Canon and Nikon Mirrorless Fans Should Be Excited: Tamron Lenses Are on the Way

Canon and Nikon Mirrorless Fans Should Be Excited: Tamron Lenses Are on the Way

In an interview that slipped under the radar a few months ago, one of Tamron’s U.S.A sales managers confirmed that Canon RF and Nikon Z-mount lenses are currently in the pipeline.

Talking to Englewood Camera in this video, Tamron’s Marc Morris is asked whether Tamron has plans to manufacture lenses for Canon and Nikon’s new mirrorless cameras. “Under development for both,” Morris confirms. “The mirrorless paradigm is our focus.”

Tamron has transformed its reputation as a manufacturer in recent years, producing a series of high-quality, very affordable lenses for Sony mirrorless cameras. It has just completed its alternative trinity of intelligently compromised f/2.8 zooms (check out this review of the brand new 70-180mm f/2.8), providing Sony shooters with fast, compact, and versatile lenses that shave a few millimeters of width or reach in order to save on size and weight, but without undermining performance.

Canon fans will be excited to learn that affordable glass will be appearing for R-series cameras in the near future, acting as a complement to the high-end, high-priced glass produced by Canon since the launch of the EOS R in October 2018.

Nikon users will be equally pleased. While Nikkor Z-mount glass is much more affordable than Canon's RF lenses, a broader choice of glass will be welcomed. For both Canon and Nikon, a greater selection of lenses at a wider range of prices will increase the appeal for customers to shift from DSLR to mirrorless.

Are you excited to see Tamron producing lenses for Nikon and Canon mirrorless cameras? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.

Log in or register to post comments

18 Comments

"Are you excited to see Tamron producing lenses for Nikon and Canon mirrorless cameras? "

meh

would be more excited to hear it from sigma.
but only after seeing a good gen2 camera that fixes deficits of the Z6/7

Since there are Z mount and RF mount on the market, we can't expect any high level lenses from Tamron, Sigma and Samyang as they are all just adapting some low end lenses issued from FE mount which are made far a too narrow mount (the only APSC used for FF and considered as the worst mount on the market by Fuji too)
We will never get anything comparable to modern lenses (made for Z or RF mounts) from F1.0 to F2.0.
We will probably be returning to the end of 2000 with just some cheap lenses far from what is available even in EF mounts.

Andy Day's picture

As I understand it from Marc Morris, Tamron build all of their lenses from the mount up. They do not adapt existing glass.

jim hughes's picture

If this was said a few months ago it probably doesn't mean much today.

Everybody and his dog has a "pipeline".

Steve TQP's picture

While I applaud Tamron for venturing into this space, I'm usually an OEM guy when it comes to lenses, especially the the Z mount that I am interested in. I'd love to be proven wrong, but I don't see how a 3rd party company can produce a lens that is sharper than, or more compatible with, the specific camera system, especially with a company (Nikon) that's been manufacturing their own glass for decades. Anecdotally, I have this view from testing a Rokinon 8mm Fish-Eye on a Fujifilm X-T3, and while it "works" fine (manual focus only), the resulting image quality, while decent and usable, is not quite up to the OEM (Fujiinon) standards in terms of lens acuity and microcontrast. All that said, good luck to Tamron!

Andy Day's picture

Hey Steve, those are some really good points. Having tested around six Samyang and Tamron lenses in the last year, as well as the recent Sigma 24-70mm (all for Sony), I think you'd be impressed. OEM will still clinch it in terms of sharpness and AF, but for me the role of third party manufacturers is about breadth of choice, not simply quality. Plus, with the Samyang and Tamron offerings, you're typically getting around 90% of the lens for 40-50% of the price. If sharpness, rendering, CA, and vignetting are absolutely critical for your work, then absolutely, the OEM options are your best choice. If price and portability are more of a concern, then third party is the way to go.

I'd add to that - as I understand it, third party lenses for Fuji are a little way behind those made for Sony. This may change.

I wonder if they will be able to support auto-focus.

Charles Mercier's picture

I've been a bit out of the loop for a long time so I'd like to know. Last century, the OEM Nikon lenses were the best for the Nikon I had. Only if you couldn't afford it, do you buy the aftermarket lenses. Of course, some aftermarket lens manufacturers were better than others - price dependent. I assume the same today? Or not?

FYI, I have a Sony a7 now.

It varies with every lens, not just the manufacturer.

Charles Mercier's picture

How is that possible? I'm baffled by the statement - and I do have a basic knowledge on how equipment is manufactured. Inform me.

Every lens, by every manufacturer, is a unique design so, for example, the Sigma 50mm Art is better in almost every way, except size and cost, to the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 while the Sigma 14-24mm Art is roughly equal, again, saving price, to the Nikkor 14-24mm f/2.8. And in all cases, there's disagreement on which qualities are most important, to determine the better lens. Sharpness vs quality of bokeh vs color vs ... You can't make a blanket statement that OEM lenses are better or worse than all third party lenses or even a particular third party's lenses.
Perhaps I misunderstood your question?

Charles Mercier's picture

Well, in manufacturing the companies will make the glass in the same machines with the same ingredients with the same quality control differing from another company. So Tamron's manufacturing plant will churn out a slightly different quality than Nikon's plant. I understand that some lens can be better than another company's if it doesn't come off the same assembly line but I'm not quite sure how every lens from every manufacturer is randomly better or less better than another from another manufacturer.

All I'm saying is, most manufacturer's make lenses of varying quality in order to target different customers.

Charles Mercier's picture

Ah gotcha. I was speaking more generically I guess. Sure, Tamron I guess has a cheap line and a more expensive line, I assume?

Yeah. The SP (Super Performance) lenses are their top-of-the-line (I have the 70-200 f/2.8 G2) which are supposed to be better than their other lenses (I have a couple of their older lenses) which are still good lenses but don't have their secret sauce or something. ;-)
Honestly, most decent lenses, these days, are very good; the days of crap lenses, especially among third party, are pretty much over. Even Chinese companies (designed in China, not just manufactured there) makes some pretty good lenses.

Charles Mercier's picture

I assume now that all glass and barrels are computer laser cut?

I don't know anything about manufacturing, just a little about the end products.

Deleted Account's picture

More options always welcome.