Now, what do you think is the more likely way of having this lens released in Z mount: rebadge or straight? :-)
(08-24-2023, 07:11 AM)Klaus Wrote: [ -> ]https://www.tamron.com/global/consumer/n...30824.html
Looks quite "long" (as usual) despite them stating that it's compact.
I suppose this will kill their own 20-40mm f/2.8
Very long (114 vs 87 mm, almost exactly as the 28-75!) 100g heavier and f/4.0.
Not enough for real estate, museums, churches and other historical interiors as well as city nights.
I passed on the Sony 20-70/4.0 and will for this 17-50/4,0 but keep my 20-40/2,8.
I see Klaus has got his hands on this one. This is a review that I'll be waiting for. I'm so excited that I'm almost ready to proclaim this lens the best thing since sliced bread (sorry, Canon 16-35/4!), although of course I'd need to wait for the actual test to see if my faith has any foundation in reality...)
Nothing to be sorry for: if this lens is not up to the scratch, that ought to save me a good deal of money, as well as the hassle of adapting. Oh, and snuff out the GAS... a little.
A win-win situation.
The Sony FE 20-70mm G is in my personal stock, and I certainly prefer it over this one.
The first sample of the T17-50 also had a centering issue - and it took me a while to get a new one. The review was actually planned for early November.
Thank you for the information. Well, there's still hope in the 50-400...
Dustin Abbott seemed quite impressed:
https://dustinabbott.net/2023/10/tamron-...xd-review/
Of course this lens has big, big barrel distortion at the wide end, though in his experience it was a little less prominent than on the Sony 20-70mm @ 20mm (but not by much).
Okay... that may be an obtuse thing to ask, but is there a chance for the review to be published before New Year?
(kind of like Markus's famous review of Fuji 16-80 that hit shortly before we were due to open the champagne...)