If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
On 2017-12-27 18:09:05 +0000, RichA said:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/980348...istered-lenses Do they have four worth having? -- teleportation kills |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
In article , android
wrote: Do they have four worth having? yes |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
On 12/27/2017 1:43 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , android wrote: Do they have four worth having? yes Which ones. Some of the guys in my CC have them, and are satisfied. One was really thrilled with his Tamron 70-200, until I lent him my Nikon. The cost of a Tamron is considerably less than a Tamron with the same focal length and max aperture. A couple of the guys have APS C cameras, And find them great for travel. I personally the 150-600, and for focus tracking it felt slower than my 80-400. At Photo-Expo last year, I had a discussion with the Tamron sales reps, who finally agreed that it was indeed slow on my D800. But they insisted it worked well with the D800 earlier in the day. Yet One of my friends, who shoots with a Canon, never had an issue with it. In summary: it's an OK line of lenses for those who do not want to spend a lot of money, and yet still enjoy the hobby. I personally might consider only one of the lenses, if I didn't have an equivalent Nikkor lens. The 17=50, and possibly the 150-600. Others may very well feel differently. I will not respond to anyone who makes a tzimmus over which Tamron lens is better. (For those who do not know the expression see: http://www.jewishmag.com/181mag/yiddish_words/yiddish_words.htm -- PeterN |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
On 2017-12-27 20:54:14 +0000, PeterN said:
Some of the guys in my CC have them, and are satisfied. One was really thrilled with his Tamron 70-200, until I lent him my Nikon. Oki... -- teleportation kills |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
In article , PeterN
wrote: Do they have four worth having? yes Which ones. 90mm macro is a classic, with outstanding image quality. highly recommended. the newer version is stabilized, while purists prefer the original. 180mm macro also a classic and also highly recommended. 28-75mm is inexpensive and excellent for the price, especially for aps. 200-500mm is also excellent. they also have some duds. the 200-400mm is not very good. Some of the guys in my CC have them, and are satisfied. One was really thrilled with his Tamron 70-200, until I lent him my Nikon. it's also less expensive than the nikon version. The cost of a Tamron is considerably less than a Tamron with the same focal length and max aperture. so you say. i'm quite sure the prices are much closer than you think, most likely the same. A couple of the guys have APS C cameras, only a couple? it must be a small camera club. And find them great for travel. what about the ones who stay home? I personally the 150-600, and for focus tracking it felt slower than my 80-400. At Photo-Expo last year, I had a discussion with the Tamron sales reps, who finally agreed that it was indeed slow on my D800. But they insisted it worked well with the D800 earlier in the day. Yet One of my friends, who shoots with a Canon, never had an issue with it. autofocus speeds are sometimes slower, but not overly so. what matters is the image quality. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
On 12/27/2017 4:23 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN wrote: Do they have four worth having? yes Which ones. 90mm macro is a classic, with outstanding image quality. highly recommended. the newer version is stabilized, while purists prefer the original. 180mm macro also a classic and also highly recommended. 28-75mm is inexpensive and excellent for the price, especially for aps. 200-500mm is also excellent. Compared to what. Produce your own test images, not those of someone who may very well be a shill. My Cord was a classic, just before I totaled it.. they also have some duds. the 200-400mm is not very good. Some of the guys in my CC have them, and are satisfied. One was really thrilled with his Tamron 70-200, until I lent him my Nikon. it's also less expensive than the nikon version. The cost of a Tamron is considerably less than a Tamron with the same focal length and max aperture. so you say. No that was a typo. I meant a fixed focal length lens made by Tamron is less expensive than a fixed focal length Canon or Nikon, if both have the same aperture. i'm quite sure the prices are much closer than you think, most likely the same. Dream on. A couple of the guys have APS C cameras, only a couple? it must be a small camera club. And find them great for travel. what about the ones who stay home? You are being your usual argumentative asshole. The best job for you would be counting crowds at Trump rallies. I personally the 150-600, and for focus tracking it felt slower than my 80-400. At Photo-Expo last year, I had a discussion with the Tamron sales reps, who finally agreed that it was indeed slow on my D800. But they insisted it worked well with the D800 earlier in the day. Yet One of my friends, who shoots with a Canon, never had an issue with it. autofocus speeds are sometimes slower, but not overly so. Interesting comment, considering your proven experience. what matters is the image quality. Nobody in this thread said otherwise. -- PeterN |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
In article , PeterN
wrote: Do they have four worth having? yes Which ones. 90mm macro is a classic, with outstanding image quality. highly recommended. the newer version is stabilized, while purists prefer the original. 180mm macro also a classic and also highly recommended. 28-75mm is inexpensive and excellent for the price, especially for aps. 200-500mm is also excellent. Compared to what. Produce your own test images, not those of someone who may very well be a shill. i see you just want to argue. My Cord was a classic, just before I totaled it.. you don't have a very good track record. they also have some duds. the 200-400mm is not very good. Some of the guys in my CC have them, and are satisfied. One was really thrilled with his Tamron 70-200, until I lent him my Nikon. it's also less expensive than the nikon version. The cost of a Tamron is considerably less than a Tamron with the same focal length and max aperture. so you say. No that was a typo. I meant a fixed focal length lens made by Tamron is less expensive than a fixed focal length Canon or Nikon, if both have the same aperture. i'm quite sure the prices are much closer than you think, most likely the same. Dream on. *whoosh* A couple of the guys have APS C cameras, only a couple? it must be a small camera club. And find them great for travel. what about the ones who stay home? You are being your usual argumentative asshole. The best job for you would be counting crowds at Trump rallies. there's one crowd per rally, possibly two if there are protestors. easy! I personally the 150-600, and for focus tracking it felt slower than my 80-400. At Photo-Expo last year, I had a discussion with the Tamron sales reps, who finally agreed that it was indeed slow on my D800. But they insisted it worked well with the D800 earlier in the day. Yet One of my friends, who shoots with a Canon, never had an issue with it. autofocus speeds are sometimes slower, but not overly so. Interesting comment, considering your proven experience. which is extensive. what matters is the image quality. Nobody in this thread said otherwise. you did. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
On Dec 27, 2017, PeterN wrote
(in article ): On 12/27/2017 4:23 PM, nospam wrote: In , PeterN wrote: Do they have four worth having? yes Which ones. 90mm macro is a classic, with outstanding image quality. highly recommended. the newer version is stabilized, while purists prefer the original. 180mm macro also a classic and also highly recommended. 28-75mm is inexpensive and excellent for the price, especially for aps. 200-500mm is also excellent. Compared to what. Produce your own test images, not those of someone who may very well be a shill. My Cord was a classic, just before I totaled it.. ....and for that automotive crime you should have been punished severely! https://www.dropbox.com/s/9vt5rp5x5ez9l84/DNC3479Aw.jpg -- Regards, Savageduck |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
On 12/27/2017 10:09 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On Dec 27, 2017, PeterN wrote (in article ): On 12/27/2017 4:23 PM, nospam wrote: In , PeterN wrote: Do they have four worth having? yes Which ones. 90mm macro is a classic, with outstanding image quality. highly recommended. the newer version is stabilized, while purists prefer the original. 180mm macro also a classic and also highly recommended. 28-75mm is inexpensive and excellent for the price, especially for aps. 200-500mm is also excellent. Compared to what. Produce your own test images, not those of someone who may very well be a shill. My Cord was a classic, just before I totaled it.. ...and for that automotive crime you should have been punished severely! https://www.dropbox.com/s/9vt5rp5x5ez9l84/DNC3479Aw.jpg I am, every time I look at one. That's what happens when you do something smart with gambling money. Actually the car was closer to this: If it was an 812 I would have been even more ****ed at myself. https://www.dropbox.com/s/gr22c8htkyppsau/download.jpg?dl=0 On our last cruise I won the ships blackjack tournament. As proof that I learned that lesson, I spent the money wisely: we had an air conditioned lean to on the beach; and a butler serving us lobster dinners with all the trimmings and drinks we wanted; invited some friends to join us, while our fellow cruise passengers were eating hamburgers and hotdogs, while fighting for a place to sit down and eat. I wound up with no money in either case, but some great memories in the second case. I will not play BJ where they have changed the rule so that a dealer must draw on a soft 17. In a six deck game, WITH DOUBLE AFTER SPLITTING ALLOWED, It increases the house edge from about .41% to .63%. If you doubt me, do the math for yourself. -- PeterN |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Tamron wants to thank you for being a loyal buyer
On Wed, 27 Dec 2017 23:29:25 -0500, PeterN
wrote: I will not play BJ where they have changed the rule so that a dealer must draw on a soft 17. In a six deck game, WITH DOUBLE AFTER SPLITTING ALLOWED, It increases the house edge from about .41% to .63%. If you doubt me, do the math for yourself. If the house has any edge, why bother playing at all? And no one actually does the math on this. These days they look it up, but it was established with simulations, not a calculator. Anyway, that change to hit soft 17 will cost only another $22 after $10,000 of betting. Who cares? At a full table, you'd play 3-4 hours at $100 per hand and lose $63 instead of $41. It's not even worth thinking about. You're just gambling either way, and if you're betting that much, $22 means nothing. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Canon abandons loyal customers | Alan Justice | 35mm Photo Equipment | 1 | June 29th 11 11:21 PM |