Grate review! For several days I have had a dilemma which telephoto choose for A7III. I'm considering Sony 70-200 F4, Sony 70-300 and Tamron 70-300. In the image quality tests between the Sony 70-300 and the Tamron 70-300 Tamron wins. Tamron is sharper. It is also lighter. But how is the image quality between Sony 70-200 and Tamron?
@@thegixlad27 So in your opinion it all mean that it has better image quality? Haha. Check Chris tests to see that you are thinking wrong. Tamron has better image quality than 70-200..
It’s actually longer than my 70-300mm Sony G. The G is still 40% heavier though, and slightly larger in diameter. Tamron is really splitting hairs saying it’s the smallest.
i have an a6400 (no IBIS) and looking for another telephoto that can zoom farther than my sony 18-105. i came across this Tamron 70-300 and now I'm torn between it (price) and the Sony 70-350 (oss). should I pull the trigger with this Tamron? or the lack of stabilization is a real deal breaker?
I think it depends on what you want to use it for. If you are doing Sport or wildlife photography than I don't think the oss matters too much because you would have a fast enough shutter speed anyway.
David, always appreciate your guidance. For the Sony A6xxx camera body, would you recommend the Sony 70-200 F4 that you've used or the newish Sony 70-350? Thanks in advance!
OK the Tamron has 5 weather seals - so a light drizzle isn't going to harm it (in fact I shoot non-weather sealed lenses in drizzle and in 20 years have never had any issues) as for shooting in a downpour and not trusting it? Who shoots landscapes in a downpour? And even more pertinent if you do why would you not have a simple rain cover on? Even a plastic bag and two rubber bands !! Comparing the Tamron to Sony's 70-300 we find the Tamron sharper (in both the centre, edges and corners) where there is any difference. Add in the fact that you could buy both the Tamron 70-180 AND the 70-300 for just the price of the Sony ... and at least for me, that was a slam dunk.
Yeah, you are right ...not without effort but I'm satisfied with the improvement I've made with this lens on images of Andromeda, Orion, Flame etc.from the previous results I had with same subjects using the Rokinon 135mm {great lens bargain} because I'm at 300mm. My inferior tracker's ability loses alignment after 30 seconds @ 300mm but still, 10 of them stacked creates a decent image. About 10% of an APOD but cool for me. Not really a true test for this lens with my Rube Goldberg style of tracking, In afraid. But , $800 for a better tracker ain't in the budget right now
@@DavidJohnstonPhoto I know. I am asking whether Tamron 70-300 F/4.5-6.3 will be better than another lens from Tamron i.e. 70-180 F2.8 for bokeh in portraits. I was confused between these two lenses.
I usually shoot telephoto with the 100-400GM, but when I want to pack lighter and still want some reach I'll take the Sony 70-300 G with me. I'm wondering, though, if it would be worth it to me to sell that lens and pick up the Tammy instead.
GET THE TAMRON 70-300 SONY E MOUNT LENS: amzn.to/3mjlKpu
Grate review! For several days I have had a dilemma which telephoto choose for A7III. I'm considering Sony 70-200 F4, Sony 70-300 and Tamron 70-300. In the image quality tests between the Sony 70-300 and the Tamron 70-300 Tamron wins. Tamron is sharper. It is also lighter. But how is the image quality between Sony 70-200 and Tamron?
Obviously, the 70-200 will be better as it has a 2.8 aperture.
@@thegixlad27 But lower aperture 2.8 doesnt mean better image quality ;)
@@skarpy24 It has the superior glass sorry, hence the higher price tag. It's also native glass.
@@thegixlad27 So in your opinion it all mean that it has better image quality? Haha. Check Chris tests to see that you are thinking wrong. Tamron has better image quality than 70-200..
@@skarpy24 No, it has better image quality why do you think it's more expensive 😂😂😂
Excellent review David!
Thanks Henry!
Great review!! Thanks for putting it together!
Thanks for watching Ryan! Glad you enjoyed it
It’s actually longer than my 70-300mm Sony G. The G is still 40% heavier though, and slightly larger in diameter. Tamron is really splitting hairs saying it’s the smallest.
40% heavier is a big difference
That was really helpful. Seems like the perfect lens for me. Thank you!
Right on!
what is the mount you put your camera on when mounting on tripod ?
