Tamron will ship the new SP 24-70mm f/2.8 A-mount lens from April 18th in Japan and subsequently elsewhere.
Source: Tamron (Thanks Mistral for finding the news).
Tamron will ship the new SP 24-70mm f/2.8 A-mount lens from April 18th in Japan and subsequently elsewhere.
Source: Tamron (Thanks Mistral for finding the news).
*Please also check your spam folder if you don't get the confirmation mail. And mark the mail as "non-spam" to see the future newsletter.
58 Responses
Do you know if it will be cheaper than the EF equivalent (since it lacks the stabilizer)?
Unlikely, since the volume of Sony mount sales will be much lower than Canon or Nikon mounts. Regardless, $1099 (@ DigitalRev) for a 24-70/2.8 that performs as good as Canon or Nikon variants is quite amazing.
If only Sony had a cheaper FF body for under $2000.
They do, and its got their very own sensor: the Nikon D600
Well you can always get an A850 for 1000$ in great condition? and save the money for the A99 which easily beats the D600, not even in the same league.
The D600 is inferior only in video performance. In still performance it has slightly better IQ since there is no light loss due to the fixed mirror. It has more AF points (ok the Sony has that 102 assist points but they cannot be used to lock focus and Nikon has better tracking ability anyways).
I do like the A99 but if they could make a cheaper A97 or something without the additional video features for $2000 I would pick it up in a heartbeat.
Wishful thinking I know since the admin had posted earlier that no new FF camera is coming out soon.
The free flash and grip is very nice and all but its not available for people outside the US.
But why the Nikon D600 is cheaper? and every day more cheaper? Is because the oil dust collector sensor issue. 600 actuations and you don’t see problem, but after 1000 you’re doomed (google it for more info). People called Nikon support and they sent an email detailing what you could do to clean it and that even not work. Real furious people out there for this issue.
True, however there wasn’t dedicated R&D for the a-mount version. It’s just a variant with a different mount minus an expensive part. Well, it would be nice…
Well, the Tamron 24-70 has been Canikon 24-70 killer, It’s interesting to see if it’s gonna be the ZA Sony 24-70 killer 🙂
Yes! I expect the Tamron to be quite better than the Sigma 24-70/2.8 EX DG HSM, especially in sharpness at 2.8-3.5 (the Sigma is excellent at f4 and above), thus it’ll be on par with the Zeiss in IQ for a lot less money!
That’s fine, but WE NEED the same lens for E MOUNT!! where is this?
Who’s we?
Unless you’re referring to the future FF e-mount, 24-70mm doesn’t make much sense on a cropped sensor e-mount. It’s way too big and heavy.
A 16-50mm f/2.8 (24-75mm equivalent) or something similar makes much more sense. Smaller, lighter and a more useful focal length range. See Sony DT 16-50mm for A-mount. Even then, that is not a particularly light lens.
WE – who are the nuts about NEX system, the “same lens” was referred to the luminosity of the lens f2.8 or even smaller f for the zoom lens.
Thanks for the hint of “Sony DT 16-50mm”, even if it’s not that light.
I’m with you, WHERE is the E mount?
For that matter where are the E mounts in general?
I would buy this lens in a heartbeat (e mount)!!
Same price:
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search?Ntt=tamron+24-70&N=0&InitialSearch=yes&sts=ma&Top+Nav-Search=
Question – AF-D Dual AutoFocus
Will this new TAMRON FF glass offering be AF-D Dual AF certified to use all of the the
Sony A99 102 Focus Points of the Sony AF-F Dual AF functionality
or just the Sony A99 base 19 point AF???
Only the base 19. Sony won’t add lens support for any 3rd party lens, especially when they don’t even support all of their own. Very dumb move I say. This is the same problem as the PDAF support with E-mount.
WOW, If SONY keeps making base alpha and nex products so proprietary, It is NO wonder there are so few lens options.
I am having the same lack of alternative problem with flash options, I need the highest power mobile Flash (type Metz MeccaB76 or Nikon SB910s functional comparable) Sony only offers that one Sony HVLF60M for the A99, A58 & nex6 – with a 60 power guide spec –
Is Sony Kidding?
