New Tamron is (NOT)a dud

[Tannin]

I've always been a bit wary of the off-brand lenses. Well, of Sigma and Tamron mostly, Tokina has always been in a different class. You used to hear so many horror stories about faulty Tamrons and Sigmas.

But that was years ago. Everybody says both companies have improved their quality control and build standards enormously over the last few years.

Hmmm.....

Over the years I have bought about 20 Canon lenses. Failure rate out of 20? Zero.

Over the years I have bought 3 Tokina lenses. Failure rate out of 3? Zero.

I just bought my first ever Tamron. Tried it out in anger for the first time this week. Dud. Failure rate out of 1? 100%.


This is what you get at f/1./8.



I haven't checked to see the exact point at which the fault goes away, but it does go away as you stop down.

Anyway, now that I've had my grumble, I guess I'd better send it off. Should I send it back and ask for a refund? Or trust them to fix it so that it actually works properly?

[ameerat42]

What are you complaining about? - It runs rings around...

How odd that the zones are so sharply defined. That one's definitely a return, but I don't know that
your statistical treatise is robust Any research shed any light?

PS: Ya didn't drop it, didja?

[Tannin]

Certainly not! This was the first time I've even used it.

My options:

1: return it and put the money towards a Canon 85/1.4 (three times the price, and much heavier, which I don't want)
2: return it and put the money towards a Canon 85/1.8 (half the price, no IS, cheaper build (!), inferior optics)
3: return it and put the money towards a Sigma 85/1.4 (huge, heavy, expensive)
4: get it repaired/replaced and hope for the best.

Now I really wish Tokina made an 85.

[Brian500au]

You did take the protective plastic film off the front of the lens before you tried it?

Another alternative is the Canon 85F1.2 (as long as you don't need lightning fast focus speed)

[arthurking83]

Strangest thing I've ever seen.

Is that how it shoots?
If so, I'd say something to do with an APS-C like crop, as that's roughly where an APS-C crop factor will be when shot on a 135 format sensor.

Have you tried it on one of your crop cameras too?

That is seriously

Have you tried with and without VC on? Does the VC work? .. etc.

[Geoff79]

Now that is seriously odd. I’m no expert on any of this sort of stuff and look to you guys for any good advice on these matters, but my first thought was if it was a crop/full frame sensor issue too. Would love to know what it is...

Ring aside, it’s certainly very soft too, innit? Hope you get it sorted.

[agb]

So what lens is it? On first glance it does look like what you might expect from an aps-c lens on a full frame, though I would have thought that would more likely be vignette than such a sharp ring.

[arthurking83]

So what lens is it? On first glance it does look like what you might expect from an aps-c lens on a full frame, though I would have thought that would more likely be vignette than such a sharp ring.

Lens is the Tammy 85/1.8 VC.
And you're right, put an APS-C lens on a 135 format sensor and you just get a gradual vignette that fades to black(ie. hard mechanical vignette). Some lenses can produce an image to the edge and just extremely dark.

But the inside ring pattern/size looks similar to what I used to get with my Sigma 10-20 when used on the D800, which I'd then crop to suit. Usually in a 1x1 format.

[Tannin]

Cheers all. In random order:

* It is definitely a full frame lens. http://www.tamron-usa.com/product/lenses/f016.html

* The Canon 85/1.2 weighs less than the West Gate Bridge. But not much less.

* I haven't seen any indication that the lens is soft. Have not examined anything in forensic detail yet, 'coz of the obvious fault, but it seems fine in that regard. The focus on that sample is on the foreground object; background is supposed to be blurred.

* I haven't tried it without the IS. What would be the point? It is obviously faulty. I'll just send it back and hope they fix it properly. (New items which fail straight out of the box should actually be replaced, not repaired. But I bought it a few months ago and have only just had a chance to try it out, so I might have to put up with a repair.)

