce their price (see how price of 24-70II came down).

Kanye wrote in post #16537774
It's still a Tamron.

It's like buying a very expensive Toyota, over say, a BMW, which is the L equivalent in the world of optics.

Doesn't matter.

Tamron optics can rival Canon.

If the Toyota outperforms the BMW, or is a car that does something the BMW doesn't offer, why not? What you're suggesting is that you'd buy a BMW instead of a Toyota if, for example, you needed a 4WD pickup (Hilux) but decided to buy a BMW X1 because of the little blue and white badge even though it doesn't do the job you need it for (and is, quite frankly, a ridiculous car).

1Tanker wrote in post #16538023
So everything you buy in life, is a top-of-the-line model? You're either very rich, have nothing, or very numb upstairs.

Oh, i forgot.. you have a 50/1.4. Why didn't you buy the 50L or a Zeiss or Leica 50?

Because I bought what I paid for ? ? ?

Talley wrote in post #16538243
What makes you?

I have ownership of experience here. I have used many L glass, non L glass and lenses from Tokina, Tamron, Sigma, Canon & Rokinon.

I'm no expert but based on my real experience all manufactures have strengths and weaknesses. Believe me I do not doubt one bit that the L glass is some of the finest however the continued updates from Canon produce very costly results.

All while the 3rd party guys are vastly improving their lineups. Gone are the micro motor days and most have HSM/USD/SD-M variants and if you look at Sigmas latest 18-35/24-105/35/120-300 their glass is very good. Tamrons latest 70-200 is just simply amazing especially for the price.

So again. What makes me able to comment in the fashion I do?... real use. I'm no expert by any means but a "Real" pro does not need pro gear. It's that little peanut behind the viewfinder that creates the real magic.

I never said I was. I'm just stating the facts as they are.

You're not convincing anyone that Tamron is Canon.

A spade is a spade.

As for the lens I'm definitely interested at that price point. At 1069 I'm hoping to pick up a used one in June for 800-900 .

Charlie wrote in post #16537678
uh... I own one. Got it for the 300mm, and it doesnt get really sharp, even stopped down. If I can stop it down to F8-F11 and get really sharp images, I'de be all for it, but it's clearly not in the league of the 24-70 or even 17-35, which are much sharper stopped down.

I have one too and it is sharp all the way to 300mm. It is sharper at 200mm than it is at 300mm. It is sharper when stoppoed down, especailly sharp at f/8-f/11. Some other lenses can be sharper. But it is still what I consider sharp even at 300mm f/5.6 (and I have one of the sharpest lenses made now so it's not like I compare it only with soft lenses). I have posted samples to show it before and there are many other samples showing it too. Just because other lenses are sharper doesn't mean it is not sharp.

Kanye wrote in post #16538177
Because I bought what I paid for ? ? ?

Actually with that lens, you get less than you pay for. You get terrible bokeh, dodgy AF, and poor build quality.

Can this argue ent stop! I thought the goal of photography was to take good photos. If you need l glass to be satisfied that's fine. I could have the best lens' money could buy and not match a Nat Geo photographer that was using a point and shoot. I personally appreciate reading these forums about all lens brands. Please don't kill it by digressing to BMW vs Toyota.

Kanye wrote in post #16538930
Anyone who takes great shots with the 50mm 1.4.

Just don't drop it 3 feet onto the grass, like I did. A new one will cost less than getting it fixed, and you won't have to find the pieces in the grass. Being "a" Canon did not help it. I replaced it with the Sigma, which is optically superior.

Moderator Admonition.

We do not allow the beat of dead horses here nor do we allow personal attacks. You may express your opinions about images, and equipment but not about members which constitute personal attacks. It is not your place to change the opinions of others, you state yours and move on.

If the arguments continue or if there are further references to automobiles in this thread discipline will follow.

If you cannot follow this admonition then simply walk away.

Thank Mod for goderators!