New Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 Di II VC HLD lens to be announced soon

After the new SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD lens (model A030) that was introduced in Japan today, Tamron is rumored to announce also a new 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 Di II VC HLD lens that will replace the previous non-VC version (this lens is designed for APS-C/DX based DSLR cameras).

Tamron is rumored to also introduce a new SP 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD G2 lens.

Here are the specifications of the Tamron 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 Di II VC HLD lens (pictured above):

  • Model B023
  • First lens to come with the new motor HLD (High / Low Torque Modulated Drive Motor)
  • Equipped with a camera shake correction mechanism VC (approximately 4 stops)
  • Antifouling coat and simple drip-proof construction are adopted
  • TAP-in console compatible
  • Lens construction: 16 elements in 11 groups (LD, XLD, aspheric and a composite aspherical lenses inside)
  • Shortest shooting distance: 0.24m
  • Maximum shooting magnification: 1:5.3
  • Filter diameter: 77 mm
  • Maximum diameter × length: 83.6 mm × 84.6 mm
  • Weight: 440 g
  • Suggested retail price: 70,000 yen + tax
  • Mass retailer price: 62,100 yen (tax included)

Via Nokishita

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

    I shoot real estate photos with a D7200 and nikon 10-24mm lens. 90 percent of my shots are at 10mm. ( 15 equivalent ). What are the chances this lens will be better than the Nikon version? How much in US dollars do you think it will be?

    • Really, Eric, that 10-24 of yours is a terrific lens. I used one on my D300s to shoot real estate for a couple years and found it way better than the Sigma I’d been using before that. Way less flare. I can’t imagine a Tamron being “better”.

      • Eledeuh

        The D300S is not exactly as taxing on lenses as the D7200, I hear the 10-24 clearly shows its age on higher resolution sensors.

        That being said, for real estate purposes it’s probably sufficient ?

        • Yes, that’s what I meant to say but didn’t get around to in my comment because I expect people to read my mind and know what I’m trying to say. Real estate should be fine. 🙂

          • Eric Parker

            I will definitely be going in to a brick and mortar store to take some sample images with both lens. The biggest drawback of the Nikon at 10mm is the corner sharpness at f/8, even on a tripod. Like someone mentioned, maybe with this Tamron being newer, it will be better.

            • Do/will your clients notice? If not, why spend the money? If you really want to impress them, get a used D800 and a refurb’d 14-24mm.


              I profited 104000 dollars previous year by doing an on-line job from my house a­n­d I was able to do it by work­ing part time f­­o­­r 3+ hrs on daily basis. I used an earning opportunity I found online and I am so thrilled that I was able to earn so much money on the side. It’s so newbie friendly a­n­d I am just so blessed that i learned about it. Here is what i did… STATICTAB.COM/5rq2qty


              I have profited 104 thousand dollars in last 12 months by working on-line a­­n­­d I was able to do it by w­o­r­k­i­n­g in my own time for 3+ h daily. I followed a money making opportunity I stumbled upon online and I am so excited that i made so much extra income. It’s so beginner friendly a­­n­­d I’m so thankful that I found out about this. This is what i do… STATICTAB.COM/gptmadp

    • Spy Black

      Tamron and Sigma are on a roll, and this is new technology, so I’d say the chances are pretty good this lens may have better IQ than the older Nikkor.

      • Bob Thane

        Plus Nikon only gives you one focus tuning setting. If you get the Tamron dock I think you can tune it at multiple focal lengths/focus distances, which can be very handy.

      • Unless they cram a ton more megapixels into APS-C, I don’t think the Nikon 10-24 *needs* to be beaten. I’ve already tested it on a 24 MP DX sensor sans-AA filter, and it was fantastic.

        Really, if Tamron wanted to *wow*, they should have made an APS-C version of the 15-30 f/2.8 VC. I’d pay top dollar for a 10-20mm f/2.8 VC that was sharper than the Tokina 2.8’s and the Rokinon 10mm f/2.8.

        Of course, only as long as it’s lighter than the 15-30 2.8 enough to actually entice a purchase; the whole point of APS-C for me is weight savings so that I can *add* 1-2 of them to a kit that already includes one full-frame setup. Such is the life of an astro-landscape timelapse photographer…

        • Spy Black

          Well, we’re not really going to know anything until we see the Tamron in the wild. We’ll have to see how the 8-year-old Nikkor holds up to a lens that should benefit from modern formulation, coatings, and other advancements in lens design that have occurred since the Nikkor came out.

          You can see how far companies like Tamron have come when you compare their 85mm f/1.8 to the 85mm f/1.4 Nikkor. Although it may not necessarily wind up being the case, I see no reason why this forthcoming lens can’t be a significant improvement over it’s equivalent Nikkor.

          • True, regarding the potential for improvement thanks to modern design.