[mongo]

Odd to see this of a Modern Tamron. If all else is correct with crop size and the way it is being used, then, it is clearly faulty. Mongo would prefer his money back or a new exchange less rather than have them try to fix it. It would be extremely unlikely that you will get another faulty copy and, if you do, then ask for your money back. That is first preference. Alternatively, go the "you have one opportunity to fix it or my money back".
Tony, this lens should work a treat if you get what you paid for.

[mpb]

As others have said, most unusual.

The sharp margins and image outside the ring suggest to me that it is camera generated not lens generated.
This may be caused by a communication or firmware issue with the camera thinking that the lens is a cropped sensor lens, but I am just hypothesizing.
Does it do the same on other bodies?

Good luck with getting it sorted.

[Tannin]

An inventive idea Mark, great thinking! Not applicable in the Canon world though, where there have never been any electronic or firmware steps taken with regard to crop vs non-crop lenses because Canon crop lenses physically do not fit on full-frame bodies - they use a different lens mount called EF-S. (Third-party crop lenses don't use it, but Canon studiously pretends that third-party lens makers do not exist.)

[Tannin]

Well knock me down and put me to bed with a shovel ... it is combination-specific.

Tamron 85 & 5D IV - effect as shown above at f/1.8, 2.0. 2.2, 2.5. Lesser effect at f/2.8 (just the outer corners). Perfectly OK at f/3.3 and beyond.
Tamron 85 & 5D II - no effect.
Canon 35L & 5D IV - no effect. (Not even at f/1.4.)
Canon 35L & 5D II - no effect.

The Canon 35/1.4 is the only other lens I own faster than f/2.8, and the old 5D II is the only other full-frame camera I have. So that's it for testing.

I have done a quick search for known incompatibilities and firmware fixes (for both camera and lens) without result. But there was a Canon firmware update (1.1.2) available for the 5D IV so I applied it anyway. Made no difference. Possibly there is an update for the Tamron but I lack the means to apply it. (I.e., a Tamron dock. I think these are available now.)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE:

On experimenting, I have discovered that the culprit is the Peripheral Illumination Correction (anti-vignette) function. Turn that off, and the Tamron and the 5D IV work together just fine. Unfortunately, there is no apparent way to turn it off for the Tamron lens only: it's a global setting. Looks as though I'm stuck with that. Shouldn't be too difficult to work around. (And sooner or later there will probably be a fix for it.) And there really isn't another 85mm lens I want. Nothing else has reasonable size and weight plus IS. The Canon 85/1.4 comes closest, and is by all reports so perfect you would want to marry it, but substantially heavier and overkill for my needs.

Special kudos to Mark (mbp) for landing his ball closest to the pin and thanks to all.

Case closed.

[mpb]

....On experimenting, I have discovered that the culprit is the Peripheral Illumination Correction (anti-vignette) function. .....

Ahh yes "Peripheral Illumination Correction" should have known, except I have never heard of it as a non Canon user.

So I googled it, appears to happen with Sigma lenses as well. This page suggests that it only happens with the jpeg file and not the RAW file, which could be good news.

[Hawthy]

A bit of Googling suggests that if you shut off the "In-camera Lens Correction" it will go away. I don't have a Canon so I am not sure about this feature but it is worth a shot.

Edit: Found this https://www.lensrentals.com/blog/201...-party-lenses/

Hmm...came to this realisation after you, apparently. Always too slow...

[arthurking83]

Well knock me down ....

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UPDATE:

On experimenting, I have discovered that the culprit is the Peripheral Illumination Correction (anti-vignette) function. Turn that off, and the Tamron and the 5D IV work together just fine. ..... .

Ah! I was going to suggest something like that with your last reply(pre update).

So it seems that the anti vignette has something to do with the way the lens is coded to allow the 5DiV to recognise it.

From my understanding(but I could be wrong).
The third party manufacturers have to code the lens in a way that the camera makers don't see it as a Tamron XXX/XX lens, they just see it as a generic lens usually from 'yesteryear'
I've seen info to that effect about Sigma lenses and Nikon cameras.

