New Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC announced

[Derrel]

Tamron has announced a new 70-200mm f/2.8 VC (Vibration Control) lens with a ring-type ultrasonic focusing motor, and an exceptionally close MOD (minimum object distance) of 0.95 meters. Price is a surprisingly low $1,299 US. The new lens is expected to begin shipping febrary 26, 2017.

This lens is part of a collection of new, similarly-styled VC lenses from Tamron, such as their new 35mm VC f/1.8, 45mm VC f/1.8, and 85mm f/1.8 VC primes.

Pre-orders are being accepted. The lens has smart,modern-looking styling cues.

Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 G2

 

[Destin]

But is it worth an upgrade from my first generation 70-200 VC from Tamron?

At about $500 between what I could sell mine for and the cost of the new one.. probably not.

For time the bigger news is that this will likely drive the price of the gen 1 VC down even more.. which sucks for me, but is awesome for anyone looking to get into a really good quality 70-200 for not a lot of cash.

 

[Derrel]

But is it worth an upgrade from my first generation 70-200 VC from Tamron?

At about $500 between what I could sell mine for and the cost of the new one.. probably not.

For time the bigger news is that this will likely drive the price of the gen 1 VC down even more.. which sucks for me, but is awesome for anyone looking to get into a really good quality 70-200 for not a lot of cash.

You bring up a couple of very good points! The newer lens will likely drive down the used market prices of their earlier-gen VC lens, which would make selling early likely better than selling later, if the idea is to maximize resale value on the first-gen lens.And yes, a new model lowering prices on an earlier mode is typically viewed as a good thing for those looking to get a lens at a good price.

It's going to be interesting to see how this new lens tests out, and how it performs. The price seems reasonable to me, especially now that Canon and Nikon have driven their 70-200/2.8 prices so high over the past few years.

Looking at the press release images, this new lens looks pretty compact, pretty short, as if it has a strong telephoto factor. Maybe that's just my eyes playing tricks on me, but it looked "short" to me for a 70-200.

 

[Destin]

Agreed, it does look a little short.

Honestly, my biggest problem with it is that the zoom ring is the front ring.. I *MUCH* prefer the old designs with the zoom ring closest to the camera.. it was much easier to hold the camera steady, and made use on a monopod for sports much easier. I often find myself bumping the focus ring now when trying to zoom on a monopod. Alas, this is a problem with all of the new generation 70-200 lenses, including Nikon's newest.. so it seems I'm going to have to get used to it.

 

[JonA_CT]

I'm sorry to say, as someone who is still building a lens portfolio, my first thought was, "Yes! That'll make the old ones cheaper!".

Either way, it is good to see new technology and lenses coming out in that price range. That's the perfect price cap for someone like me, who owns/wants prosumer equipment but never will make a money off of photography.

 

[Derrel]

More pictures of the lens here, and some quick tidbits: Hands on with Tamron 70-200mm F2.8 and 10-24mm F3.5-4.5 'G2' zooms

The lens looks quite short when shown held in the hands of a man, and mounted on this Canon 5D-II. The new zoom-ring-at-front is the new way Nikon is doing their 70-200/2.8 so...Tamron's following along--AND this lens in F-mount will feature Nikon's new E for Electronic aperture actuation design type. Minimum focusing distance of 37.4 inches is a lot closer than the earlier version, which was 50.7 inches.

I think the price range makes a LOT of sense!

 

[TrolleySwag]

Amazon says I can have it by the 15th.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[TrolleySwag]

My wife says buy! But most likely cause she wants me to buy her through Nissan Leaf too.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[coastalconn]

The lens looks quite short when shown held in the hands of a man, and mounted on this Canon 5D-II.

I think the price range makes a LOT of sense!

Nikon 70-200E Length 7.97" 202mm
Canon 70-200 IS II 7.8" 198mm
Tamron 70-200 G2 7.5" 190mm (7.6" 193mm Canon mount)

So they are all roughly the same size. I will be an early adopter of the lens for sure. I really liked the G1 when I had them in Nikon and Canon mounts. I have high expectations and really makes you wonder why Nikon is flailing financially when their new version is $2800?

 

[Derrel]

As I understand the current situation, Nikon lens prices have grown very high, and Sigma has overtaken them as the #2 lens seller, behind Canon at #1. I too have high expectations for this lens, just based on the earlier model lens. I think the interchangeable lens camera market has shown a real downward trend in unit sales over the past couple of years, and so high-priced lenses are simply NOT what the market will respond to. I think the third-party makers have done a good job of adjusting their suggested retail prices to better reflect a market where sales opportunities are likely to be better with a lower price point than even a few years ago.

