Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [OM] Tamron 80-200mm Tripod Ring

Subject: Re: [OM] Tamron 80-200mm Tripod Ring
From: Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 21:49:08 -0800
I suppose you have guessed from the tenor of all the replies, but let me confirm, neither the Tamron mount for the 80-200/2.8 nor a third party aftermarket mount are made or available new anymore. They do come up for sale very rarely on the 'Bay. After considerable research, I returned the lens I bought and waited for one with both the tripod mount and bayonet mount hood. That turned out to be the right choice for me. The Tamron tripod mount is a little odd in design, supporting the lens at some distance from where it attaches to the tripod with supports of modest cross section. As a result, flex in the mount itself can feel like it is insufficiently tightened. Then excessive tightening can break it, likely one reason for the shortage of the mounts and the number of lenses being sold without them.

The tripod mount design on the Tokina 80-200/2.8 is far superior to the Tamron and the lens is significantly lighter, but it didn't show quite as well in Gary's tests and is less readily available in OM mount. The Tamron glass is indeed really excellent. I also have the 49mm version of the Tamron 90/2.5. An excellent lens, but I prefer the Kiron 105/2.8, partly for the slightly longer reach, but mostly for the direct focusing to 1:1 without fussing with any adapters. Funny how manufacturers in an industry get stuck on certain norms. I almost never need 1:1, but 1:2 is quite often just not enough magnification. A true macro lens that went directly to 1:1.5 would appeal to me, but they are all 1:1 and a bit heavy or 1:2 and require carrying around an extra piece and putting it on and off the lens all the time. The Tamron SP 60-300/3.8-5.4 and Tokina 50-250/3.5-4.5 both go to the 1:1.5 area, but do so from their widest setting, giving very little distance from the front element to the subject. They undoubtedly have much more field curvature and softer corners in macro than true macro lenses, but that isn't a big deal in nature shots.

Moose

Bob Docherty wrote:

Thanks for all the input. I have sent John a note to see if the tripod ring
is still available. I hope the performance of this lens lives up to the
review on the OM lens test site.I  have the Tamron 90mm f/2.5 49mm Macro and
have been greatly pleased with it. I had a "Canon" friend remark that I
should get some good glass if I want good pictures. He denigrated the Tamron
till he viewed a Caterpillar shot I took on Velvia 50 with a 30X magnifier
he had. I loved the look on his face as he viewed the slide :)




< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >




<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz