On Saturday June 19 2004 3:22 am, Ken Durling wrote: > OK, Fred. Could be. �I'm expressing surprise and particular interest > because it really would be the first in my experience, not that that's the > end-all of anything. �I actually *do* think it matters if a compatibility > problem has been found between Tamron and Canon EF mount, since to date > they are rare to non-existent. �If there was a problem, I'd be willing to > bet it was in the line of a malfunction rather than an incompatibility. � I > did go through the entire recent thread entitled "3rd party 300/2.8s" which > this discussion stemmed out of, and there was no mention of Tamron problems > that I found.
That's possible for maybe a number of cases. I DO know of 1 instance last year with someone that did have a compatibility problem in the mount. He sent it back, and rec'd the lens back in about 2 weeks, if I remember correctly.....fixed. The lens was a prime, but I don't remember which one it was.....sorry. I also know of a few others where the auto-focus quit. From the discussions I've had with others, Tamron doesn't have the problems that Sigma has. I KNOW that Sigma REFUSES to license anything from Canon nor Nikon with the CEO having a real nasty attitude about it, and someone here recently posted that Tamron does. So, this could account for why there are less problems with Tamron than Sigma. > Hopefully, if you're correct, the originator of that complaint will pipe up > and fill us in. Quite. Whoever it is, was going to contact Tamron.....nothing sense. Fred -- "Ballmer is no more designed for the art of persuasion than the Abrams tank is for delivering meals on wheels." * **** ******* *********************************************************** * For list instructions, including unsubscribe, see: * http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/eos_list.htm ***********************************************************
