This would be certainly good news if they would make it for real! A brand new Tamron patent shows the design of the new 28-320mm f/3.5-6.3 Full Frame E-mount lens. It could become a cheaper and more broader zoom range lens compared to the Sony 24-240mm f/3.5-6.3 OSS that will ship in March 2015. I hope they make it!
Patent found via Egami.
78 Responses
Can we use this lens with good results on a A6000 ? thanks
Seems unlikely that this will give “good results” on anything with that kind of zoom range, but it’ll work just fine on an a6000.
Why no good results ? Tamron has a 16-300mm Amount which is a very good lens, so a FE lens should even be better on a Emount APS-C then on a FE camera, or am I wrong ??
A person’s perception of ‘very good lens’ varies incredibly.
The 16-300 is a ‘good enough’ lens for many, but it’s not a ‘very good lens’. This 28-320 also will be a ‘good enough’ for many lens.
Good enough lens for half the price is very good.
If you want top quality, then go ahead get a Zeiss.
The lens is too long as an all-in-one walk-around lens when on APS-C.
I’d pick an APS-C 18-200mm-ish instead.
The full frame lens will be longer, more expensive and heavier, for no gain.
Tamron, please make this lens with a powerzoom !
While it’s very good news that 3rd party manufacturers are finally waking up and making native FE lenses, I don’t really understand why it only starts at 28 and why does it go to 320… Me, I’d be happy with something like 24-120 f2.8-4 or 24-180 f2.8-5.6.
Anyway, good news, but too many unknown factors: optical quality, price, focusing performance, reliability, size.
>24-120 f2.8-4
>24-180 f2.8-5.6
Expect it to be soft and not sharp until stopped down to f8 then.
Olympus made the 4/3 12-60 f2.8-4, which had excellent sharpness wide open, even with a pixel density that’d equal 48 Mpix on FF.
Even if it’s only 24-135 f3.5-4.5, but sharp corner-to-corner stopping down a third, and reasonable in size, weight and price, I’d still be happier with that range than this 28-320. You can crop 300 from 200, but you can’t add to 28 to make 24.
I just wish they’d make primes rather than zooms…
Why 28mm on the freaking 18mm flange?
24-240 > 28-320
x10 zoom lens is for noobs
Sony needs to have a compact 24-135mm f/4 for video shooters.
The 28-135mm f/4 powerzoom they have is too pricey and big.
They also need to to have 16-50mm f2.8 and 50-150mm 2.8 lens for the A7000
I don’t know why I bother but you must understand that fullframe lenses are always fullframe-size even the camera is mirrorless. If you try to make them smaller you end up with nothing close to a sharp lens with heavy vignetting. As long as you have to deal with today’s optics you have to live with their shortcomings as well.
Give it about another two years and your A7 will be slightly smaller than a D750.
Why, do they grow over time?
So far yes. In light of the gargantuan lenses slated for release this year your going to need it.
I sure hope it does grow. IMO A7II is a step in right direction. Although there should also be A5, which is the same size as first gen A7 or even as big as A6000
You can probably tell that i’m an A-Mount user 🙂
While what you say is true, lens redesign can still make significant size savings. Just think of the LX100. Compared to the predecessor LX7, the lens size grew only 1.3x (+30%) thanks to a different optical formula; if they’d just scaled the lens to fit the bigger sensor, it’d have been 2.3 the size!
The 28-135 f4 is just unjustifiably huge compared to it’s focal and aperture range; perhaps even the 70-200 f2.8 lenses are smaller than it is. I’m sure there could be significant savings (maybe even down to the size of the 24-240) if they made a 24-135 f4.
For video shooters the 28-135mm is a bargain.
for me 24-105/4 is ok 🙂 but 24-135/4 will be nice too 🙂
Too fast!
This would be great if they made it 😀 While I am not a big fan of megazoomes, there is a complete lack of native FE teles… the 70-200 is an excellent lens and priced ok, but I don’t use teles very often and it is just not worth it for me. This would be a great option for a decent allrounder 🙂
I am also fairly sure they will make it, as this most likely IS the 24-240 with a slightly shifted zoom range. Tamron has built lots and lots of lenses for Sony (although shifting the zoom range slightly is an excellent idea that I don’t believe they did before).
