Here's the thing about this lens. It's "affordable" at least in comparison to other native Sony lenses. It's does the job, it seems fine. It is lighter, less expensive but doesn't have the range of a 16-35......but for most people on a budget, this would be perfectly fine.
Check out this picture. I would love to get your opinion. Mainly because the guy got trashed for taking a “normal” picture with a Sony A9 and a Sony 24mm prime. People are becoming ridiculous with what they believe to be worthy of praise, and bash others for not posting over edited photos. m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10220194612999894&id=1363933266&set=gm.974204802939941&source=48
Yep ! you're right ! the essential is go get and share great pictures and memories, and i think this lil' guy will do an awesome job without having to sell the car !
Outside of its "affordability", for some of us, it's weight matters. For someone who travels a lot, and wants to be able to balance their kit on their gimbal without issues, it makes sense to go with this over native glass. Especially when the differences are negligible. I own the 28 - 75 and plan on purchasing this one.
GBOY185 bingo, I have no problems paying for the GM, rigging it up can get extremely heavy and finicky if you have to rebalance. I also own the 12-24g, excellent for gimbal, but filters are difficult, and lens is a tad too wide and heavy
Yep - I have the 17-28 and 28-75 too, and weight was one of the majn factors. In an ideal world, I would have loved the overlap that a 16-35 would have afforded, but really my use cases for each lens really overlap. Sadly, Tamron don’t offer anything the the 70-200 space, but I would consider selling my G Master should they release something in that range
@@simianinc They actually released a teaser a few days ago which seems to include a 70-200 or similiar. They will announce it in October. See TamronVids latest video on TH-cam!
After using it for three years, I really like this lens for travel. The range is surprisingly practical. I travel with this lens on an A7C and a Tamron 28-200 on an A7R4. They are light, compact, good enough images and cover all the situations. The only prime I carry is a 35mm GM. I recommend this lens.
Glad to see this, I have an a7II and I've been looking for a wide angle and when even the 16-35 f/4 is "expensive" used, moreso than this lens is new, it's nice to know that this lens does a good job.
Everytime I find myself nerding for minor differences between the competition, your comments bring me back down to the ground. Really like your reviews :) Keep up the good job!
Surprisingly? Well it’s been years that sigma make the sharpest lens and only 2k overpriced sony lens can match them. Now tamron step up too and the new samyang lens are matching or beating GM lens like the 85mm f1.4 af samyang at 550€ vs 2000€ for the gm. When those lens are coming out at those price tag we should support it instead of buying overpriced sony lens so the next time sony will give us a better pricing marketing
Well the sigma is the better lens so if you need the extra width, extra IQ and don't mind the shorter long end, the sigma wins. I decided to get a 9mm prime and the tamron as my ultra to wide angle lens combo
It all depends on the usage patterns of the individual but these are the sort of generalised observations you need to consider. 1/ How often do you shoot wider than 17mm and would you be better served by an ultra wide zoom with its disadvantages, or is it better to have the more useful 17-28 range plus a very wide prime to get you to those rare can’t-get-wide-enough situations? It should be noted that the weight difference means it is possible to get the Tamron plus a small prime and still weigh less than the Sigma on its own. 2/ Do you like to use filters, because the Tamron has a reasonably smallish 67mm thread that is the same as the 28-70 and 70-180? On the Sigma I do believe you will be dicking around cutting gels to fit the rear filter holder, and that is not fun, and let’s face it, few people ever use the rear filter holder. Manufacturers only put it there to stop complaints about the lack of filter support. 3/ Do you like a lighter weight lens because the Sigma is almost 800 grams (795) while the Tamron is just a little over 400 (420) and at almost half the weight the difference is huge? 4/ Do you like stabilisation, because neither lens is going to suit you as neither has IS? 5/ Are you thinking about the rest of your basic f2.8 zoom kit? When considering how the Sigma does not have a 70-200 option and is heavy, and the Sony selection costs as much as a car, the Tamron 17-28/28-75/70-180 combination is practical on weight and cost. For me I would prefer the 14mm of the Sigma, or the 12mm of the Sony, but the weight and practicality of the Tamron swings me in that direction, especially since all three lenses from all three brands have good image quality.
Thanks for the video bro. I have both these lenses along with the A7iii. Love them. They work fine for me. Highly recommend them. Keep up the great work!!!
Later, love how you break this down. Debating getting this and the A7C and this was super helpful. Just can’t afford or justify Sony glass right now so this left me feeling so much better about my future purchase. Thanks man.
Yep same, I got the exact same setup, but might spend some cash on the Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS , this setup I have used for most image types, the Macro is pretty good as is, But I do think this camera can pump out some amazing images, I just need to figure out how, haha, I too based my choice on budget and alot of research, I think Canon and Nikons older lenses and Systems are dropping in price so fast now, I could have scored some seriously decent second hand gear for either of the two brands for the cost I paid for this, but still!. this Sony setup is so worth it, and I can now see the Digital race which looked to have slow, shoot off especially with the video side evening out in the systems, they could most likely overtake static imagery soon, ? there will be a surge in short creative art video promo's, even though its here now, this is a whole new ball game if you use video , especially Adobe After Effects
@@feeltheeffect85 yes. there is a whole field of filmmaking and long exposure you are going to have a hard time experiencing. not to mention you may not be able to shoot wide open on bright sunny days.