 

[Destin]

As I understand the current situation, Nikon lens prices have grown very high, and Sigma has overtaken them as the #2 lens seller, behind Canon at #1. I too have high expectations for this lens, just based on the earlier model lens. I think the interchangeable lens camera market has shown a real downward trend in unit sales over the past couple of years, and so high-priced lenses are simply NOT what the market will respond to. I think the third-party makers have done a good job of adjusting their suggested retail prices to better reflect a market where sales opportunities are likely to be better with a lower price point than even a few years ago.

I absolutely agree. You'll always have the working professionals who won't buy third party, and the folks that just plain have the money and don't care.

But with how far the quality of third party lenses has come in the last ten years, I can think of absolutely zero reasons for the average semi-professional or hobbyist photographer to spend more than double the money to get a nikon branded lens over third party. There are several exceptions to this (telephoto primes, tilt shift, etc) but for your average "holy trinity" of lenses, third party is the way to go for 90% of the population. Nikon is going to need to wake up to market realities.

 

[MSnowy]

But is it worth an upgrade from my first generation 70-200 VC from Tamron?

At about $500 between what I could sell mine for and the cost of the new one.. probably not.

For time the bigger news is that this will likely drive the price of the gen 1 VC down even more.. which sucks for me, but is awesome for anyone looking to get into a really good quality 70-200 for not a lot of cash.

You bring up a couple of very good points! The newer lens will likely drive down the used market prices of their earlier-gen VC lens, which would make selling early likely better than selling later, if the idea is to maximize resale value on the first-gen lens.And yes, a new model lowering prices on an earlier mode is typically viewed as a good thing for those looking to get a lens at a good price.

It's going to be interesting to see how this new lens tests out, and how it performs. The price seems reasonable to me, especially now that Canon and Nikon have driven their 70-200/2.8 prices so high over the past few years.

Looking at the press release images, this new lens looks pretty compact, pretty short, as if it has a strong telephoto factor. Maybe that's just my eyes playing tricks on me, but it looked "short" to me for a 70-200.

Looks short because the Adorama ad is showing the new Tamron 10mm-24mm

 

[Derrel]

You are correct: third-party lenses have made major advances in the last decade. Really big improvements. And the sales of third-party lenses show that the marketplace is responding very favorably, and also I think the third-party makers are moving more aggressively into niches where the big-two or big-three camera makers once thought they were invincible.

There is only one major reason to buy camera-maker, high-end lenses: long-term resale value. That is where the Canon and Nikon lenses hold value for quite a long time, but the third-party lenses lose value very quickly; that issue in itself represents a good situation for people who do not want to spend a lot of money on a lens. I sold my first-generation 70-200/2.8 AF-S VR-G lens, which I bought the week it came out, for $1,699 in 2003 I guess it was. I sold that lens in December of 2015, for $1,100. I did similarly well on my 2006-acquired Canon 70-200/2.8L IS-USM.

But really...this $2499 and $2799 camra lens for "workaday" lenses like 24-70/2.8 and 70-200/2.8...just too doggone much money for most people. And when a third-party lens hits HALF the cost of a camera-maker lens in a "trinity category lens"...Oh boy...

 

[Derrel]

Looks short because the Adorama ad is showing the new Tamron 10mm-24mm

Yeah, indeed they are! The dPreview shot of the 70-200 lens being held by the fellow at the WPPI trade show makes the lens look quite compact.

 

[coastalconn]

As I understand the current situation, Nikon lens prices have grown very high, and Sigma has overtaken them as the #2 lens seller, behind Canon at #1. I too have high expectations for this lens, just based on the earlier model lens. I think the interchangeable lens camera market has shown a real downward trend in unit sales over the past couple of years, and so high-priced lenses are simply NOT what the market will respond to. I think the third-party makers have done a good job of adjusting their suggested retail prices to better reflect a market where sales opportunities are likely to be better with a lower price point than even a few years ago.

I absolutely agree. You'll always have the working professionals who won't buy third party, and the folks that just plain have the money and don't care.

But with how far the quality of third party lenses has come in the last ten years, I can think of absolutely zero reasons for the average semi-professional or hobbyist photographer to spend more than double the money to get a nikon branded lens over third party. There are several exceptions to this (telephoto primes, tilt shift, etc) but for your average "holy trinity" of lenses, third party is the way to go for 90% of the population. Nikon is going to need to wake up to market realities.

Maybe not so fast with telephoto primes? The new Sigma 500 F4 is getting very favorable reviews and lens score just ranked it slightly ahead of the VR-G and less than 5% behind the E.. the 500 E is 10k, the G is 8k and the sigma is 6k.