Review - Tamron 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Well I've just got the 45 from Wex here in the UK. I'll give it a little go this evening and over the next few days with my 5D II and III bodies and report back here in due course. Fingers crossed it's a good copy...

Definitely report back. I find everyone's feedback interesting. I've only used one copy (though I've purchased my own -second copy) but am waiting for my wife to give it to me for Christmas

Few of us have the opportunity that Roger does to review multiple copies of everything. I'm actually surprised at the reports of AF issues for two reasons: 1) I didn't notice any of those issues in either the 35mm or 45mm when I reviewed them and 2) I've been using a number of Tamrons professionally for several years and have had very, very good focus accuracy with them (24-70 VC, 70-200 VC, and 15-30 VC more recently.)

 

[GammyKnee]

Definitely report back. I find everyone's feedback interesting. I've only used one copy (though I've purchased my own -second copy) but am waiting for my wife to give it to me for Christmas

Hehe.. it's going to feel like a long time until Christmas then!

I've had the lens on both bodies for a bit tonight, just to get first impressions of the AF, VC - nothing more than that until tomorrow when I'll have West of Scotland "not-night-light" (it doesn't really qualify as daylight).

My first shots with the center point of the 5DII showed that AFMA was needed. I dialled in a guestimated adjustment (nothing extreme) on the spot, and after that focus seemed to be in the ball park and pretty consistent given the energy saving lighting in most of our house. I didn't try the outer points on this body (I rarely trust them anyway). The lens was quite slow to focus, yet surprisingly decisive (very little hunting).

For the 5DIII I performed a quick dottune AF adjustment under artificial daylight-temp lighting (-2), and then went about shooting various things with a selection of the mark III's cross-type points elsewhere in the house. Focus speed was noticeably snappier on the mark III than the mark II (more so than I'd have expected) and the center point performed a bit better than the non-center cross points (no surprise), but given the poor lighting I feel that it did pretty well AF-wise.

Tomorrow I'll be able to try some daylight shots, check for sharpness, decentering etc but right now I'd have to say that if I end up sending this lens back it probably won't be for AF. It's early days but I have to say I'm quite relieved, having had some "fun" times with Sigma and Canon's 50 1.4 in the past.

BTW the VC is really good, noticeably better than the IS on Canon 24-105. According to the manual it can be used with panned shots (dubious about that but we'll see in due course).

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Definitely report back. I find everyone's feedback interesting. I've only used one copy (though I've purchased my own -second copy) but am waiting for my wife to give it to me for Christmas

Hehe.. it's going to feel like a long time until Christmas then!

I've had the lens on both bodies for a bit tonight, just to get first impressions of the AF, VC - nothing more than that until tomorrow when I'll have West of Scotland "not-night-light" (it doesn't really qualify as daylight).

My first shots with the center point of the 5DII showed that AFMA was needed. I dialled in a guestimated adjustment (nothing extreme) on the spot, and after that focus seemed to be in the ball park and pretty consistent given the energy saving lighting in most of our house. I didn't try the outer points on this body (I rarely trust them anyway). The lens was quite slow to focus, yet surprisingly decisive (very little hunting).

For the 5DIII I performed a quick dottune AF adjustment under artificial daylight-temp lighting (-2), and then went about shooting various things with a selection of the mark III's cross-type points elsewhere in the house. Focus speed was noticeably snappier on the mark III than the mark II (more so than I'd have expected) and the center point performed a bit better than the non-center cross points (no surprise), but given the poor lighting I feel that it did pretty well AF-wise.

Tomorrow I'll be able to try some daylight shots, check for sharpness, decentering etc but right now I'd have to say that if I end up sending this lens back it probably won't be for AF. It's early days but I have to say I'm quite relieved, having had some "fun" times with Sigma and Canon's 50 1.4 in the past.

BTW the VC is really good, noticeably better than the IS on Canon 24-105. According to the manual it can be used with panned shots (dubious about that but we'll see in due course).

Some quality feedback. Interesting to hear how much different AF speed is between the 5D3 and the 5D2. I know that newer Canon lenses are designed to get that speed advantage when mounted on certain bodies; I wonder if Tamron has found a way to reverse engineer for that?

One of the things that I think you will really enjoy about the lens is the overall drawing and look of the images. It really is very, very nice.

 

[GammyKnee]

Some quality feedback. Interesting to hear how much different AF speed is between the 5D3 and the 5D2. I know that newer Canon lenses are designed to get that speed advantage when mounted on certain bodies; I wonder if Tamron has found a way to reverse engineer for that?

One of the things that I think you will really enjoy about the lens is the overall drawing and look of the images. It really is very, very nice.

Thanks Dustin. I had a bit more time to play with the lens this morning on the 5DIII, and I'm seeing something of what Bryan at TDP described with respect to the outer cross-type points. The center point seems really dependable, the central bank of 21 are also pretty good, but the outer cross-types seem to struggle when the subject is a few metres away and/or lacking strong contrast.

That said, it's still easily the best auto-focusing 50-ish prime I've had:
- my old Canon 50 1.8 II had very iffy AF in low light
- my Canon 50 1.4 was really unpredictable and could point blank refuse to focus accurately in certain conditions
- my third copy of the Sigma 50 DG EX (pre-Art) has given me some nice shots, but I can really only trust it on my mark III body (very inconsistent on the mark II) and then only if I use AI Servo all the time; one-shot is hopeless

Regarding the focusing speed, I checked again with my mark II and yep, it's still noticeably slower on that body. To be fair I see a difference with my Canon 85 1.8 too, but it's less pronounced. It's a wash with my other lenses (no recent models though).

Maybe Tamron has indeed made a breakthrough in deciphering Canon's lens interface. One thing is for sure, on both bodies, the full model name of the lens is recognized. When you go into the AFMA screen, you're adjusting the "Tamron SP 45mm F/1.8 Di VC USD F013" not some nameless lens with a 45mm focal length. The same goes for the EXIF; the full model name is stated in there. I've never seen that with a 3rd party lens before (though I've only ever used Sigma). Are older Tamron lenses also recognized, or is this new to the SP series?

Anyway, bottom line is that this lens is a keeper for me. The weaker performance with the outer AF points is something I can live with, particularly as it only seems to happen at distances where focus-and-recompose is a viable workaround. And anyway, it's a small compromise given the big jump in IQ over what I've had before at this focal length. And then there's the VC coupled with unusually close focusing...

All I need now is for the weather to perk up a bit so I can put the lens to proper use.

BTW it was your review that convinced me to give this lens a try - big thank you for that!

 

[mrsfotografie]

.... One thing is for sure, on both bodies, the full model name of the lens is recognized. When you go into the AFMA screen, you're adjusting the "Tamron SP 45mm F/1.8 Di VC USD F013" not some nameless lens with a 45mm focal length. The same goes for the EXIF; the full model name is stated in there. I've never seen that with a 3rd party lens before (though I've only ever used Sigma). Are older Tamron lenses also recognized, or is this new to the SP series?...

Interestingly, my new Tamron 28-300mm VC PCD also does that, I've noticed although I didn't pay too much attention to the fact earlier.