Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 02 Sep 2015 (Wednesday) 06:01
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Tamron SP 45mm F1.8 VC and SP 35mm F1.8 VC

 
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Post edited over 4 years ago by genjurok. (3 edits in all)
     
Sep 02, 2015 09:24 as a reply to  @ post 17692349 |  #16

The 45mm f/1.8 VC is disappointing for me simply because of the size and weight. I need a fast standard prime lens for travel purpose and my Sigma 50 f/1.4 (non-art) is a bit heavy for that. The 50 f/1.8 II I have isn't good wide open. I expected this 45 f/1.8 VC would be around the same weight as the Sony FE 55 f/1.8 , i.e. less than 300g). Somehow this 45 f/1.8 is even heavier than the Sigma with 2/3 stops slower speed. I guess I'll have to get a 50 f/1.8 STM then.


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
MalVeauX
"Looks rough and well used"
Avatar
13,283 posts
Gallery: 1696 photos
Best ofs: 4
Likes: 10665
Joined Feb 2013
Location: Florida
     
Sep 02, 2015 09:29 |  #17

genjurok wrote in post #17692353 (external link)
The 45mm f/1.8 VC is disappointing for me simply because of the size and weight. I need a fast standard prime lens for travel purpose and my Sigma 50 f/1.4 (non-art) is a bit heavy for that. The 50 f/1.8 II I have isn't good wide open. I expected this 45 f/1.8 VC would be around the same weight as the Sony FE 55 f/1.8 , i.e. less than 300g). Somehow this 45 f/1.8 is even heavier than the Sigma with 2/3 stops slower speed. I guess I'll have to get a 50 f/1.8 STM then.

Stabilization in the lens adds to weight.

Something the 50's across the board totally lack.

Very best,


My Flickr (external link) :: My Astrobin (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,072 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6158
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 02, 2015 09:34 |  #18

genjurok wrote in post #17692353 (external link)
The 45mm f/1.8 VC is disappointing for me simply because of the size and weight. I need a fast standard prime lens for travel purpose and my Sigma 50 f/1.4 (non-art) is a bit heavy for that. The 50 f/1.8 II I have isn't good wide open. I expected this 45 f/1.8 VC would be around the same weight as the Sony FE 55 f/1.8 , i.e. less than 300g). Somehow this 45 f/1.8 is even heavier than the Sigma with 2/3 stops slower speed. I guess I'll have to get a 50 f/1.8 STM then.

it's 540g, how is that heavier than the sigma?

the bokeh is borderline amazing from the samples


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Post edited over 4 years ago by genjurok. (2 edits in all)
     
Sep 02, 2015 09:35 |  #19

Charlie wrote in post #17692366 (external link)
it's 540g, how is that heavier than the sigma?

the bokeh is borderline amazing from the samples

I said non-art. And the Sigma 50 (non-ART) is regarded as bokehlicious by many people too.
Anyway I'm not saying this 45 f/1.8 VC isn't a good lens. Just not exactly what I need, that's it.


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
genjurok
Senior Member
537 posts
Joined Jan 2010
     
Sep 02, 2015 09:38 |  #20

MalVeauX wrote in post #17692358 (external link)
Stabilization in the lens adds to weight.

Something the 50's across the board totally lack.

Very best,

Still the FE 55 f/1.8 with stellar optics is only 280g vs the 45 f/1.8 VC 540g (nearly doubled).
Does the addition of VC really need to be at the expense of almost doubled weight?


6D
Canon 17-40mm f/4L | Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 | Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II
Canon 50mm f/1.8 | Sigma 50mm f/1.4 | Canon 100mm f/2
580 EX | 430 EX | Pixel King Pro wireless radio trigger and receiver (x2)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DreDaze
happy with myself for not saying anything stupid
Avatar
18,165 posts
Gallery: 45 photos
Likes: 2495
Joined Mar 2006
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Post edited over 4 years ago by DreDaze.
     
Sep 02, 2015 09:46 |  #21

i think it's strange that they are so close in focal length...i'd think a 35mm, and 55mm would be better...there'd be a chance people would buy both...here i think it's going to be one or the other for most people...oh well, can't complain about more options...


Andre or Dre
gear list
Instagram (external link)
flickr (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Charlie
Guess What! I'm Pregnant!
16,072 posts
Gallery: 8 photos
Likes: 6158
Joined Sep 2007
     
Sep 02, 2015 10:17 |  #22

genjurok wrote in post #17692370 (external link)
Still the FE 55 f/1.8 with stellar optics is only 280g vs the 45 f/1.8 VC 540g (nearly doubled).
Does the addition of VC really need to be at the expense of almost doubled weight?

I highly doubt it's the VC causing the weight, but unique design of close focus. The specs are closest related to the Zeiss 50mm macro planar, which weighs in 500+ grams as well.


