Tamrons anouncement from 22nd this month to release an RF Version of the 18-300

[ashmadux]

Oh, you’re still here? Why? All you do is rant about how bad Canon is. So switch. Pretty pathetic that all you do is keep buying Canon gear and whining about it. You’re the butt…of your own jokes.


Right. Because none of Sony’s GM lenses force distortion correction. Lol. I’d tell you to get a clue, but it’s clear that’s beyond your capabilities.

As the resident attitude driven know it all, obviously you haven't seen my past comments / view points because you're eternally reactive with some weird kind of aggressive wit. Like, grow up already. Get a clue..oh please.

Since you have issues paying attention over your rants..

My current canon gear will stay, however due to canons policies and practices I will invest in another system - nikon or panny. Options are good, no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The last lens I bought was the wonderful EF 16-35 f4, fyi. And I love my r5, hated the r62. And I DONT love the 1400.00 cheap optics option for a 50mm 1.4. Hope you understand but don't care if you don't. Move on.

That said, your overly binary viewpoint of actions I should take are clouded for some reason. But please for my (and others!) sakes steer clear of my comments..save yourself the pain I guess.

I'm a canon customer and I get to have an opinion /rage at canons locked mount options regardless of your comment section stalking habits.

Thanks though. Good chat

 

[neuroanatomist]

I'm a canon customer and I get to have an opinion /rage at canons locked mount options regardless of your comment section stalking habits.

Thanks though. Good chat

Rage all you want. Piss into the wind, too…at least that would accomplish something. Good luck.

 

[josephandrews222]

As the resident attitude driven know it all, obviously you haven't seen my past comments / view points because you're eternally reactive with some weird kind of aggressive wit. Like, grow up already. Get a clue..oh please.

Since you have issues paying attention over your rants..

My current canon gear will stay, however due to canons policies and practices I will invest in another system - nikon or panny. Options are good, no need to throw the baby out with the bathwater. The last lens I bought was the wonderful EF 16-35 f4, fyi. And I love my r5, hated the r62. And I DONT love the 1400.00 cheap optics option for a 50mm 1.4. Hope you understand but don't care if you don't. Move on.

That said, your overly binary viewpoint of actions I should take are clouded for some reason. But please for my (and others!) sakes steer clear of my comments..save yourself the pain I guess.

I'm a canon customer and I get to have an opinion /rage at canons locked mount options regardless of your comment section stalking habits.

Thanks though. Good chat

1. ashmadux:

Canon: No Plans for High Resolution R1

What is 'the best possible camera'? Hint: it differs for everyone, you don't ge to define it for anyone but you. Some things even you would admit would make a camera "better". E.g. the optical smart controllers would work just as well on on mid-range models. They don't cost much, yet they're...

www.canonrumors.com

2. A nice Tamron B061 review is here. I look forward to reading reviews of the RF-S version. The review states that the B061 gets a bit soft at 200mm.

3. In the meantime, after reading the linked DA review, I compared the dimensions of the Tamron B061 with Canon's RF 24-240 and EF-M 18-150 (which I own and use; the RF 18-150 should be similar in size and mass). I'm not sure what to think (if I owned an R7), in terms of how often I would actually use the B061. But I look forward to reading reviews of its performance.

 

[Del Paso]

Indeed, a lens like this wouldn't appeal to the L crowd, or most enthusiasts who like to hang out in photo equipment forums.

It's curious though. I don't follow market trends thaat closely, but a few years ago, the conventional wisdom was that the low end of the market was being replaced by phones, and the dedicated camera and lens manufacturers were going upmarket for growth. Is that changing? Have the mythical "phone users who want more" finally materialized in large enough numbers?

My major issue with this lens is its extreme focal range.
I simply don't believe you can achieve an excellent IQ by stretching the focal range from WA to long tele. At least, certainly not at this selling price...
As to "L" lenses, I do indeed favor them, believing (naively?) that quality controls and mechanical build are on higher level. This opinion is valid for Canon lenses as well.
Nothing in general against Sigmas or Tamrons, even though I prefer OEM lenses. Sigmas are often in the heavy brick category, Tamrons often too "plasticky" for my taste. Their optical quality is not at stake, especially Sigma's.
As to phone-users, it is indeed strange that some seem to want more. This is illustrated by the "new" compact camera hype. Is it just an internet/influencer driven fashion? Certainly in part.
But I've also noticed among my friends that some of them just want a more specific tool for photography. Not one one of the cheap sort, but a well-made and also (important!) good looking camera, vintage look often preferred...
On the other hand, when I visited the world's most beautiful cathedral (Notre Dame de Strasbourg, of course!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), I saw maybe 3 "real" cameras the whole day long... 1 FF Nikon, 2 APS/C Canons. Plus mine. And hundreds of phones.
So, I guess, speaking of a mass movement would be a bit exaggerated.

 

[Del Paso]

Notre Dame de Strasbourg

 

[EricN]

View attachment 223567
Notre Dame de Strasbourg

Great photo. I thought you said you hated converging lines?

 

[Del Paso]

Great photo. I thought you said you hated converging lines?

Not always. And, in this case, no chance to get one single picture of the entire edifice without sending all the inhabitants and tourists home. Also, I wanted the picture exactly this way.

 

[Del Paso]

Here, I would have disliked converging lines...(Maison Kammerzell, Strasbourg, also known for very good meals...)

 

[AlanF]

Here, I would have disliked converging lines...(Maison Kammerzell, Strasbourg, also known for very good meals...)View attachment 223568

Been there!

 

[Del Paso]

Been there!

Me too!
For the goujonnettes de sole a l'anis.

 

[Philnick]

I grabbed the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 RF DC DN for my R7 as soon as it came out, and it has seldom been off the camera. I also grabbed its 56mm f/1.4 sibling as soon as it became available,

On the R7, with its excellent IBIS, these lenses are sharp and bright enough to make me decide to sell the R6 Mark II and RF 28-70mm f/2.8 IS STM I bought last fall, which I simply wasn't using since the Sigma lenses made the R7 just as good while much lighter.

Why would I want the big and heavy optically-stabilized Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8? I've had the Canon RF 85mm f/2 Macro for the additional reach for years, though I seldom use it. Same goes for my EF 200mm f/2.8L Mark II and its EF 1.4 teleconverter.

Small and light wins unless there's a specific need for a bigger and heavier rig.

 

[InternalRevenue]

Why would I want the big and heavy optically-stabilized Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8?

The Sigma makes good sense over the Tamron for the R7, but 4 out of 5 of Canon's currently available RF-S bodies lack IBIS, and the R50 is one of their top selling cameras. And as big as that 17-70 is compared to it's Sigma counterpart, its still lighter than these two dark superzooms.

 

[twoheadedboy]

I wish there was like an 11 - 135mm APS-C zoom, which would give ultrawide to telephoto coverage. 300mm (450mm equivalent) is cool but way less useful than the wide end for me.