I am very interested in the pricing… from Tamrons past lenses, I would guess 999€. I would guess they have an agreement with Sony that they may not sell it “too cheap” in comparison to the “Sony 24-240”. Personally I would go for the Tamron just because of the 5-year warranty.
“…could become a cheaper and more broader zoom range lens compared to the Sony 24-240mm…”
I don’t want to rain on the parade, but I’m pretty sure I could make a zoom with a wider range and sell it for less, but it would be complete and utter garbage! Such a lens is only of the most minor interest until it is released and tested.
Once that happens we might see no interest whatsoever, or waiting times of months to be one of the lucky owners! Unfortunately, you can’t have rumours about performance from a patent application.
Another tourist lens. Moving on.
yet another awesome…. siht… 🙂 i mean this is the most needed lens right now for E-mount ! thank you!
am i sarcastic?
Anything far beyond 5x zoom on a FF demands high compromises related to IQ.
As of Sony bringing a 24-240 they would have done better to bring what’s really needed – a 70-300 or 400.
I’d definitely consider a 70-300 variable aperture zoom… The 24-240 doesn’t do it for me, especially at that price and with the inevitable iq trade off.
Too slow, especially considering that it’s easier to make faster lenses compact at longer focal lengths. This is because the focal length makes such a large contribution to the f-stop ratio,
Why not 24-160?
Seems to be another versatile but bad IQ lens.
YOu can go as long as you want. For all I care…carry up to 500. But if you can’t hit at least 24 on the wide end it’s useless.
Do you know you can put an other lens on your camera, so you can have a say 18-35mm lens and an 28-320mm lens on your camera and change your Tele lens to a WA lens?
Useless anyway. Shoot 70-200 at 200mm, crop it to 320mm equivalent FOV, and you`ll get better image than with non crop 320mm.
+1. Tried Sigma 18-250 and Sony 18-250 on A-Mount APSC when i was just getting started. Sony was better, but on both, anything beyond 100mm was extremely soft. To the point of unusable. I maybe got 1.5-3mp out of that at most…. So for a FF lens, i’m expecting it to be heavier and worse, as it is harder to design precision optics for a larger image circle, than it is for smaller image circle.
24 is when you start getting wide. 28 is meh. 28 is like a wide angle 35mm. 24 is wide. 20 is really what I’d rather. If I can’t get the 24mm on the wide end I’d rather no zoom at all. I can change lenses but I don’t want too. That’s the whole point of a lens like this.
So you have an option of sony 24-240mm.
Yeah, I want it bad. One lens to rule them all and I think that’s the one.
4mm makes that big of a difference? Just back up a few steps.
At the wide end, 4mm make more difference than 100mm at the telephoto end. Try backing up 1 mile, just for that landscape shot….
When I’m hiking, a few steps is the difference between making it back to before diner is served or ending up at the bottom of a cliff.
Aaaaaannnddd… Another slow optically compromised superzoom. This is exactly what the E Mount system needed. I mean I’m tired of these super high quality Zooms we have for the E Mount. They should make a 10 – 600 f16 next. That would be super exciting for the E Mount community who is obviously tired of the tons of High quality glass options we have.
For a second I thought I found some sarcasm in your post. 🙂
What is it with all the companies making the same type of lenses…. We are about to see three 35mm lenses, two 50ish mm lenses, and two megazooms. Ok, now please release more 90 macros
Basically, they all want to release lenses that they know will sell well (popular FL primes, convenience zooms). Filling gaps in the line-up isn’t their first priority.
im still wanting a 50-105mm F2 FE lens. would be awesome portrait lens
And a 20-50mm F2 lens !
And 24-300 F2. The two above will be humongous anyways, so might as well go all out….
Yup, a nice 24-300 F2, but build it as pancake lens with internal zoom and focus… and while we are at it, an internal ND filter, OSS and a OSS mode for panning. Did I forget anything?
Coffee grinder and pool skimmer?
