Tamron patents a 115mm f/1.4 VC lens

Tamron 115mm f:1.4 VC lens patent
Tamron filed a patent in Japan for a 115mm f/1.4 VC full frame DSLR lens. Here are the details:

  • Patent 2016-151661
  • Published on August 22, 2016
  • Filing date:m February 17, 2015
  • Focal length: 113
  • Aperture: 1.456
  • Half angle of view: 10.632
  • Internal focus
  • Vibration reduction

Via Egami

This entry was posted in Nikon Lenses, Nikon Patents and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Mike

    Ok, now this is getting ridiculous. Lol. Gotta love competition.

    • Greg

      yay!

  • Canon has a patent for 116mm f/1.4.

    Watch out, Tamron and Nikon.

  • longzoom

    How long its gonna take for Tamron, from patent to shelf? Any ideas?

    • JasonsArgonauts

      Some of the stuff they patent never makes it to the shelves, unfortunately… Same for Canon and Nikon. Sigma seem to be the only ones that follow through every time they patent something.

      • longzoom

        Thank you!

    • jason Keefer

      The 85 patent leak was about 8 months.

      • longzoom

        Thanks!

  • Daniel Bykhovsky

    Rounded off its actually a f1.5 lens.

  • nek4life

    That is going to be huge at 1.4 w/ VC. I might be able to afford this one though :/

  • Michael Turner

    This can’t be a great lens though. It defies logic. Probably great in low light but mediocre in good lighting. I can’t wait to see these new lenses go head to head.

    • Andy Aungthwin

      “Probably great in low light but mediocre in good lighting”.

      I think that what you said defies logic.

      • Michael Turner

        Exactly! Haha. To clarify what I meant: It has advantages for low light shooting but those advantages would work as weaknesses in proper lighting. Once you have to stop down to f2, you are better off with a lens that was built around and for f2. Maybe a Zeiss 135mm or Nikon 105mm.

        • Those are pretty rough generalisations. Why couldn’t it be good in proper light?

          • Michael Turner

            They may have risked lowering the actually image quality to get the lens to open up to 1.4 and then there’s also extra glass for the VC. You are correct that I’m making generalizations here. The lens could be a miracle. But if you are using a tripod and you have good lighting and your subject is a human or something that needs f2 or more, I’m guessing it won’t be better in those circumstances than existing lenses.

            • Aldo

              I’m trying to think of something (and I’m usually good at thinking) that would support what you say but can’t think of anything. It seems you are navigating in waters you aren’t too familiar. If you are trying to say that stopping down a lens like this for optimal exposure in a well lit situation (assuming you are using a low shutter speed) is a waste… then there’s some logic there, but this can be said with every 1.4.

            • Michael Turner

              If this lens tests well, I’m going to trade in some gear and get it. If not, then I won’t. That’s probably the best logic I can muster.

            • Aldo

              Okay that makes more sense =] … I’m thinking it will perform similar to their new 35 and 50mm 1.8 VC.

            • Spy Black

              I think he’s thinking along the lines of the old Noct Nikkor, which was optimized to be used wide open.

            • Eh, the new Nikon 105mm 1.4 has amazing optical quality. Razor sharp and smooth transition between focus and out-of-focus. I don’t see why Tamron couldn’t do the same. Their most recent lenses are all amazing, and they wouldn’t release a portrait lens that isn’t good, because it wouldn’t sell. Today’s large aperture lenses are made to be used wide open.

            • Michael Turner

              Ah, but if it’s a portrait lens and you are taking actual portraits with it, the subject needs to perfectly facing the camera so both eyes are in focus. Once they start to turn a little to the side only one eye will be in focus. If you want both eyes in focus then you are going to need higher Fstops. That’s when other lenses would be a better choice. I’m not saying I don’t need a 1.4 portrait lens in my bag for low light conditions, I do need one. It just comes down to which performs better and also maybe the price.

