Patent: Tamron 300mm f/2.8, 400mm f/4, 500mm f/4

tiggy@mac.com

R5
CR Pro
Jan 20, 2014
695
584
Thetford, VT
www.camnostic.com
I've always thought it was a big opportunity lost over the past year or so for the lens companies not to make some long f/8 glass. Small and long. With bodies now doing pretty good AF at f/8, it's just obvious. Perhaps I'm just impatient, and it takes that long to design and start production.

My dream would be a 600 f/8 DO, which would cut down on both width and length.
 

slclick

Unsolicited & Always Free
Dec 17, 2013
4,494
2,771
tiggy@mac.com said:
I've always thought it was a big opportunity lost over the past year or so for the lens companies not to make some long f/8 glass. Small and long. With bodies now doing pretty good AF at f/8, it's just obvious. Perhaps I'm just impatient, and it takes that long to design and start production.

My dream would be a 600 f/8 DO, which would cut down on both width and length.

If I lived somewhere with more yearly abundant sunshine, such as San Diego, I'd love longer and slower but living in a place with actual seasons and not as much available light, the need for f/4 is real.
 

Plainsman

EOS 90D
Oct 26, 2012
193
0
....made in China very probably so QC suspect
...so better to purchase a used Canon equivalent for the same price
 

slclick

Unsolicited & Always Free
Dec 17, 2013
4,494
2,771
Plainsman said:
....made in China very probably so QC suspect
...so better to purchase a used Canon equivalent for the same price

I find it hard to make build and pricing judgements on something that may or may not come to fruition
 

Plainsman

EOS 90D
Oct 26, 2012
193
0
slclick said:
Plainsman said:
....made in China very probably so QC suspect
...so better to purchase a used Canon equivalent for the same price

I find it hard to make build and pricing judgements on something that may or may not come to fruition

Tamron will surely follow Sigma
 

preppyak

EOS R
Oct 18, 2011
1,024
78
tiggy@mac.com said:
hat, in part, is due to much larger discounting on the 3rd parties hurting the aftermarket.
3rd parties also do that to themselves. For example, Sigma 150-600 contemporary is nearly half its list price in about 3 years. The used market for that is comparably cheap...and if you bought early, well, you wont do that ever again with Sigma.

Whereas the Sports version has held its price, likewise for the Tamron G2. And their used markets are fairly steady as a result
 

Don Haines

Beware of cats with laser eyes!
Jun 4, 2012
8,265
1,935
Canada
slclick said:
Plainsman said:
....made in China very probably so QC suspect
...so better to purchase a used Canon equivalent for the same price

I find it hard to make build and pricing judgements on something that may or may not come to fruition

I agree!

The day before Tamron came out with the 150-600, if you had predicted that lens for under $1000 people would have laughed at you. It arrived and sold out for half of a year, and then along came Sigma with another two..... Now they have the G2 version at almost L quality and with a dock for software updates for $1400. It is a very fine lens with a quality build.

If they make a prime of a similar build, it will be a very sharp lens and once again, probably sell out for a half year until production can catch up....

They surprised us once, they can do it again.
 

Mr Majestyk

EOS RP
Feb 20, 2016
411
266
Australia
I think your are wrong about a 400 f/4 being much cheaper. The 400 f/4 DO II is only a tad dearer than the 300 f/2.8 and is exactly the sort of price I would have expected for a non DO version anyway, it won't be and can't be much cheaper than a 300 f/2.8. most people expected the mk II DO to be $10K, so the pricing was a actually quite good IMO.

Having said that Tamron will offer something much cheaper than Canon at any FL, but I'm more interested in them offering FE versions of these lenses, because Sony certainly will take years and ask 2x the price
 

Plainsman

EOS 90D
Oct 26, 2012
193
0
Don Haines said:
slclick said:
Plainsman said:
....made in China very probably so QC suspect
...so better to purchase a used Canon equivalent for the same price

I find it hard to make build and pricing judgements on something that may or may not come to fruition

I agree!

The day before Tamron came out with the 150-600, if you had predicted that lens for under $1000 people would have laughed at you. It arrived and sold out for half of a year, and then along came Sigma with another two..... Now they have the G2 version at almost L quality and with a dock for software updates for $1400. It is a very fine lens with a quality build.

If they make a prime of a similar build, it will be a very sharp lens and once again, probably sell out for a half year until production can catch up....

They surprised us once, they can do it again.

"..G2 version almost L quality.."

that's a plain daft statement
which Canon L lens are you comparing it with?
Canon AF, IS will always beat a Tamron and Canon L lenses have first class QC and build quality
Now most reviewers rate the G2 as slightly better than the G1
I had a G1 once and it was poor - much sharper on one side than the other due to optical alignment problem but it passed Tamron quality control in China.
 