Sony A7riii/A9 - FE 12-24/4 - FE 24-240 - SY 24/2.8 - FE 28/2 - FE 35/2.8 - FE 50/1.8 - FE 85/1.8 - EF 135/1.8 Art - F 600/5.6 - CZ 100-300 - Astro Rok 14/2.8 - Tamron 17-28/2.8 - 28-75/2.8 RXD, 70-200/2.8 VC

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
artyH
Goldmember
2,107 posts
Likes: 29
Joined Aug 2009
Post edited over 4 years ago by artyH.
     
Sep 02, 2015 13:22 |  #23

The 45 weighs as much as the Tamron 90 mm VC macro lens (less 10 grams). It might be attractive if sharp and if the AF is fast and accurate in low light.
The lens won't look good to me if AF is slow and inconsistent. I have read some complaints of slow operation on VC in some Tamron lenses. That could be a potential problem, and could be camera related.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
BrickR
Cream of the Crop
5,935 posts
Likes: 114
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Dallas TX
     
Sep 02, 2015 15:19 |  #24

I'm in for the 45mm at this point ;) For video this is a breath of fresh air. I do agree with Dre, the FL's are a little too close to one another.


My junk
The grass isn't greener on the other side, it's green where you water it.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Sep 02, 2015 17:21 |  #25

Talley wrote in post #17692304 (external link)
Yup I agree. However if the AF/IQ performs anywhere near their 70-200 then I think it'll do fine. It's 1/3 stop quicker and will have weather sealing and in the end their price will drop to be cheaper than the Canon.

For 599 I'll buy one and test it out. 7.9" focusing is pretty close focusing too however that is a feature I won't find that useful.

Yeah, although weather sealing and a metal body perked my interest. Tbh, more interested in their 45mm f/1.8 b.c. Canon doesn't have a sharp 50 yet. Hoping that Canon will out the 50mm f/1.2L II by then, but if I need an interim and the Tamron focuses well, I might look into picking one up if it's cheap. If it focuses like my old studio's Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 SP VC, forget it though.


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rebelsimon
Goldmember
Avatar
1,136 posts
Likes: 1991
Joined Nov 2013
Location: Whitby, ON
     
Jun 06, 2016 15:14 |  #26

Any verdict on these lenses? If the autofocus tests out alright I'm adding the 45mm.


Toronto area photographer http://www.SimonMellic​kPhotography.com (external link)
Cameras:5Diii (x2), 70D
Lenses:Rokinon 14mm f2.8, Voightlander 20mm f3.5, Canon 24-70 f2.8ii, Tamron 35mm f1.8 VC, Canon 50mm STM, Tamron 90mm 2.8 VC, Canon 135mm f2
Lights: AD600, AD200 (x2), V850 (x4)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
smythie
I wasn't even trying
3,718 posts
Gallery: 30 photos
Likes: 648
Joined Jun 2009
Location: Sydney - Australia
     
Jun 06, 2016 17:20 |  #27

wallstreetoneil had some good things to say about the 45 recently, I think in the 1DX2 thread


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ekinnyc
Senior Member
Avatar
782 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Brooklyn, NY
     
Jun 09, 2016 10:37 |  #28

so many choices, especially in the 35mm FL:

canon f1.4L
canon f1.4 L v2
sigma f1.4 art
tamron f1.8 VC
canon f2 IS
yongnuo f2

how do you choose, especially when the 1.4L v1 can be had used for about the same cost as the sigma, the canon and tammy in the same ballpark, and then yongnuo being the budget entry

obviously 1.4 vs 1.8 vs. 2 is a big deal, but if the 1.4L v1 isnt sharp until f2 anyway, and sigma has focus issues, how do you balance speed vs sharpness/focusing


6D| 35mm f/2 IS
Buying/Selling Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
idkdc
Goldmember
Avatar
2,838 posts
Likes: 251
Joined Oct 2014
     
Jun 09, 2016 17:59 |  #29

ekinnyc wrote in post #18034050 (external link)
how do you balance speed vs sharpness/focusing

Money. You throw money at the problem.


Nikon Z7 / D850 | Canon C200 / 1DXII | Fujifilm XT2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
ekinnyc
Senior Member
Avatar
782 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Mar 2011
Location: Brooklyn, NY
     
Jun 16, 2016 13:23 as a reply to  @ idkdc's post |  #30

LOL!

seems like the 1.8 VC is a good middle ground between the 35mm 1.4 choices, and the f/2 IS

every review i've read so far mentions that the tamron AF isnt as fast as the others - yet noone mentions what "slower" means - has anyone done any real-world comparisons of what "slower" AF means compared to something like the L, sigma, or the f/2


6D| 35mm f/2 IS
Buying/Selling Feedback

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

9,307 views & 3 likes for this thread
Tamron SP 45mm F1.8 VC and SP 35mm F1.8 VC
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is mcsdet
1610 guests, 252 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.