Tamron 18-200MM F/3.5-6.3 Di II VC for Nikon, with samples

I'm not one for superzoom lenses.  In fact, I wouldn't normally buy a lens with more than a 4x zoom range.  10x zooms tend to be mushy at both ends with some place decent in the middle of the range.

However, due to the nature of skate parks, I have had some thoughts about the Panasonic 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 Power OIS lens.  Rather than spend US$700 on this lens and be disappointed, I decided to buy a discounted (US$200) Tamron 18-200mm lens.  This Tamron lens just won the "Best Entry DSLR Lens" TIPA award.  (TIPA, like EISA seems to be a group that believes that everyone is a winner, although Tokina didn't win anything.)

Tamron's optical image stabilization has been quite good.  Considering the very small maximum aperture (f/3.5-6.3), it definitely needs OIS.  The Panasonic lens has their best OIS, which doesn't seem completely effective but might be similar, given the focal range.  Considering that the Tamron lens is made for a dSLR, it's surprising that it uses a 62mm filter size while the Panasonic lens uses a 58mm filter size.  That makes the Tamron lens quite compact.

18mm

200mm

VC/OIS seemed to work while I was walking 

Fairly sharp with unusual shapes

These seem very good examples of what the lens can do but these next images seem to show some of the less great attributes.

Purple fringing seems quite noticeable and there are multiple problems with these photos concerning eye-bending distortion.  They're not awful, especially when not viewed close up, but they can be irritating when thoroughly examined.  It is a lens for convenience.

I consider that this is typically a US$250 lens.  That isn't a lot, so no one should expect a lot.  Of course, if you were using a bridge camera, it might correct all of these little issues automagically and you'd never see any real problem.  Imagine a 60x zoom range.  That is difficult to believe with a bigger sensor.  The Sigma 50-500mm lens is the biggest 10x zoom lens I've seen and you don't really need a crew to handle it, but a tripod helps.

Considering that I have:

Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8
Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8
Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8 fisheye

this Tamron 18-200mm f/3.5-6.3 seems an odd fit.  I bought the D7200 for wide angle purposes and it has done well for that, even though it isn't possibly as wide as a 135 Format/FX body would be.  It is sufficient.  The Tamron lens adds a bit of reach without much expense, so that I can use the D7200 on its own, to handle a variety of tasks.

If you're interested, What Digital Camera put together a review of the lens for Canon.  Nothing should surprise you.

Panasonic DMC-G6 = renewed DMC-GH2

For all those who wanted a GH2 replacement and you hate the GH3, Panasonic has the G6.

It has:

• Compact size
• GH2 sensor, apparently enhanced
• Enhanced Venus engine
• Better Electronic Viewfinder
• Enhanced firmware

It seems to me that they did everything they could with the G6 to satisfy the GH2 fans, much as they brought out the GX1 for the GF1 fans.

It makes sense that they would provide a new body, especially since it seems to take a more Leica look for easy Leica re-badging.  They've added function buttons and given it less of a consumer look.

The rest of the package makes a lot of sense for those with a keen interest in video who still need to take still photos.  Sure, it won't be as good as the GH3 or the Black Magic Cinema Pocket Camera but the price reflects that.

Given the news about the Black Magic Cinema Pocket Camera, they will have an alternative without jeopardizing their consumer-oriented focus.  The G6 should quell the uproar that the GH3 wasn't a true successor to the GH2.  It seems that they're addressing a lot of issues with just one camera body.

I'm not quite as sure about the 14-140mm f/3.5-5.6 lens.  I still don't love the 35-100mm, so what would possess me to buy a 10x zoom lens when a superzoom is already a compromise?  The new one is smaller and lighter, which is certainly good for those with the GX1 or GF6 since those are tiny.

I read some comment stating that it didn't look like the new one was worse.  That's not much of a compliment.   Was the older one that good that "no worse" could be a good thing?  I'm certainly not going to buy something just because it's "no worse" than the older one.  To its favour, the maximum aperture is bigger, probably because the physical size of the lens has been reduced.  It will be somewhat more capable in low light.  After spending some time with the 45-200mm f/4.0-5.6, I hope that the 14-140mm focuses in dim light, as the 45-200mm has trouble in average light.

Of course, their Power OIS should help in low light, as it seems very capable on the 35-100mm I have.  I'm interested in seeing the Tamron 14-150mm f/3.5-5.6, as their VC (Vibration Control) III is said to be quite good.  Tamron has every reason to make their first attempt in the micro Four-Thirds market a powerful one.

I suspect that people who wanted the GH2 and 14-140mm will be terribly pleased with the G6 and the newer 14-140mm lens.  At a lower price and with better capabilities, people should love them.

Update 2014.05.22: I guess I was wrong.  They wanted the GH2 body with the GH3 internals.  They're beating a dead horse because Panasonic isn't making another GH2.  It should be obvious by now with the GH3 and GH4 that Panasonic isn't making a cheap, hobbyist-oriented body in the style of the GH2.  I heard that the G6 wasn't the successor because it didn't have the same controls--right, because they're not in the GH2 body.

How is it that some people feel betrayed by a company trying to make money to stay in business to make more products to stay in business?  Apple fanatics are the worst.  They dream up something crazy and when the company doesn't bring it to life, they're angry.