Johnny Johnson wrote:
> At 05:41 PM 11/8/2007, Moose wrote:
>
>> Some may recall my abortive experience with the Tamron 28-300 VC lens.
>> Supposed to be my favorite lens with IS added - only it didn't IS.
>>
> I didn't see anything from you about it. What was the problem?
>
Maybe I didn't burden the list with this OT issue. I would likely have
reported if it worked. It is, after all, a lens of most interest to FF
Canyon users - and we are still a minority here. :-)
Back in maybe July, I saw a full page ad in PopPhoto for this lens. I
checked and found it wasn't yet available, but I stayed vigilant and
noticed as soon as it showed up at B&H. Wasn't even showing except with
some searches. Anyway, I bought it.
When I tried it out, I could see the viewfinder image steady when it
kicked in - kewl. To see how much advantage it might give, I shot three
shot sequences with and without VC on at various focal lengths and
shutter speeds. The results were quite disappointing, with the VC
disabled results holding a slight lead overall.
I asked Tamron service about it and found that "some" lenses were having
problems. Checking back on B&H, I found that the lens was now
"back-ordered". It turns out that it was a very broad problem and Tamron
withdrew them from sale and posted an apology on the page for that lens
on their site, promising a later release after problems were worked out.
Apparently only a handful of lenses were sold before the recall. I
suppose reports like mine may have led them to discover the problem.
After all, Tamron in the US mostly just receives lenses and distributes
them, they don't normally test them unless returned for repair.
Tamron offered to replace it when they got working ones, but had no idea
when that might be, so I returned it to B&H as defective. A recent email
from Tamron saying they were back led to a phone call to B&H and their
offer to overnight my replacement.
> You do realize don't you that VR (IS) won't stop subject motion? (Just
> yanking your chain!) ;-)
>
Yeah, I know I've been a broken record on that. I just was amazed how
many posts I saw on forums where people apparently didn't understand
that basic truth.
Following my own rules, I went with low noise at high iso first, now I'm
going to IS second. I do shoot a lot of static subjects. The Tamron is
1/4 the weight of the Canyon, only a tiny bit slower at the long end and
way cheaper. And I find it very good optically. According to PopPhoto
tests, an earlier version of the Tammy preformed at the same level as
the Canyon (some give and take), and better at wider apertures at 300
mm. So that speed advantage at 300 mm may not be real. The Tammy is now
a design generation or two later, so who knows.
I just don't see myself hauling around such a ponderous, conspicuous
monster as Canyon's version. If I did, it's name would be Moby. :-)
Moose
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|