New BR Lens Before the End of the Year? [CR2]

[ahsanford]

The 15-30 is a tank of a lens. It is very, very well made. You'll find that I used the 16-35mm f/2.8 and f/4L IS lenses alongside it for an extended period of time (I didn't own any of them at the time), and I personally chose the Tamron.

+1.

As much as I lament the front filter ring decision, the 15-30 f/2.8 VC appears to be as formidable a piece of kit Dustin's review is stellar (as are the pictures he took with the wonderpana setup on that lens!).

I'll stick with my 16-35 F/4L IS because convenient front-filtering is massive for me, but that Tamron is a fine tool.

- A

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

The 15-30 is a tank of a lens. It is very, very well made. You'll find that I used the 16-35mm f/2.8 and f/4L IS lenses alongside it for an extended period of time (I didn't own any of them at the time), and I personally chose the Tamron.

+1.

As much as I lament the front filter ring decision, the 15-30 f/2.8 VC appears to be as formidable a piece of kit Dustin's review is stellar (as are the pictures he took with the wonderpana setup on that lens!).

I'll stick with my 16-35 F/4L IS because convenient front-filtering is massive for me, but that Tamron is a fine tool.

- A

The 16-35mm f/4L IS is an equally good lens in a number of ways. It definitely is smaller, lighter, and you can use standard filters. It's not a great astro lens, but that is really its only true shortcoming. The Tamron just excites me more, for whatever reason. It has less distortion, less vignette, and of course has the wider f/2.8 aperture that I use for events and in low light.

 

[StudentOfLight]

I'm gonna add another guess: EF 85mm f/2 IS STM

 

[AvTvM]

I'm gonna add another guess: EF 85mm f/2 IS STM

would be nice, but i doubt they could make it small & light enough and unexpensive enough to pass as an EF-M lens.

 

[ahsanford]

I'm gonna add another guess: EF 85mm f/2 IS STM

If they update the 85 f/1.8 USM by slowing it down and giving it slower STM focusing, people would likely be pissed. Consider: the triumvirate of non-L 'IS refresh' lenses (24/28/35) did not get any slower.

The non-L 50mm and 85mm need IS and USM 100%. Those are staple still photography tools.

- A

 

[TAF]

Seems to me the 24-105 is the most in need of refreshment...

It already was refreshed. The 24-70 f/4L IS replaced it for all intents and purposes for a paltry price of 35mm, you get a sharper lens, a lighter lens, and a super super useful 0.7x max mag, which is unheard of. That lens is now correctly kitted as the up-market choice over the 24-105.

For those who believe a 24-105L II is coming, I don't see it. Canon sees that FL range as entry level for FF and wisely introduced a cheaper STM variable max aperture version of it to keep costs down.

Reach-obsessed 'range-o-philes' hate this of course, but Canon is moving away from large FL multipliers in their L zooms in favor of sharpness. I agree with that call 100%.

- A

While your analysis is probably correct, I sincerely hope it is proven wrong.

The 24-70 doesn't cover enough range for it to be an adequate all-around lens. The 24-105 barely does...I was rather hoping for 24-150 or so.

Bottom line, I can carry two fast(er) primes and get better results than the 24-70 yields, without experiencing too much inconvenience.

 

[infared]

I'd be all for a 16-35 f/2.8 mkiii

SERIOUSLY doubt Canon would throw IS into it though

Yeah, a 16-35 f2.8 IS would be absolutely massive (and expensive). Just look at Tamron's 15-30 f2.8 VC,plus the fact that it's a bulbous lens that can't take front filters.

As an occasional landscaper, that Tamron 15-30 just boils by blood. I want to love it, but chasing just 1mm extra cost them a front filter ring. That is now my gold standard example for 'worst lens decision ever'.

- A

To each their own. It's one of my favorite lenses.

Dustin..I read your review of the Tamron and WOW...I have to confess..that I did not know of its existence...but Tamron lost me when I saw on LensRentals (Roger) mention the "falling-out" front elements on the 24-70mm lenses, I believe it was...so I have just disregarded any of their products from that time on. I also think that when I sold off my 16-35mm f/2.8L II to buy the New 16-35mm f/4L IS that the Tamron Superwide Zoom was not yet released. I actually sold off my Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 also, because I realized after owning the new Canon IS zoom that I most likely would rarely use it. (although...I may be in the market for the upcoming Sigma 20mm f/1.4 to give me a fast UWA lens to complement the Canon Zoom, for low-light or astro photos. Waiting for a review on that one).

