Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Preview: Tamron SP 15-30mm f/2.8 Di VC USD
#11
Quote:Innsbruck and Geneva... you could have met THXBB12   Smile
Ha, thanks for pointing that out, I didn't remember Smile Yeah, actually, it looks like I'll be regularly travelling to and spending time in Geneva in the near future, so there will be future opportunities Smile

Out of curiosity: where are you located? Maybe it's on my way to Geneva Smile

-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#12
If you travel by train from Zurich, Solothurn is on your way. I could board the same train, so we could end up in Geneva meeting THXBB12, a small PZ meeting with Ex-Nikon and still-Nikon users and some Fuji and Olympus involved.  Smile I already wanted to pay him a visit, but so far it didn't happen.

#13
Sounds great Smile There's no preferred route for me, I usually pick the cheapest ticket I can get, which then either leads through Basel->Biel->Geneva or Basel->Olten->Geneva, the latter one passing Solothurn.

Let's make that happen Smile More via PN though...

-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com

#14
Quote:But since this is the Tamron thread, let me already tell: the 15-30 VC does flare (as most lenses do), but a LOT less than the Nikkor 14-24 (ok, must admit, that's an easy target).


-- Markus
 

Yeah, that seems to be the consensus. The bigger question is whether any of the more lightweight offerings from smaller vendors (Irix, Samyang, Laowa) can compete. It seems to me that all of them have major flare issues (sometimes denied by those manufacturers, but pics don't lie); but still I'm not quite ready to bury my hopes entirely at the moment. The new Sigma 12-24 seems to be decent.
#15
Quote:Yeah, that seems to be the consensus. The bigger question is whether any of the more lightweight offerings from smaller vendors (Irix, Samyang, Laowa) can compete. It seems to me that all of them have major flare issues (sometimes denied by those manufacturers, but pics don't lie); but still I'm not quite ready to bury my hopes entirely at the moment. The new Sigma 12-24 seems to be decent.
These are not competing directly against the Tamron / Sigma / Nikon for a simple reason: lack of AF. Therefore they're in a different class, not immediately comparable; some people may not be bothered by that as they're used to focusing manually, while others (like myself) simply do not consider MF lenses at all.
#16
If MF, then Zeiss 15/2.8 (as comparison or reference) needs to be in that line, too. But there's another difference: Nikkor, Tamron, Sigma: all of them are zooms and I'd also say, all those zooms (together with the Canon colleague) perform aside of flare on a very high, nearly prime level.

 

Studor13, those are some useful ideas for work with those lenses - if I have a tripod and umbrella with me. And the latter I take if it looks like a probably rainy day, which usually means, no sun fllares. I'm a bit sceptical if a partially blocked sun will mean "different contrast for blocked and unblocked picture, but there's an easy way to find out.  ^_^

#17
Quote:These are not competing directly against the Tamron / Sigma / Nikon for a simple reason: lack of AF. 
 

For some they don't. For me they do, very directly. Depends on use. I could care less about AF with an ultrawide that I use for landscape and astro.
#18
If "astro" appears in the intended usage list, I would stay away from AF lenses, if I were you. None of them has a mechanical stop at  âˆž . I would try to get my hands on an Irix lens just because of some of their features, try it and if it fulfills my needs, use it and don't care about other offers. If I were you, but I'm not, so for me AF is also important as I trust it more (in LV) than manual focus. PDAF on Nikon - at least at mine - works less reliable, wide open and off center, so it clearly is a case for "better LV, if it has to be wide open".
#19
Quote:If "astro" appears in the intended usage list, I would stay away from AF lenses, if I were you. None of them has a mechanical stop at  âˆž . I would try to get my hands on an Irix lens just because of some of their features, try it and if it fulfills my needs, use it and don't care about other offers. If I were you, but I'm not, so for me AF is also important as I trust it more (in LV) than manual focus. PDAF on Nikon - at least at mine - works less reliable, wide open and off center, so it clearly is a case for "better LV, if it has to be wide open".
 

The problem is that on extended hiking trips, I don't want to carry both an astro and a landscape ultrawide - and the Irix seems to flare like crazy in some situations, so shooting into the setting sun might be a problem.

 

That said, I can usually focus on bright stars using live view at night, so I don't necessarily need a hard infinity stop.
#20
 I have shot directly into the sun with the Samyang 14mm F2.8, generally it's pretty resistant to flares but you do get the odd artifact, not quite as resistant as their 8mm fisheye though. The 14mm is MF and as such has a hard infinity focus stop.

Dave's clichés
  


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)