Great video, thanks
I loved that lotta shaking goin on refference ;)
i have an a6400 (no IBIS) and looking for another telephoto that can zoom farther than my sony 18-105. i came across this Tamron 70-300 and now I'm torn between it (price) and the Sony 70-350 (oss). should I pull the trigger with this Tamron? or the lack of stabilization is a real deal breaker?
I think it depends on what you want to use it for.
If you are doing Sport or wildlife photography than I don't think the oss matters too much because you would have a fast enough shutter speed anyway.
Great review! How do you feel about this lens for the A6000, which does not have IBIS?
It would definitely work with the a6000 and give you extra reach. But without IBIS I would really worry about shakes
The Sony APS-C Equivalent is similar priced, check it out (70-350)
Nice lens, but can't replace my 70-200mm f4 🙂
That’s fair! I’ve been playing with the idea of selling my 70-200 and just using this one because it’s so light
I wouldn't think it would at 1/3 the cost but that's just it -- it's 1/3 the cost.
Can I use this Tamron 70-300mm Di III RXD lens with my Sony a6400 mirrorless Camera ? Please advise.
This one is for full frame sensors. It would fit, but wouldn’t look exactly like it would on a full frame
David, always appreciate your guidance. For the Sony A6xxx camera body, would you recommend the Sony 70-200 F4 that you've used or the newish Sony 70-350? Thanks in advance!
What are you going to use it for primarily?
@@DavidJohnstonPhoto primarily landscapes/nature with an occasional portrait.
70-200 for sure
@@DavidJohnstonPhoto Thank you, David!
You bet!
David loved the review. It’s nice to see a review without a hidden agenda behind it. Love my Tamron glass.
Thanks Earl!
This is a parfocal lens?
OK the Tamron has 5 weather seals - so a light drizzle isn't going to harm it (in fact I shoot non-weather sealed lenses in drizzle and in 20 years have never had any issues) as for shooting in a downpour and not trusting it? Who shoots landscapes in a downpour? And even more pertinent if you do why would you not have a simple rain cover on? Even a plastic bag and two rubber bands !!
Comparing the Tamron to Sony's 70-300 we find the Tamron sharper (in both the centre, edges and corners) where there is any difference. Add in the fact that you could buy both the Tamron 70-180 AND the 70-300 for just the price of the Sony ... and at least for me, that was a slam dunk.
do you think you could do any astrophotography if you were using a tracker with this Tamron lens?
You’d be hard pressed to do it
in theory yes
Yeah, you are right ...not without effort but I'm satisfied with the improvement I've made with this lens on images of Andromeda, Orion, Flame etc.from the previous results I had with same subjects using the Rokinon 135mm {great lens bargain} because I'm at 300mm. My inferior tracker's ability loses alignment after 30 seconds @ 300mm but still, 10 of them stacked creates a decent image. About 10% of an APOD but cool for me. Not really a true test for this lens with my Rube Goldberg style of tracking, In afraid. But , $800 for a better tracker ain't in the budget right now
Which would give better bokeh for portraits this at focal range above 200mm or 70-180 f2.8 ?
This lens doesn’t go to 2.8.
@@DavidJohnstonPhoto I know. I am asking whether Tamron 70-300 F/4.5-6.3 will be better than another lens from Tamron i.e. 70-180 F2.8 for bokeh in portraits. I was confused between these two lenses.
@@Nitish0989 70-180 is better
@@sulev111 thanks
Cool video
Thanks!
Nice review David! Can you tell me what L bracket you are using?
Sure thing. It’s the 3 Legged Thing l bracket
David.....jut an fyi...a "footer" is known as a tripod collar.
True. And a footer.
The question is... This one or... the 70-180 f/2.8?
This one
@@DavidJohnstonPhoto why though? I know it’s lighter and has more reach but the 70-180 is better optically...
@@DavidJohnstonPhoto Plus, I will be travelling without a tripod... so no OSS on the 70-300 is going to be a problem, I imagine... ?
@@Someone-lc6dc the 70-180 dont have OSS too
I usually shoot telephoto with the 100-400GM, but when I want to pack lighter and still want some reach I'll take the Sony 70-300 G with me. I'm wondering, though, if it would be worth it to me to sell that lens and pick up the Tammy instead.
Ohhh the Tamron is significantly lighter and smaller. Everything else is pretty equal