WOW, If SONY keeps making base alpha and nex products so proprietary, It is NO wonder there are so few lens options.
I am having the same lack of alternative problem with flash options, I need the highest power mobile Flash (type Metz MeccaB76 or Nikon SB910s functional comparable) Sony only offers that one Sony HVLF60M for the A99, A58 & nex6 – with a 60 power guide spec –
Is Sony Kidding
Sony CEO Kazuo Hirai –
Please open up your Alpha platform – We your users (user base) need and require
If you want to sell more Alpha base units – Open up the platform. It is too proprietary.
More AutoFocus – You only provide a 19 AutoFocus AF points on base units
– Industry comparable competitive technology offers 39 or 51 points.
Your AF-D Dual AutoFocus is 102 points, it is only available on Sony Lens
More Lens Options – NO FF Third party glass works with AF-D Dual AutoFocus
More Flash Options – Your Only Flash options for A99, A58 & nex6 are so low power
The A99 AFD – Dual AF – is a Sony exclusive available only for Sony and Minolta “D” (distance encoded) lenses (most).
I nearly bought the tamron. It is good thing i read your review.Thank you for your comments
—The A99 AFD – Dual AF – is a Sony exclusive available only for Sony and Minolta “D” (distance encoded) lenses (most).
I really hope they fixed their ugly ring bokeh. Seems to plague all their lenses.
It doesn’t plague my Tamron 90mm SP macro, or 200-500 SP.
Never had such a problem on 28-75 f2.8 or 90mm macro.
My 28-75/F2.8 has this ring bokeh, and the new 24-70/F2.8 seems to have it to, from the pictures I have seen. what is the reason for me to upgrade except for the wider angle?
Ultrasonic motor?
Dramatically improved image rendering across the whole zoom. This lens is a class above the 28-75. It’s almost as good as the Nikkor and Zeiss equivalents for significantly less money. Think of it as being right between the 28-75 and, say, the Zeiss and the pricing matches that.
If your eyes aren’t capable of seeing the improved optical quality then don’t spend the money on it, it’s that simple.
I don’t think this is a good rendering at all:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ralphwelin/8388159420/
And weather sealing.
No such plague on my 17-50/2.8.
Unfortunately, lens has no image stabilization. So, if somebody needs 24-70 for NEX, he should chose between fast AF (with LA-EA2) and image stabilization.
will this TAMRON it be allowed to use the Sony Dual AF-D for 102points of autofocus??
Same 24-70 range, same f2.8 aperture, and same $2k price as the Ziess?
Somehow I don’t think there sales are going to be too high.
It looks to me that it’s $700 cheaper (at the least at B&H preorder).
where did you see it has the same price as the zeiss?
Why no 28-70 for E mount? 😐
For a moment there I got hyped out thinking my NEX prayers were answered, and then I saw the A mount details…
$1299.00 for the New Tamron, or $1222.00 for a good 2nd hand CZ 24-70. Tough choice, i will have to see some real world comparisons.
No Choice at all. The Zeiss 24-70 is the sharpest lens in my bag…
Tamron might do a good job on their optical design, and that’s all fine, but they really ought to do something about the more or less hideous exterior. Among third party lens producers, Tamron has the ugliest lenses on the market. Even el cheapo Bower/Samyang looks better. Carl Zeiss has a very clean and professional look, and Sigmas three new series are very promising, both optically and visually.
