Review - Tamron 45mm f/1.8 Di VC USD
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
Nice work as always, Dustin. I very much want a new 50-ish prime with fast/reliable/consistent AF. The 50L is too soft and the the Sigma Art is a monstrous pickle jar with inconsistent AF. I'm still waiting for Canon to get off it's butt and give us the 50 f/nooneknows IS USM that I think many of us would buy on day one.
But while I'm waiting, I'm glad to see Tamron try to fill this void. Sounds like the principal concerns for what I shoot are AF speed and chromatic aberration. It's also much bigger and heavier than my old 50 f/1.4 USM, but not so bad in that regard as the Sigma. (In fairness, I suppose the days of the compact double gauss 50 prime might be over.)
How much slower would you peg the AF on this to a decent mid-level USM lens like the 35 f/2 IS USM? Is it still faster than the peppier variant of STM from Canon?
And have you had success at removing the chromatic aberrations in post, or was that problematic to accomplish? They are more of a hassle than an incorrectible problem, correct?
Thanks!
- A
But while I'm waiting, I'm glad to see Tamron try to fill this void. Sounds like the principal concerns for what I shoot are AF speed and chromatic aberration. It's also much bigger and heavier than my old 50 f/1.4 USM, but not so bad in that regard as the Sigma. (In fairness, I suppose the days of the compact double gauss 50 prime might be over.)
How much slower would you peg the AF on this to a decent mid-level USM lens like the 35 f/2 IS USM? Is it still faster than the peppier variant of STM from Canon?
And have you had success at removing the chromatic aberrations in post, or was that problematic to accomplish? They are more of a hassle than an incorrectible problem, correct?
Thanks!
- A
Upvote
0
I've just added this on my 'I tentatively want this' list. The short MFD and overall optical qualities please me as well as the reasonable weight and size. Dimensionally it is an almost perfect match to my Sigma 35mm A.
Not sure if I would keep it next to my 50mm EX DG...
The 50mm A has been right out for me due to its massive size.
Not sure if I would keep it next to my 50mm EX DG...
The 50mm A has been right out for me due to its massive size.
Upvote
0
As a side note, offering a 50mm prime (or 45, 55, etc.) is a very very crowded commercial space. You need a gameplan and a very carefully though through value proposition. You need to be cheaper, or you need to be smaller, or you need to be lighter, sharper, whatever.
Tamron appears to be putting VC (IS) on everything these days, and in the 50mm space, that's a very good call. Consider: B&H currently sells 21 primes between 45-56mm for the EF mount. This is the only one with IS.
- A
Tamron appears to be putting VC (IS) on everything these days, and in the 50mm space, that's a very good call. Consider: B&H currently sells 21 primes between 45-56mm for the EF mount. This is the only one with IS.
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
To answer your questions (though as for the former question I am working off memory, as I don't have either the 45mm VC or the 50mm STM in hand right now).
Focus speed is roughly similar between these two lenses. I expected both of them to be snappier than what they are. The biggest situation where you will notice any focus lag is when making a serious change from minimum focus to infinity (bigger focus throw with the Tamron). Most more subtle focus changes will happen very quickly. I pegged the 45mm as being just marginally faster than the Tamron 24-70 VC - if that helps. You will find that the Tamron has a much bigger focus throw than most autofocus primes, which is good for precision but not so good for speed.
Chromatic aberrations - the answer is yes they are easy to correct when it comes to purple fringing. I find the green fringing harder to correct for. The green fringing will mostly show up as bokeh fringing, and I don't find the "eyedropper" tool in Lightroom or Camera RAW works as effectively. In most cases you will only see it at a pixel level, though.
Here's a sample image with crops of before correction, after correction, and then a pixel level crop that will show the purple fringing eliminated after the eyedropper but a bit of the green fringing persisting.
Attachments
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
I agree. It does help to distinguish the lens in a crowded field. I do think that Canon is going to regret not being more proactive about putting out a 50mm IS lens more quickly, but, as much as we rave about the 35mm f/2 IS now, I think that Canon got burned on that release thanks to the almost simultaneous release of the 35A. The Sigma got ALL the press, and probably a fair bit of the sales.
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
Very interesting point. When Canon get around to releasing a 50mm IS I think/hope it will have massive appeal because I'm guessing Canon can make it lighter and smaller. Consider the 35mm f/2 IS is only 335 grams. This Tamron 45mm weighs the same as the 50 L but is about 50% longer.
Upvote
0
Good24 said:
Yep. You beat me to it.
I know the days of a super tiny / light double-gauss 50 prime may be over if you are chasing a 50 MP sensor in 2015, but I'd love something more on the right of this diagram than the left.
I coined the moniker 50 f/noooneknows IS sometime ago for the new non-L because I secretly want 'nooneknows' to be 2.0. I know that's heresy to a number of camps (bokeh people, old school 50 f/1.4 people, etc) but I want a tiny lens like the 35 f/2 IS.
There. I said it. :
- A
Attachments
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:I know the days of a super tiny / light double-gauss 50 prime may be over if you are chasing a 50 MP sensor in 2015, but I'd love something more on the right of this diagram than the left.
