Joseph Tainter wrote: > http://www.tamron.co.jp/en/news/release_2007/0307_a001.html > > It's a macro, like the new Sigma. According to tests, the Sigma achieved > its macro capability by design compromises elsewhere. It is weak at the > long end. If I were shopping for such a lens (I have the older, > non-macro Sigma EX 70-200 F2.8), I would rather that it be good at 200 > mm than that it have macro capability. > > So I will be interested to see what reviews say of the Tamron--whether > Tamron also made design compromises to achieve macro capability. > > Joe >
Tamron's pulled off the 'not-quite-macro' already with the 28-75 and 17-50, bth of which are superb lenses. I don't see why theywouldn't wit the 70-200. -Adam ----- Tamron might do a better job. When they make a lens similar to a Sigma model, they often seem to do it better. But if I was in the market for such a lens, I would wait for reviews. If it was a non-macro, I might buy it even before reviews come out. I wonder what a 200-500 mm F2.8 from Tamron would be like? Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