No, I am not a Tamron hater. I have several old Tamron SP Adaptall2 lenses in my collection, from the time when they looked good. No, great in fact. 35 years old, they still look as if they were designed yesterday. A very clean and industrial design. Pretty close to the look on Sony SEL lenses but entirely black. Compare the SEL 55-210 and the Tamron SP 70-210 Adaptall2 and you’ll see what I mean.
http://www.seller119us.com/cluney1002/ebay8/sony/sel55210_01.jpg
http://allphotolenses.com/public/files/img/3812aa2e92c8790769de503d2982addc.jpg
It’s just personal taste, lots of people complain how the grip finish on sony lenses are dust magnets compared to tamron equivalents (I’m in different myself)
Yes, it’s a matter of taste, I know. And yes, function is more important than form, I know. 🙂
I completely agree. It’s just aesthetics, but Tamron lenses look so damn ugly. 🙂 If a Tamron lens produces the best pictures for the price, I’ll still buy it, but the design is a bitter pill to swallow. The CZ 2470 is beautiful. Clean, simple, handsome (and priced to match, unfortunately). The new Sigma 35mm looks good. But Tamron still looks like a cheap copy of a Nikkor lens– and I don’t think even those look good. Whatever, it’s just glass I guess. 🙂
They already have a 28-75mm f/2.8 for $499. Why make a slightly wider lens $1299? They would have been better off making an E-mount version with VC.
Why it costs more:
1) ultrasonic motor = better AF/MF switching, quieter focusing
2) weather sealing
3) goes wider, probably has better optical performance
4) stabilization (well, for the Nikon/Canon versions at least, but Tamron doesn’t give a discount on non-stabilized Sony versions)
There is still a much greater market share available in the E-mount (&M43) sector, being that such a lens does not exist and is needed to fill the large holes in their lens selection. Sigma also makes a very similar lens for the Sony A-mount (Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 IF EX DG HSM AF) with the same specs as this “new” Tamron A007 minus the moisture resistance for $824, which to me moisture resistance does not really merit the extra $475 premium, but maybe that’s just frugal me.
Problem is it’s hardly a budget lens, it’ll be not that far off a 2nd hand zeiss. It’ll be interesting to see how it compares when the lens reviewers get hold of it
Nice to know! Right now 5 of my 7 lenses are different Tamrons – modern ones and old ones alike… Good quality and good price also!
Something nobody seems to have noticed is that this lens is splash/dust resistant. The Zeiss is not. In fact, almost no Sony lens is protected this way. This may be relevant to some people.
Well spotted! Yes the sealing will attract some and it’s worth a mention. I feel the Tamron is a good lens, used one on a Canon and it’s right up there with it’s rivals or pretty damn close. I suspect it will be a hit for Tamron when the price is right, it should be around £600 cheaper than the Sony lens and that’s a big difference, but importantly a small difference in optics.
Some Tamron’s have wonderful Bokeh, the 90mm macro is one example. Most zooms like this lens would not be considered Bokeh kings from any maker.
Indeed, even the Zeiss 24-70 isn’t great in terms of bokeh.
Exactly, and just pointed that out above. What’s the point of a weather sealed body that will be replaced more frequently than the non-sealed lenses. In general, I’d rather protect lenses over bodies if I had to choose.
It’s just a shame that the A99 costs more than 2000$..
Is this tamron a better alternative to the minolta 28-75 G?
Wish it were as sharp as ZA2470 but weight a lot less, I only use ZA2470 for indoor events that I have no time to change lenses…but I can’t hold it for too long becoz its bulky and heavy!
Is it too heavy for you for handheld video or stills? If you’re shooting for hours handheld that’s understandable (try a monopod). If it’s too heavy for you for stills, try hitting the gym a little.
Also, to make lens swaps a cinch – a belt-mounted lens holster makes swapping a 20 second action.
I have/had a couple of Tamron Lenses. The 17-50 2.8 was pretty nice, and worked well with the A55/57. The 70-200 2.8 looked ok, but has painfully bad AF performance. It’s both slow, and hunts way more than the Sony Version. If this lens performs like the 17-50, it’s probably pretty good for the money.
Sony should launch an entry level FF A-mount camera to compete with 6D/D600.
Rebrand this lens and make it cheaper than competitor’s 24-105/4, 24-120/4…
There already is – the Sony a850.
Missing a few modern features, but still better resolution than the 6D, and probably has similar AF capabilities too.
Sure, you miss high ISO performance, live view, and video, but it’s quite a bit cheaper.