I coined the moniker 50 f/noooneknows IS sometime ago for the new non-L because I secretly want 'nooneknows' to be 2.0. I know that's heresy to a number of camps (bokeh people, old school 50 f/1.4 people, etc) but I want a tiny lens like the 35 f/2 IS.
There. I said it. :
- A
I'm still hoping for the Canon 50 IS to be f/1.4. The 50 f/1.4 is small, and I'm hoping that the IS version won't be much bigger/heavier. Leave the fully corrected 50mm fast prime for the 50L f/1.2 II. That will give Canon three distinct tier ranges.
Upvote
0
Random Orbits said:ahsanford said:I know the days of a super tiny / light double-gauss 50 prime may be over if you are chasing a 50 MP sensor in 2015, but I'd love something more on the right of this diagram than the left.
I coined the moniker 50 f/noooneknows IS sometime ago for the new non-L because I secretly want 'nooneknows' to be 2.0. I know that's heresy to a number of camps (bokeh people, old school 50 f/1.4 people, etc) but I want a tiny lens like the 35 f/2 IS.
There. I said it. :
- A
I'm still hoping for the Canon 50 IS to be f/1.4. The 50 f/1.4 is small, and I'm hoping that the IS version won't be much bigger/heavier. Leave the fully corrected 50mm fast prime for the 50L f/1.2 II. That will give Canon three distinct tier ranges.
I've gone and done it again. We're off-topic. My fault.
Back to the Tamron and Dustin's fine work.
- A
Upvote
0
Kind of bummed that Tamron choose the 45mm focal length to preserve similarity to its 35mm counterpart. It's one thing to start with a common design, but having a suboptimal product to preserve a common 67mm filter size? Is it susceptible to chromatic aberrations because of this constraint?
This is a much bigger threat to Sigma than the Canon right now just because of the pricing and gap between the EF 50 f/1.4 and 50 f/1.2. If the 35L II with it's BR element is pointer to the 50L replacement, and the 50L replacement is better (even if slightly) than the 50A, then Canon will still do well in the market.
This is a much bigger threat to Sigma than the Canon right now just because of the pricing and gap between the EF 50 f/1.4 and 50 f/1.2. If the 35L II with it's BR element is pointer to the 50L replacement, and the 50L replacement is better (even if slightly) than the 50A, then Canon will still do well in the market.
Upvote
0
Unfortunately from personal experience Tamron (and Sigma) lenses have serious QC issues if made in China.
If Dustin got this lens direct from Tamron it could have been carefully selected for him.
Don't be deceived by a nice looking lens and if in doubt buy Canon assuming of course it is built in Japan.
Nevertheless thanks for this review Dustin.
If Dustin got this lens direct from Tamron it could have been carefully selected for him.
Don't be deceived by a nice looking lens and if in doubt buy Canon assuming of course it is built in Japan.
Nevertheless thanks for this review Dustin.
Upvote
0
Plainsman said:
Isn't that too generalistic?
I just bought a Tamron 28-300 VC PCD that was made in China, and is works fine, in line with the review Dustin did of a Japan-made copy.
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:...
I know that's heresy to a number of camps (bokeh people, old school 50 f/1.4 people, etc) but I want a tiny lens like the 35 f/2 IS.
There. I said it. :
- A
Which is why this still makes it into my bag anywhere I travel (or its equivalently sized sister, the 35mm f/2.0)
Attachments
Upvote
0
Plainsman said:
If you look at either my full review or the build quality video you will find that Tamron really emphasizes that these lenses are both designed and built in Japan (its on the lens and hood about three times!)
BTW, none of the high end Tamron lenses are built anywhere but Japan. I've only seen consumer grade lenses built in China.
As for a cherry picked copy - if that's the case (and I doubt it is as my reviews have been corroborated by other reviews since), I sure hope my own personal copy I ordered is cherry picked too ;D
Upvote
0
TWI by Dustin Abbott said:
Here's a visual size comparison and it becomes very obvious. The Σ35A and T45 are almost exactly the same size - with the Tamron hitting the weight sweet point at 540 grams (I like my primes around ~0.5kg max). The Sigma is still a bit hefty at 665 grams. I like that they share the 67mm filter size.
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Lens-Product-Images.aspx?Lens=1004&LensComp=829&LensComp2=473
Still, it's a bit shocking to see how 'big' (well, especially 'long') the T45 is compared to the old Σ50 EX DG HSM, but that is an 'old' double Gauss design.
I think I'll keep my Σ50 EX even if I decide to purchase the T45 because it has a dreamy look that I like. I have a great copy but I sometimes hesitate to use it wide open: as a 'museum lens' it's good but it has a terrible macro ratio of 1:7.4 and it can be a lot of work to nail sharpness at apertures wider than f/2.8 because it has a focus shift that becomes a problem at these apertures. AF is not inconsistent on my copy, but I find I often compensate for the focus shift by using DOF preview and MF at apertures wider than f/2.8 when critical focus is needed. This, and the 'throw' of the Σ50 EX focus ring being a bit short, make for arduous manual focus work.
I expect the T45VC to deliver better for static low-light use. I like that it gets up close, and I don't have a normal EF prime yet that features image stabilization. In that sense I'm a bit spoiled already with the Sony 35 f/1.8 OSS. That's the trouble with pushing two camera systems... :
;D
Upvote
0
Similar threads
