Equipment 18-270 anyone?

TAMRON announces the development of the AF18-270MM Di II VC ULTRA HIGH POWER ZOOM LENS
Equivalent to 28-419 mm on a crop body for which it is intended.

Now I don't know about you but this here sounds to me like a killer backpacker lens. If the price is low enough and the quality fair I might just get one and stick it on my 350D and keep that always in my backpack.

 

sounds awesome and i agree with the idea of a backpacking lens any idea on price?

 

No idea on price at all. I'm guesstimating it would be somewhere around the price of their 18-200 when that launched. Also it might be somewhere like 6 months before we see this.

 

Interesting, they don't really appeal to me but I can see the market though

 

the existing 18-250mm has a pretty good rep - esp. on a Pentax/Samsung/Sony etc. body with in-body IS.

 

Is it just me, or am I the only one that absolutely despises superzooms? Guess I'd have to wait to see the tests...but f/3.5-6.3 is already an enormous turnoff. I wonder how their VC will perform...

 

Agreed. Even the massively expensive ones are just okay.
A friend of mine was listing after a canon 28-300 for the longest time until he actually used one.

 

Nope, you are not.

Lusted after, and bought the Sigma 170-500, and wished I hadn't (Making it worse, I sold the Tamron 200-400 to fund it). I try to stay under 4x these days If possible, and pick up primes when the funds permit, (So far, they haven't permitted).

If it's a Zoom, *something* has to give, IQ wise, even at the top end (EG:- 70-200 2.8 IS)

 

They already have an 18-250, why bother with the extra 20mm at the end?

I'm seriously considering trading my 19-35 and 28-300 in on a 18-250 and a 1.6x teleconverter.

Seems to be one of those marmite propositions, you either love super zooms or you hate them. You can guess which category i'm in!

 

well...20mm is a huge addition, as is the implementation of VC (Tamron's variant of Canon's IS).

 

Thats what puts me off, would rather have two seperate lens's. Which albeit more expensive are far far better at all

 

Like Olej says, its a great backpacker lens or the everyday walk-around.

The less you carry on a hike the easier it is on you. IQ may be less, but its better than not getting the image at all just because you can't switch out your prime in time before the rare elusive yellow tail squabbler flies off into the thicket.

Or if you have little ones running around where you need that zoom ability, because kids won't keep that same pose just for you to switch lenses.

 

Some people just can't admit that newer top glass zooms are very close in quality to primes, sometimes exceeding. They have some sort of prime lens collection complex.

 

Note that he was speaking of superzooms (ex: 18-2**mm). In which case they cannot touch primes, hell they even have trouble hanging with kit lenses at comparable fl's

 

I'd say kit lenses have come a very far way from earlier kits. They aren't as fast or having IQ as top end lenses, but they are a great bang for the buck now and days.

I don't mind my 18-200, although it is a bit soft from 180+. But it's a good tradeoff from hiking 5 miles through a forest with the 70-200 AND 17-55.

 

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I hate changing lenses and I very frequently use all of my 28-300 range throughout a day of shooting. I can gladly accept the hit in IQ for the convienience of not having to fumble with changing lenses every few minutes.

On a vaguely related topic, does anyone know why the Tamron 18-250 is $100 more expensive on the Sony / Minolta mount than it is on the Canon / Pentax / Nikon mounts?

 

At a guess, Lower sales Volume for that mount?

 

My 18-250mm hasn't even arrived yet and this happens! Typical!

 

Pro's have two bodies rather than a superzoom.

 

I had a compact (Olympus Sp-550Z) which was a super zoom (10x or their abouts). The lens was horrible. Lots of distortion, very slow at the long end, lack of sharpness starting from the mid-tele onwards. But people continue to buy compacts with superzooms, and DSLR lenses that have huge zoom ranges, because they see the huge 10X or 15X and think it must be better. The average consumer with a 400D or other budget SLR (In my opinion at least) does not really know about or really understand the importance of low f/stops , but instead will see that it has "4 stops Virbration Reduction" or whatever that partiuclar brand's VR is called.