I’d like it to include a pneumatic car jack and a gallon of gasoline!
I think you forgot the Built-in teleconverter.
Lol, be happy Sony fanboys, now you have 6 lenses for your system. Next Nissin flash and you will be all good 🙂
So many Canon guys said their system is the best ,
but they never buy more than the kits lens
and use the pop up flash pretend to be pro.
How is the performance of your pro fe 24-70? Is almost as good as the EF 18-55?
5d mk 3 doesn’t have a pop up flash
Call him a Canon shooter and don’t insult him any more ….
Don’t forget that we can use all of your lens with a cheap adapter or even use af with metabones too.
There is already a Nissin flash. Have it in my bag troll!
Ugh. What we really need is the wonderful 28-75 f2.8 re-done for FE mount. Wonderful lens, great value.
Just wish someone made a 24(28?)-105 f2.8-4 or something. That i would buy.
This is a perfect lens for me! I hope it comes out soon.
A “vacation” lens.
Great as allround-lens, but only, if it is weatherproofed!!!!
If Tamron wants to make lenses for E mount they should make a longe zoom of slightly better quality than the Sigma 150-600 sport.
Possibly a 250-750.f 5.6
There are currently no E mount long lenses so Yamron would be first.
Nice try clonebarry but not good enough… NEXT!
It’s weird when people complain about the lack of the lenses for their cameras.
Do you guys buy cameras, and then check the lens availability? That’s not smart.
Do you guys buy cameras, and start praying that the lenses you want will get released soon? That’s not smart either.
Or maybe we don’t buy the cameras, because the lenses we want aren’t avalable. Hence the complaints.
If the technology/lenses you want exist somewhere else, then go and buy the other brand’s equipment.
If the technology/lenses you want DON’T exist somewhere else, then what you’re asking for doesn’t exist.
Yes, but that means having to settle for a body of a different brand. If I want a Sony camera, but the lenses I want aren’t available, then I’m going to be complaining, since I might end up with say a Canon, Nikon or Fuji body.
People keep harping about lenses but they forget about cameras. What alternative is there to Sony FE cameras ? Leica ? There doesn’t exist any alternative. I bought the A7 as I didn’t want a heavy bulky DSLR but I wanted a FF sensor.
hope they dont keep the same crap with sony like with the 18-200
i mean, sony version 739, canon version 499, of the same damn lense
for a brand that works closely with sony one of their major shareholders
tamron seems to screw sony mounts lenses very often, disabled VC in sony anyone
past history tells, this lense was designed with canon in mind, for future canon FF mirrorless
Date of patent… over at sonyff.com I saw that the patent was made in July, 2013. Does anybody KNOW how long it usually takes Tamron to build lenses after the patent? I specifically mean knowing and not guessing… – if google translate is correct, the writing before 2015.1.29 says release date. Of course that probably the projected date back then which doesn’t matter in the slightest (the A7’s were not even announced and only the VG900 was on the market).
特許公開番号 2015-18124
公開日 2015.1.29
出願日 2013.7.11
As I assume they are basically making the Sony 24-240 I have a bit higher hopes, but they also have other mirrorless designs patented which they (at least till now) have not announced. Even if nobody can really answer this, it certainly is noteworthy information.
I was always under the impression that patents weren’t crucial to producting. What I mean by this is that they don’t need the patent to start building the sucker. Am I wrong?
If indeed this drawing is made to scale looking from the top than the 77px sensor on the drawing corresponds to 36mm hence the 345px distance from the sensor to the end of the extended lens is merely 161mm i.e. 16cm or 6.2″ (inches). Quite small it seems.
If this is side view hence the 77mm coresponds to mere 24mm sensor then the lens becodes about the size of the 55mm f/1.8 which seems impossible.
I suppose the drawing is incorrect and the snesor is pctured much lagrer than in reality.
Genuinely interesting analysis 🙂
The sensor will definitely not be to scale then. Also, the front glas would only be about 30mm large, which on a megazoom also seems impossible.
I’m excited Tamron is getting in the game. Finally, maybe they can give us some modestly priced UWA’s. Enough with the fancy Zeiss glass already.