That is, the lens announces itself to the camera with some hex code, and that hex code needs to be of a type that the camera will work with(ie. AF, IS/VC .. etc.)
If it was hex coded to tell the camera that it's a 85/1.8 VC lens, the camera doesn't know how to handle the VC if it's not in it's internal lookup table.

So, almost 99.999% certain it'll be a lens firmware issue, where Tamron may have an update for it(via those USB dock devices).

I just had a quick peek on the Tamron support site, and there is a firmware v3(up from v2) which was for operation on various Canon cameras, 5D IV being one of them.

[Tannin]

Cheers lads.

Arthur, the camera correctly recognises the lens as "TAMRON SP 85mm F/1.8 DI VC USD", adds "F016" (the firmware version perhaps?) and then says "Correction data available".

I'm vague about this as I can't remember whether "Correction data available" in Canonspeak means "I know all about this lens" or "I can deal with this lens but you will need to download the info file from Canon for me". As I recall, Canon cameras come pre-loaded with a selection of data for the most popular lenses, and you can add others. In the old 5D Mark II (one of the first cameras to have optical correction capability), you got 25 lenses pre-loaded and (if I remember correctly) there was limited room for more but you could delete the data for some lens you didn't own to make space if needed. Possibly the 5D IV is similar, but it is many years newer, the firmware file is huge, and it probably contains ... oh I don't know ... 50 or 100 pre-loaded lenses 'coz modern electronics makes this sort of thing so easy.

So, possibly, I'll be able to use the EOS Utility to install a new lens data file for the 85mm Tamron. I'll look into that tonight. But it's no longer a priority as I can simply switch the PIC off if I'm (a) using the 85, and (b) using the 5D IV with it, and (c) going to f/2.8 or wider. That wouldn't really matter much. And this problem aside, it's a very sweet little lens. I was really enjoying using it for the first time until I saw the black circles.

(Ever since I went full frame, I have missed the wonderful little Canon 60mm f/2.8 macro (which is an EF-S lens and does not fit on a full frame body). I used it for macro work only a little, and for landscapes and general photography quite a lot. That field of view really suits me. On full frame, 50mm is too wide, 100mm too long: that 75-85mm range is my sweet spot. And adding IS to the recipe makes it even better as you often want to be stopped down quite a long way for depth of field.)

[arthurking83]

I'll try to find more info about what I was trying to explain.
I remember I@M had issues with his Sigma 100-300/4 years back, so of course, I went searching for more info.
Couldn't help Andrew but he got them updated firmware at Sigma and they got sorted.

I'm sure it was via exiftool that I found this info
And it was really weird stuff too. something like a Sigma 70/2.8 was recognised (in hex code) as a 60/2.8 lens .. or some weird thing like that.
If you're curious as to what I'm referring too, have a peek on the exiftool site, HERE
Scroll down to LendID tag table.

The exif always comes up perfectly correct tho, that isn't the issue. it's this weird underlying code that isn't commonly known about.

Basically a camera has a finite amount of storage for a lens database(firmwares update this, and hex codes get reused).
The manufacturers never allow for thirdparty lenses, so the third party makers use known hex codes.
In the case of the 85/1.8 tho, this would seem normal, and you'd expect the camera to think that the tammy 85/1.8 is a Canon 85/1.8(as that lens exists). But without IS.
So how would the camera operate the VC if it thinks the lens is a Canon 85/1.8.
(remember exif is a separate issue, not part of the operation of the camera).
So the camera has to be able to operate the focus in a specific manner(ie. same travel and speed, etc) and also the VC which won't exist in a canon 85/1.8 lens.
And Canon dont have a Tamron SP 85mm f/1.8 VC lens into their camera's database. they usually struggle for room for all their own lenses.

On the exiftool site, I can't locate a search tool, so I copy/pasted the table into a document and searched for that lens term. Doesn't exist. So Tamron probably used another lens ID code, but may have botched it for that lens type.
That is, lens is older than the camera, and camera was updated with different info.
If you have a look at the table, you see entries for the Tammy SP 35 and 45mm f/1.8 VC lenses tho.

ps. I didn't know that the lens ID tags used a numerical value for Canon tho. In Nikon world, the lens tags are in hex.