            • You can always stop it down if you need longer depth of field. Too many people complain and forget that the possibility exists. And besides, the aperture helps to give short depth of field for full body portraits where the entire face will be in focus. You don’t need to use it for close-up portraits only. The Tamron will most likely be cheaper, but maybe have slightly worse optical quality.
              Here is an example of a portrait where i would want this kind of lens. It’s taken with an 85 1.8 wide open.

            • Michael Turner

              That’s a great example of being far enough from the subject where you could open up to 1.4 and the subject would still be in focus. 1.4 would also help with some extra light and add extra bokeh for the foliage. (115mm would also add bokeh) If you don’t like using a tripod then the VC is right for you too. That’s a spot on example of where this lens would be most appropriate. Great shot too!

            • Thanks a lot for the compliments! It’s never bad to have more possibilities, as long as you are willing to spend the money for it and have a vision for how you will use it.

            • ITN

              For a whole body portrait, f/1.4 gives enough depth of field to cover most of the subject and give a pleasing blur in the environment.

            • El Aura

              Most very fast lenses roughly match slower lenses at common f-stops. What can happen with very fast lenses is that the lens design is focussed on centre quality (eg, getting the whole frame reasonably sharp at f/1.4 might be to difficult but getting only the central region sharp is doable) and this carries over into the stopped range. However, this is mainly with wide-angle to normal lenses (though some portrait primes suffer from this to, eg, the Canon 85 mm f/1.2).

        • Zenettii

          WTF ? This is what the tinternet is so great at. Misinformation by people who think they know stuff.

          • Michael Turner

            Is that really what the tinternet is so great at? Or did you just add some misinformation.

        • ITN

          This is not correct. A faster lens stopped down a bit typically performs at its best and in almost all cases would be better than a slower lens wide open.

          • Michael Turner

            Unless that faster lens’ optics were cannibalized due the priority of make the lens faster over making the lens be the best it could optically be.

            • ITN

              Nikon will never release a faster lens that is not better at the slower lens’s maximum aperture. That’s a basic requirement for design of a fast version. I.e. an 85/1.4 must be better at f/1.8 than the f/1.8 version. If this is not possible, they will not release the lens since it is going to be much more expensive than the slower lens, it must be better at that specific aperture.

  • Aldo

    I’m still hoping sigma will come through with the 85mm and save us from these monster lenses.

    • Michael Turner

      I’m in the same boat. If the Sigma 85 1.4 turns out to be better than Nikon’s and also performs better than these 1.4 105 and 115’s, then that will be my next purchase.

    • Carleton Foxx

      Not trying to troll, trying to understand…Reviewers rave about the newish Nikon 85 f/1.8 and to a lesser extent the 1.4. Why are you waiting for Sigma?

      • Aldo

        Quite frankly I’m looking for the extra speed… at a sigma price… with similar performance of that of the nikon 1.8g. That to me would be a worthy upgrade… not necessary… but a ‘nice’ upgrade. I can probably pick up a used nikon 1.4g at the intro price of the rumored sigma… but to be honest I’m not completely sold on the nikon. I think (or at least I’m hoping) the new sigma will outperform nikon’s current 1.4.

      • Michael Turner

        To see how it performs. I don’t own a Sigma yet and though it’s stupid to buy a brand just cause it’s a brand, I mostly only have Nikon lenses and I really need to get to know some other options. Expand my mind or learn from the mistake sort of thing. I do have Nikon’s 85 1.8 and it’s really amazing at nailing a super sharp focus in the middle of excellent bokeh. It does have short comings; it’s not the best at handling contrast in bright sun and has some vignetting. If it had a nano coating and ED elements maybe that would resolve those issues but then it would be like making the 1.4 version just without the 1.4. And that makes no sense from a production/marketing point of view.