            However, my point still stands- It’s not like I was testing the old Nikon on a 12-16 MP sensor with an AA filter. I’ve tested the “old” lens on a “latest-and-greatest” DX sensor, and even at 24 MP with no AA filter the original Nikon 10-24 DX is, simply put, “plenty sharp”. (By comparison, a 24 MP DX sensor sure does put the screws to something like the 85 1.4 G.)

            Could the Tamron be *better*? Sure. But my point is that most people won’t even see the difference, and those who do shoot “correctly” for maximum resolving power would mostly just see slight improvement in the far corners and wide-open.

            IMO, the real reason for this new lens is simply that the older Tamron 10-24 is the dog. That’s the lens they need to really beat. And with that in mind, I’d rather have them barely match the existing Nikon, but do it at a great price point, (plus VC!) …than have them try and really beat the Nikon, but have the lens weigh a lot more and/or cost just as much as the Nikon. (I suspect the former, not the latter, will be the case.)

            • Spy Black

              I’m not sure if Tamron is out to “beat the Nikon”, but they are certainly overall more competitive with both Nikon and Canon, as is Sigma. Improve the older design? Why not? Wind up being better than the Nikon? Why not?

              Seems to me both Tamron and Sigma are modernizing their lens line, and are doing it with a flair and pizzaz you’re simply not seeing in the likes of Nikon or Canon. I bet it took the 24-70 Tamron to get Nikon to make one with VR, and I’m sure Canon will probably follow with the same. So the game has been ratcheted up and both Canon and Nikon have been put on notice.

              In the end, we benefit.

      • and in real life no one will actually see a difference

        • Spy Black

          Probably, but if one is in the market for such a lens, and if the Tamron is equal or better, then it will be a better option than the Nikkor.

          • I agree but I think as I am sure soooo many do now that lenses and cameras have run their course, there is only so much you can change/alter/update. NO REAL move forward in cameras/lenses has happened in real terms just a re hash of what exists, add a mm here take a mm away there, add a coating and that is it

            • KnightPhoto

              I tend to look at this that, the choices we photographers have right now in 2017, are ones our predecessors would kill to have. Both on sensors, camera features, and lenses!

            • Spy Black

              That’s not really true, especially in optics. Lenses today are quite a bit better than lenses created only 10 years ago. Just look at the new Tamrons, Sigmas, as well as lenses like the 100 and 300 Nikkors and 16-35 Canon. They’re all significant optical improvements, capable making the best use of high resolution sensors.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Siri tells me 70k yen is $621.46 right now.

      Like Pete implied below, why would anyone with a Nikon 10-24mm consider replacing it with Tamron? Did you drop the Nikon?

      • Spy Black

        It all depends on how they engineer it, now doesn’t it? As I said elsewhere, Tamron and Sigma are on a roll, and this is new technology, so I’d say the chances are pretty good this lens may have better IQ than the older Nikkor. How old is that Nikkor now?

        That’s not to say that Tamron may not screw it up, but so far the two leading third-party manufacturers have been quite impressive. We’ll just have to wait and see.

      • EnPassant

        VC will add at least two stops for handheld use. For many that will be the deciding factor if optically it is at least as good as the Nikon 10-24 lens.

    • The Nikon, in my experience, is already pretty freaking awesome. Don’t you shoot real estate stopped down on a tripod anyways?

      I compared *ALL* the old APS-C ultra-wides once, including the Nikon 10-24 DX and the original Tamron 10-24, plus both of the Sigma 10-20’s, and all the various Tokina DX’s.

      Simply put, the Nikon is a winner. If you already own it, stick with it. There’s very, very little chance that the Tamron will be sharper. Especially if you shoot everything at f/8 and f/11.

    • Merv S

      If you are looking for a wide angle 3rd party alternative to your Nikon 10-24, I’d would only consider the Sigma 8-16 or the Tokina 11-16. If you have lots of money and want really wide, then a full-frame Canon dSLR with the Canon 11-14.

    • David

      The Nikon is around $900, so this Tammy I’m guessing will be around $700-750

  • Captain Insane-O

    What, Tamron is coming out with a replacement for their 70-200 2.8!!!!

    Honestly, I was excited that they were going to replace their 15-30 2.8 with a 10mm version… until I realized that it wasn’t, and that it was going to be a variably slow lens.

    • Bob Thane

      Hey, this will be probably half the price of the 15-30, give a much wider angle (only used for crop sensor cameras), be smaller and lighter, and take filters. It may not be the top-end lens for full frame cameras, but for enthusiasts who want their first ultra-wide it could be a great quality offering.

      • Captain Insane-O

        I agree, and I am sure it will be a great crop lens. I was simply voicing my immediate excitement and subsequent disappointment.

        • Bob Thane

          Ha, fair. I feel that way too.