Sorry for the long post again, but it's kind'a hard to explain it with a short reply.

The F016 info on the lens is the actual lens model.
eg. Tammy make three electronic 90/2.8 macro lenses. Each as it's own lens model number, even tho they're all the same lens spec type. late models are 172/272E and the earlier one is the 72E.
Some models use A as a prefix for the alphabet value, others use a suffix(usually a D or E)
There's more detail in the Nikon lens ID table than the Canon one.

No idea how you'd find the firmware version without the use of the TapIn console from Tamron.
I'd say almost certainly to be the issue.
Even tho you got he lens recently, it may have been made prior to March this year(when Tamron updated the firmware from v2 to v3).
If it's was a local lens, I'd say almost certainly this is the case. If you got an import(eg. from HK), then more likely it's a later than March build.. but again no certainty.

But I'd recommend to look into getting one of the USB attachment devices.
Any issues with the lens in future with any other newer camera, where a firmware may be needed(hope not, but always plan for contingencies) you're prepped to do so.
I think they cost about $100.
The upside, if your geekily inclined(ie. like me) you also have options to play with focus speed/accuracy in a much nicer manner than any in camera feature allows.

I also reckon to give it a go with VC off and anti vignette on to see if it changes behaviour of the anti vignette feature.
More than anything else, I'm curious as to what would happen. if it changes the strange ring.

The other even stranger aspect to your issue is(and this is really weird to see!). if the camera is set to Peripheral Illumination Correction as on, you'd expect to see a brighter circle, not a darker one(as in your images).
That is, it's an anti vignette feature, yet it's set a strange circular vignette .. the opposite of what it's supposed to do.

[mongo]

Good to see problem solved albeit not in an ideal way but at least in a workable way for now. Still a little disappointing about apparent lack of better communicating these features to buyers at the time of sale and not having to find out much later.

not thrilled about having to buy docks for various lenses but understand it is a way of now updating/improving the lens' potential. This should be made available with the lens or be made available for free for use through major retailers who stock the brand. Owners willing to call in and update can do so. THe dock is useless the rest of the time and often only used once in its lifetime depending on ownership of the brand.

Again, today' Tamron , at its upper end products, is up there with the big boys re engineering and quality

[arthurking83]

.... This should be made available with the lens or be made available for free for use through major retailers who stock the brand. Owners willing to call in and update can do so. THe dock is useless the rest of the time and often only used once in its lifetime depending on ownership of the brand.

....

That would be the ideal scenario, for sure.
Have docks at various retailers, of the lens was bought from the retailer, it'd be a free of charge service for the life of the lens.(it really takes no time to do a firmware update)

If the lens was purchased from 'other sources' then a very small fee could be easily accepted just for the time of the retail staff to do the process.

You don't need any special skill to do it, just connect, check for updates, confirm ... etc.

USB dock tho isn't so much useless the rest of the time, at least possibly for a short time as the owner gets used to a product.
It also allows certain features to be tweaked and adjusted to suit the owner.
Stuff like AF speed and accuracy, the two are co dependent, so if AF speed is more of a priority, it may (in some situations) result in a bit less accuracy, and vice versa.
I'd guess that the Tamron(being a VC lens) may also have some tweaking ability to adjust the VC operation to be smoother, more stable, or whatever.

I only have the Sigma dock, and one Sigma lens, and the multitude of adjustments are quite a little overwhelming at first, but once you work through them, they start to make a little sense.
Not saying that this Tamron lens has any of all of those additional features too(as I don't have one), but I suspect that they'll have at least some commonality.

But, overall, Mongo is right. Once the lens has been set to a specific user preference, it really does become kind of 'useless'.
I have even looked at my Sigma dock for at least a year or more now. But it's nice knowing it's there, if I get a new camera and there is any weird operational situation with the lens, it's a matter of waiting for Sigma to provide the firmware to allow it to be loaded into the lens.