        • Deryk

          My hopes for the Sigma 85mm 1.4 Art are that it takes the best qualities of their other Art lenses, has better chromatic aberration control, and has a price of about 1000$ or less. While I know the 85mm 1.4 G has better fringing control than the “D” version, I would still like less. FYI, I own the 85mm 1.4 D, and those that own the lens, know that it is built well, but fringes quite a bit.

  • Max

    lol everyone had two or three designs ready but just waited to see what Nikon would do and now it’s off with the patents.

    • Eric Calabros

      They cant see before its being published. and even if they are informed what is filled in Japan patent office everyday, cant design a lens in such a short period of time as a response.

      • Max

        they can have three designs ready, and when they see what the shortcomings of the Nikkor is, they can pick the design that compensates those flaws and start producing it. That’s just a thought, i’m probably wrong though.

  • doge

    I really want one of these 85 to 120ish fast primes. probably 85.

    • Aldo

      wow ?

      • doge

        Depends on the image quality.

  • Carleton Foxx

    We live in amazing times. Who wouldn’t want one of these for portraits?

  • CBJ

    Interesting, I have heard from someone that VC does not work well with shallow DOF. Would like to see reviews if this does get release.

    • Mistral75

      > I have heard from someone that VC does not work well with shallow DOF.

      This someone apparently never used a 200mm f/2 (Nikon or Canon)…

      • Chris Lane

        Agreed, My 1st Gen 200mm F2 VR is tack sharp on D810 VR on or off.

    • Aldo

      That could make some sense… because VR gives you a less shaky image at the price of a smudgy look… for good bokeh, a good transition of focused to out of focus areas is important. A smudgy focused area would not make this transition very pleasing… in theory.

      • JasonsArgonauts

        That’s the thing with VC. There’s a switch in the side which will turn it off, thus making it effectively a non-VC lens.

        • Spy Black

          …but the optic is never as perfectly aligned as in a non-stabilized lens.

          • JasonsArgonauts

            I’ve never had an issue such as imperfectly aligned optics, whether it’s on a VC/VR lens or not.

            • Michael Turner

              I’ve also never noticed any issues with VC or VR when it’s turn off or on. But then again I’ve only used it on a 24-85 and 55-300. That extra glass on a real lens, turned off or on, might have a negative effect on the image.

            • Spy Black

              No you should be fine with your lens, but my comment refers to comparing the results with an identical focal length lens without stabilization. There’s been discussions that the floating element affects the bokeh of the lens compared to non-floating optic-based lenses.

  • Nikos Delhanidis

    <3 tamron

  • outkasted

    HA!!

  • Yawn…

  • Carlos DAngerio

    I’m going to patent 117mmf.14 Bwahahahaha 😉

    • Oompsy

      Guess what buddy, I’m patenting a 118mm f1.4 next BWAHAHAHA. XD

  • MB

    Tamron will probably eventually release 85 2.8 and label it 115 1.4 …
    Same as current 24-70 2.8 that is actually 22-55 with apperture that doesn’t work above 4 and VR that only works at shutter speed 1/30 …

  • Andreas Ursin Hellebust

    Have you seen how Tamron constantly produces extremely high-quality glass to directly compete with the higher-priced Nikkors? And for some reason NONE of them comes in Sony FE versions?

    I have just changed from Nikon D600 to Sony A7R, but I have to say the availability of reasonably priced glass for the FE system is worse than I feared. I would love the Tamron SP 35mm or 45mm or the 24-70mm 2.8, but the primes don’t exist, and the zoom has been nerfed (A-mount and adapter) and removed the VC, making it unusable for video.

    And since we know Sony is the second largest shareholder in Tamron….. Don’t you think this is foul play? I mean there must be some free-market rules to destroying the competition, while keeping a monopoly on your own system 😛 urgh.

    The Tamron 115mm F1.4 comes just as the 105mm Nikkor is released. And I bet my ass we won’t ever see the Tamron in FE version 😛 so disgusting.

  • Back to top