No, you are not drunk! The image doesn’t show the same lens twice…theses are two different new Tamron lenses!
On the left you see the 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Full Frame and on the right the Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 APS-C lens. Both will come in A-mount too. Imaging Resource reports:
Both lenses contain aspherical lens elements as well as Ultra-Extra Refractive Index glass, and both will be shown off at this year’s CP+, which is set to begin on February 13th in Yokohama, Japan. Pricing and availability for both lenses have yet to be announced.
Nice lenses!
0 Responses
I think the 16mm is asp and the 28 mm a full frame
No admin you are the one drunk. It is very clear stated that 16-300 is a DI II lens (designed for crop) and further clearly states that it is designed for crop sensor. You know similar to existing Nikon 18-300 lens designed for crop. It would be also nice if you learned a little bit about Tamron. DI II means for Crop (like EFS for Canon). DI without II means for full frame. The second lens is designed for full frame. You know like existing Nikon 28-300. Except Nikon ends at F/5.6, not F/6.3
@David B.
Just skimming the article Andreas mentioned – “….This one is made for full-frame DSLRs, and despite its lower magnification, it sports even more glass than the 16-300mm lens, with 19 lens elements in 12 groups….”
Oops – I accidentally published that before I finished editing … and now I lost the edits …. grrrrr
read it again. and again. DI II signifies build for crop for Tamron. It is universally known, and pretty basic. DI signifies build for full frame. If you need further evidence on this very basic point that anyone who is familiar with Tamron would know, read the link on imaging-resource page. “With the new 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC PZD Macro (yes, that’s its full official name), Tamron introduces an unprecedented 18.8x zoom lens for DSLRs with APS-C-sized sensors. ” Should I explain what APS-C-sized sensor is is????
Even without knowing anything about Tamron brand, which is excusable for a crowd who had never owned a DSLR, common sense would tell you that it is impossible to design a full frame lens to go from 16mm to 300mm. There is no one in existence. If it was possible to make one, it would probably be 5 kilos and huge size.
You make some great points here and the details associated are valuable for all. It’s unfortunate that your intellect and passion for photography, something us poor peasants here can appreciate, is a ghost in the shadow of your bottomless capacity of arrogance. It makes your otherwise good points just noise (oh boy, did I queue a lecture on noise too? I didn’t mean that type of noise, sigh, moving along, nevermind…).
Sometimes I wonder about how people like you lack any sense of courtesy or sense of proportion. Lighten up, please. So what if there is a small mistake in the article?
meh another superzoom
Just what we need…
Tamron 16-300mm f/3.5-6.3 FULL FRAME lens
and on the right the 28-300mm f/3.5-6.3 APS-C lens ?
i think is the other way round.
Of course, it is the other way around it is clear to anyone who cares to think for a second
ops sorry. I now made it right. Banal error 🙂
It IS, the other way around. Admin either got the pictures out of order, or his descriptive title.
Full Frame is the 28-300mm
http://www.tamron-usa.com/news/35mm/28300_A010_feb14.asp
http://www.dpreview.com/products/tamron/lenses/tamron_28-300_3p5-6p3_di_vc_pzd
I see admin beat me to the punch. Now he’s got the description / photograph sequence correct.
Why are you so angry at the admin? Because he did not identify the lenses that you so much love to name it properly? If you think you can make a better job why not starting your own site?
I am confident you are going to do a better job and be error free forever.
In the meantime be more respectful of the work the admin is doing you useless brat.
wooowww… i like the FL…
Bring it on. A cheap, stabilised and fast focusing tele for my A7 (used with LEA4)
Let’s wait for the results. Tamron really surprised me with the 70-300 that I recently got. If image quality comes close, this could be a nice lens for the “light-travel-vacation”.
If image quality is close enough to the Sony 16-105 zoom then I’ll definitely be buying one of these.
There’ve been quite a few times when 105mm just hasn’t given me enough reach, and my longer lenses are all too weighty to carry around when I’m travelling. They’re undoubtedly better at 300mm than this will be, but they only tend to be taken out when I go to a nature reserve or an air show, where I know they’ll be needed.