RGF

How you relate to the issue, is the issue.
Jul 13, 2012
2,820
38
tiggy@mac.com said:
RGF said:
tiggy@mac.com said:
it'll retain value much more over time.

Wonder how true this is. Not doubting the truth, just much better does Canon (or Nikon) glass hold their value than good 3rd party glass (excluding of course, Zeiss)

I spent the last two years buying and selling cameras and lenses, using the arbitrage profits accrued to pay for the 500. In the course of that, I have noticed that the Canon lenses retain value for longer. That, in part, is due to much larger discounting on the 3rd parties hurting the aftermarket. There are other reasons. With Sigma still up at its launch price, it's I DON'T believe it's a good candidate for value retention.

thanks
 

dslrdummy

EOS RP
Aug 28, 2012
376
145
tiggy@mac.com said:
IglooEater said:
Choice is normally good for the overall market, so I’m excited to see what comes from Tamron. imho Sigma’s venture into that territory with the 500mm f/4 sports was just to expensive to choose over a used Canon edition.

Yeah, IglooEater, I was looking to buy a 500mm Sigma. Reportedly an excellent lens, just as good as Canon's, but for reported focus shift affecting apertures greater than f/4 (not a great concern for me). That said, I found a used 500mm L II for 116% the cost of the best used Sigma 500 cost, so I bought the Canon of course, as it doesn't have the focus shift issue, and it'll retain value much more over time.

Pretty sure we'll see Sigma's 500 come down to $4500 eventually from the $6k you see now. A sigma offering at 400mm could very well be a $2500 lens, if they chose to go for volume (something Tamron can do much more so than Sigma).

I suspect Tamron would do better to throw the 500mm into the market first, though. More demand, less competition. More of an upgrade market, where most owners of a 400 would need something special to "upgrade" to something that also only got 400mm.

Would expect a Tamron 500 f/4 to go for $3500. Being the cost of a decent pro body, that's a pretty darned reasonable package.

Further, I think the big white refresh from Canon will have to be priced lower than the version IIs simply due to existing and forthcoming competition. They might launch high, but I expect the effective price after discounts to be much lower than the current effective prices. When I borrow a big white from Canon now through its CPS program, they list on the invoice the value of the lens at $16,000, yet they charge $10k-12k in reality. Wouldn't be surprised if we are in the 5-figure range for the next generation once they catch up with supplying the market for those who just can't wait to pay the full price on pre-orders (a year in, typically).
I had been contemplating the Sigma 500 f4 for a while to replace my 300 2.8ii and then over the Xmas period there was a 15% discount being offered by one of our (Aussie) retailers so I bought it. Just took delivery so can't report on the focus shift issue yet but it is a sweet lense. As for Canon glass holding its value. Yes it does but the flip-side is that second hand big whites are not that cheap (here at least), assuming you can find them. Indeed, the second hand market here for Superteles is not big - I haven't had any bites on my near mint 300 after a couple of weeks on two sites.
 

dslrdummy

EOS RP
Aug 28, 2012
376
145
tiggy@mac.com said:
dslrdummy, great luck with your new 500. Let us know what you think of focus shift. For my part, I seldom find myself shooting the 500 at thinner apertures, so it wouldn't be a big deal.
Thanks. I generally shoot the 300 with the extender for sport and wildlife so f4 as well. Just wanted a bit more reach and hopefully a tad sharper.
 

AlanF

Stay at home
CR Pro
Aug 16, 2012
8,273
10,345
dslrdummy said:
As for Canon glass holding its value. Yes it does but the flip-side is that second hand big whites are not that cheap (here at least), assuming you can find them. Indeed, the second hand market here for Superteles is not big - I haven't had any bites on my near mint 300 after a couple of weeks on two sites.

Having seen that the 300/2.8 II was selling very slowly on eBay, even from reputable dealers, I sold mine at the end of last October to a major dealer in used gear. It is still unsold on their site. Now that inflation is generally low and manufacturers are more aggressive in price cutting, with even Canon giving 10% discounts on all L lenses periodically, you will be lucky not to lose big money on buying new Canon big whites and then selling. The amount lost in buying a Tamron or Sigma 150-600mm and selling on at half-price is far less. The 500mm will lose a lot. But, you buy a lens to use it.
 
Sigma never made a mark across the board with long primes (which means don't chime in about a single particular great lens you owned once in a blue moon) so let's hope Tammy gets it right. There has never truly been econo choices for birding, let us hope.