  • srghyc

    I’ve been looking at wide angle lenses for my d5500. The sigma 10-20 3.5 is only 400 dollars or less. If this had a wide aperture like 2.8 like the famous tokina 11-16 that might justify the extra cost.

    • …You can buy a used Tokina 11-16 (ii) for under $400. If all you need is 11mm and f/2.8, that’s the lens to buy. Unfortunately, if you want the whole zoom range, the Tokina suffers from 13-16mm, and a 10-24 is a much better option.

      The old Tamron 10-24 was a bit underwhelming compared to either the Nikon 10-24 or the (two) Sigma 10-20’s, but it wasn’t half bad either and if you’re not pixel-peeping in the corners, it was just fine.

      I suspect that this new 10-24, if continuing along Tamron’s line of high-end lenses, will be quite a good option, however it’ll probably be $500-700.

      • KnightPhoto

        I’m interested in the Tokina 14-20 f/2 and 11-20 f/2.8 – any comments about those? I’m probably going to go for the f/2 for use in Theatre…

        • Spy Black

          Lenstip has a very favorable review of the 14-20. For $600, it certainly looks like a winner:

          • KnightPhoto

            Thanks Spy, LensTip MTF findings are very impressive! I think the Tokina 14-20 will do what I need in Theatre:
            – f/2 to provide an additional stop of shutter speed under very dim conditions;
            – appears to be plenty sharp enough out to the border shot wide open;
            – centre sharpness is incredible.

        • @KnightPhoto: Yup! Both are fantastic, killer lenses that you should definitely consider if you have the extra $$$. (Compared to a super-cheap used 11-16, which is really only an 11-12mm prime.)

          While I think the 11-20mm f/2.8 is a more versatile and usable lens for anyone whose main camera is DX, I think the 14-20 is a fantastic exotic choice for any folks who shoot both FX and DX, because the 14-20 can be used in 1.2x and 1.5x mode on a full-frame camera whenever you are shooting astro-landscape timelapse and care more about high ISO than resolving power…

          • KnightPhoto

            Thanks Matthew, I read your reviews and watched your videos – very helpful! looks like I will get the Tokina 14-20 (and maybe the Tokina 11-20 later on).

            Also liked your idea of shooting it in 1.2 crop on full-frame! That would significantly extend it’s usefulness in any of us mixed DX/FX shooters kit!

  • pedantic_brit

    I thought “antifouling” was for boat bottoms.k

    Seriously though if the performance is in line with recent Tamron offerings I will give it a very serious look. Keeping my fingers crossed.

    • LBNative2

      Wow, I didn’t know barnacles settled on lenses! Keep your lenses out of the ocean. But AF coatings are used in many industries, not just on boat bottoms.

  • CaMeRa QuEsT

    I really, really hated my Nikon 10-24mm, it’s a soft, low contrast, overpriced lens which has as its only redeeming point the fact that Nikon has kept raising its price year after year, which allowed me to unload it for close to what I paid for it brand new. I replaced it with a used Sigma 10-20mm f4-5.6 that is sharper, has higher contrast, and cost me only a 1/3 of what I paid for the Nikon. The current Tamron 10-24mm, which seems to be a cheaper brother for the Nikon (their lens formulae look almost exactly the same, save for two elements missing in the Tamron), is even worse. Nowadays, the totem poles in UWA DSLR crop sensor zooms are the Tokina 11-20mm and the Canon 10-18mm, and Tamron wants to charge more than either of those, so they better deliver and beat them both!

  • MissAshot

    Qhats going on with Tamron prices… sigma 10-20 3.5 in my country is 300 euros new. Tokinas (12-24) can be fiund 150e used. Why would anyone spent this much to crop senzor lens. Btw Nikkor 16-35 vr used is same price..

    • Spy Black

      Because it may very well be a superior lens, we’ll see.


    Seems so that every lens manufacturer takes a sip of SIGMAs new lens design. Thats a good thing.

  • Steven Thomas

    This looks great. Nice balance of speed and weight. I just hope it comes in cheaper than the most over priced lens ever, the nikon 10-24.

    • fanboy fagz

      Nope. Alot of overpriced nikon lenses. The 58 1.4. 105 1.4 24 1.4 35 1.4. 70-200e. 200 f/2. Some are good. But all are overpriced

      • Steven Thomas

        Those ones as well. There are so many expensive lenses now in the UK, I’m glad I’m already well invested in the gear I need.

  • Nikita

    I very much like the zoom range, but it’s too slow. Would still take the 11-20 2.8 Tokina especially for non-flash interiors.

  • Gosh another lens just about the same as all other lenses with noting special, why bother

  • Peter Charles

    Would be worth it, if it has weather-sealing (and was sharp!) I have yet to find a aps-c ultra-wide angle zoom from any manufacturer that has this feature!

  • Back to top