16mm at the wide end makes a real difference compared with the 18mm of typical APS-C kit zooms. If Tamron do a good job then this could be a great all purpose lens.
I’ve been considering the old Tamron 28-300, but I’m sure the new one will be so much better!
Definitely a buy for me
Looks like will not be available for e-mount
Of course it won’t, it’s not a compact lens
Doesn’t have to be compact.
Wasn’t E-Mount specifically designed to be a compact system?
Camera yes, lens meh, not really. Anyway, I would have been very happy with an E-mount version of this lens. Does not seem much bigger than the current 18-200 and would be an excellent holiday snapshot lens with that more zoom and bit more wide.
Another set of no good superzooms. Tamron should rather work on updating the faster lenses like the 17-50 f2.8 which needs a USD in it; or the 180 macro.
The main plus of 17-50 f/2.8 is that it is very cheap. An upgrade would make it more expensive
And Tamron really shines at superzooms
Agreed, Tamron 17-50 is cheap. But the noisy autofocus and no FTM; made me pay double to get the Sony 16-50 instead. I only wish they upgrade the 17-50, so as us guys can still get a good lens for cheaper money than Sony.
And put the saved money into another one. 🙂
Well, these are not brilliant, but they are usable, and with such a huge zoom range – it might be a perfect walk-around lens that’s ready for nearly every situation.
Ya the lenses are OK for people who don’t want to carry around weight. I used one of the superzooms from Sigma 18-250, and the affair turned out to be a short one. Had to move on as in general anything beyond 4-5x zoom is usually not so brilliant.
I wish they would get their act together and release the 150-600 that was suppose to be released last month.
I wanta FF superzoom 14-300 f.1,4 and Inner fokus. 0,5 kg and 10 cm long 😉
and add WR and SSM and please make it cheap and white and put this cool zeiss logo on it thank you very much 😀
😉 🙂 😉 🙂
Ok, I will buy 16-300, I am sure.
And it’s funny to see names like Ultr-Extra-Mega-Hyper 🙂
Canon oriented design
One thing for sure..We are all going to be ripped off once more by Tamron!!
Why..Because they fit their excellent IS into all lenses….EXCEPT SONY lenses but make us pay exactly the same as those with IS.
Come on Tamron, play fair and leave your IS on ALL lenses and allow us the choice to use yours or Sonys IS. We pay the money, give us the full package.
That is certainly true and has also annoyed me a bit. But at least they actually build the newer lenses for Sony – for Pentax (also in-body-stabilized), they just do not seem to make any new lenses.
Just leaving their VC in would be one option (my Sigma 100mm has that), or, in favor of weight, leaving it out and making the lens accordingly cheaper would be great.
WE SONY USERS ARE THE REASON TAMRON AND NOW SIGMA need to remove is from Sony mount lenses.
Sigma has been overwhelmed by complaints and returns fro Sony users who lack the common sense to turn of the switch so they do not use both syabilization systems together.
T as mron is unwilling to trust users to turn of the switch.
Thats why is has been eliminated!
Well if that is the case, as long as the issue is explained clearly in the operating instructions then all that Sigma and Tamron have to do when they get these complaints is to refer to the operating instructions. I think there is more to it than that.
It IS explained in the instructions.
You just cant fill empty heads with common sence so we all have to pay the price.
You cant blame the lensmakers for not wanting to suffer the financial losses from all those returns.
oh, I never have thought it was so simple.
But in theory, they could use to ship A-mount lenses with IS turned off and require smth complex for user to turn in on (e.g. microswitch)
Why doesn’t anyone try to make a wider superzoom for full frame? How about 24-250? I would buy that…
The pictures and text do not match. 16-300 is on the left and 28-300 is on the right.
Who are you calling “not drunk”? Speak for yourself! 😀
16-300 + Turbo Booster
This will be awesome if the image quality is comparable to other good superzooms and it doesn’t cost much. I especially like the 16mm starting point. Most superzooms only start at 18mm. 18-200mm or even 18-250mm are good, but this starts wider and zooms more, too. Like I said, if the image quality and price are right, this will be great!
100-300 f3.5-4 macro
Where is the Sony Emount version?