Here is the thing with the Tamron...even after I read your extensive review, and I do respect your opinion.... I know that Tamron has a 6-year warranty...but after seeing a company that spot glues its front elements in (that can fall out), and even your own problem with your Tamron 24-70mm (the alignment issue)....Do you have the confidence when you go out with the Tamron UWA zoom that you are going to come home with the goods. Does the lens feel cheaply made or "less-than"???
On paper...the lens sounds perfect for me...I do not care about the filter issue, and f/2.8 with accurate AF and IS seems like a dream lens, especially when it also out performs or matches the high-end competition in sharpness, contrast and general IQ. I could live with the size of the monster for ALL of the benefits. That is my one huge hesitation. Has Tamron turned a corner like Sigma seems to have with the build, performance and design of their products? I am not a L fanbois..to the point that I will not own other manufactures...I have the Sigma 50mm and 35mm Arts (and after a return and some tuning on the dock...they are quite incredible for the price)... I know that you are not so much of fan of the Sigma's.
It is interesting how we all have such differing experiences and opinions for our equipment...I guess that goes along with different needs, too.
Thanks for all the great, THOROUGH reviews....You always do a great job with you check out a lens!

The 15-30 is a tank of a lens. It is very, very well made. You'll find that I used the 16-35mm f/2.8 and f/4L IS lenses alongside it for an extended period of time (I didn't own any of them at the time), and I personally chose the Tamron.

As for the 24-70 VC - I have used it more roughly and frequently than any other lens for three years in half a dozen countries and all weather conditions - it actually hasn't let me down at all. I don't know what to say about the "front element" falling out, but that seems like a bit of hyperbole to me. My copy has paid for itself many, many times over (including a single shot used -ironically - by Canon to promote the 6D) ;D

That's FUNNY! Thanks for the input. Your opinion will make me look twice at Tamron offerings in the future...and reconsider my UWA zoom situation.

 

[StudentOfLight]

I'm gonna add another guess: EF 85mm f/2 IS STM

If they update the 85 f/1.8 USM by slowing it down and giving it slower STM focusing, people would likely be pissed. Consider: the triumvirate of non-L 'IS refresh' lenses (24/28/35) did not get any slower.

The non-L 50mm and 85mm need IS and USM 100%. Those are staple still photography tools.

- A

I wasn't suggesting it as an update to the 85mm f/1.8 USM, but rather as a completely different video oriented lens. Think servo-AF in video with shallow depth of field. An example would be interviews where you want to throw the background way out of focus but still allow the subject some freedom to lean forward and back without them drifting out of focus. Also low-light events like school plays/concerts. Also a useful portrait focal length. Wouldn't STM provide sufficient AF speed for the casual photographer?

 

[ahsanford]

I'm gonna add another guess: EF 85mm f/2 IS STM

If they update the 85 f/1.8 USM by slowing it down and giving it slower STM focusing, people would likely be pissed. Consider: the triumvirate of non-L 'IS refresh' lenses (24/28/35) did not get any slower.

The non-L 50mm and 85mm need IS and USM 100%. Those are staple still photography tools.

- A

I wasn't suggesting it as an update to the 85mm f/1.8 USM, but rather as a completely different video oriented lens. Think servo-AF in video with shallow depth of field. An example would be interviews where you want to throw the background way out of focus but still allow the subject some freedom to lean forward and back without them drifting out of focus. Also low-light events like school plays/concerts. Also a useful portrait focal length. Wouldn't STM provide sufficient AF speed for the casual photographer?

Sure -- as a side by side with the 85 f/1.8 USM, I could see that working. But both the 50 f/1.4 USM and 85 f/1.8 USM will be replaced before too long -- they have to be.

- A

 

[StoneColdCoffee]

The 15-30 is a tank of a lens. It is very, very well made. You'll find that I used the 16-35mm f/2.8 and f/4L IS lenses alongside it for an extended period of time (I didn't own any of them at the time), and I personally chose the Tamron.

+1.

As much as I lament the front filter ring decision, the 15-30 f/2.8 VC appears to be as formidable a piece of kit Dustin's review is stellar (as are the pictures he took with the wonderpana setup on that lens!).

I'll stick with my 16-35 F/4L IS because convenient front-filtering is massive for me, but that Tamron is a fine tool.

- A

+1 again on the front element. I traded in my 16-35L II for the Tamron 15-30. After using it awhile Im very glad I did, even though the Tamron is HUGE and heavy comparably. I wouldn't have thought Tamron could beat out Canon..But the corner coma difference is very noticeable. (especially for astro) . So now id say its Nikon 14-24,tamron 15-30, canon 16-35f/2.8 II.
All that being said. I really hope the new lens will be a 16-35L f/2.8III. So you can have a filter set that doesn't resemble Mark Mothersbaughs' DEVO hat in size ! And then cost. How could it be released at less than 2800USD? So id wait for a price drop while I enjoy this Tamron

 

[martti]

Somehow something in the back of my brain is telling me that there will be a 55mm f/1.2.
Just for the old times...like the FD 55mm f/1.2 SSC I had 30 years ago.

 

[jeffa4444]

Please "gojuu" f1.4L IS USM