Hi Jared, first thanks for all this reviews and everything you do. I'd like to know how'd be this lens in comparison with the 16-35mm sony f4, is the f4 good for work? I'm planning to start on photography of weddings and some other areas, and also landscape which os my passion, so would a f4 be good or professional enough?
Thanks for your review! Furthermore, could ask you guys who has this lens did you notice that the aperture is really loud and gives quite sick noise or just mine is faulty? There is a rubbing, scratching voice when I switch on or off the camera and the aperture goes open and close. When I'm just setting the aperture only has clicking voice. I never felt/heard anything like this before from any lenses. Thanks in advance for the answers.
I just got this lens and I noticed a noise when focusing and you are in AF-S at like f9 or f11. When the lens opens the blades to focus faster the blades make a metal noise when they open and close. This is with Sony A7 III and aperture drive in AF as Standard cause you can't change it on this lens. Has anyone experienced the same?
If you're someone who doesn't regularly require a super-wide angle then this would be a perfect choice. I have (had until I dropped it) the 28-75 f2.8, image quality and sharpness was excellent. I would buy it again. For me the biggest issue is not having an AF/MF switch, but that is a personal preference. In this review there's no real telling how it will stack up to real world architecture but if it does, it's a perfect choice.
I would consider this lens, but I have the Sigma 24-35mm f/2 Art with the Sigma MC-11 adapter. Not as wide and definitely heavier but feels great and the photos are awesome
I'd get the sigma if it was even just like, 16-24, as long as it could accept regular filters and I didn't have to buy a whole filter kit just for the one lens. For my uses, an ultrawide will almost always be paired with a CPL. I really am not a fan of the tamron build quality and really wish I had another option here.
Im done trying to get this lens preordered ages ago and gave up when my ship date kept getting pushed back. It didnt smell right "preordering" while more and more reviews kept just popping up. All i wanted to do was buy a reasonable lens on the ultrawide side. I did snag the 28-75 and i've yet to take it off
I was waiting for the LMOUNT ALLIANCE to be worked in somewhere..maybe next time. Good overall review. I have the 28-75 and it is great but I think it does not focus as well as my Sony glass in low light but I saved a ton of money to buy more lenses. So I deal with it. I am looking to buy the 17-28 soon.
Hell yeah, waiting for Sigma 14-24mm review. Considering to buy Sigma but I don't know how those internal filters works. Are they good? Does anyone have an experience with them? 🤔
For the internal filters you can only use the filters made by Sigma, as this is a filter solution that is new to this lens. But by time other manufacturers will probably start making them as well. Sigma has already made a new front filter holder especially designed for this lens: sonyaddict.com/2019/09/14/nisi-150mm-square-filter-holder-s5-sigma-14-24mm-f2-8-dg-dn-exclusive-model-released/
I have the Sony 12-24 f4 and although it's not 2.8, I'm more than happy with the option of the wider focal length for shooting real estate and landscapes. Was still a more expensive buy second hand though.
Proabably the Tamrons as you will get the added F-stops and ultimately the G master will be a good all rounder in those areas but the two tamrons will be better in their distinctive areas when compared to the sony. But your milage may vary.
I had a 16-35gm i sold it for this tamron, because of the size and weight, and its same sharpness quality, so i just lost 29-35mm but for the size weight and price its more than whorth it.
Thanks for the open and neutral analysis Jared! What about the Sony Zeiss 16-35 4.0? It has an more versatile focal range and OSS, so I can also use it on my A73 + B cam A6400. It has currently a very close price to the TAMRON. Instead of the TAMRON 28-70 I would go x the Sony G 24-105 4.0.
Can people stop saying this is a lens you buy when you can't afford a $2,000 Sony Lens? It is utterly ridiculous and has nothing to do with what someone can and cannot afford. It is an absolute bang for your buck and it can go head to head 16-35mm and find that the Tamron is damn near the same quality as the Sony. While it saves the user over $1,000, it does not mean the person cannot afford it. Why wouldn't anyone want to save a thousand dollars? I hate how people are making Tamron out to be some entry-level lens. They hold up amazingly and I dont agree with this review. I cant wait to get this lens.
The Tamron trinity will be complete by October, ie 17-28mm, 28-75mm & 75-180mm (all f/2.8). Amazing times to have full frame cameras with affordable f/2.8 zoom lenses
I bought it two weeks ago in China. My friend brought it back to Canada. Great lens and great deal. It’s only $1300 CAD...$220 cheaper than the local price with tax. Lol
i have the lens and i am happy with it i shot a lot of video work and i love to get really light with my gear so there was no other Lens for me, i had the Batis 18mm but ive send it back for the tamron. also on the Sigma 14-24 you cant screw Filters on, so this is a absolute dealbreaker for me especially if you shoot video. The lens ist really sharp, i love the new lens coating of tamron! there are of corse some drawbacks, specially with the barrel distortion but overall this lens Kicks Ass and i hope the new Tamron lenses will to ive rather support Tamron than Sony with theyr utopic Price policy
You can use Nisi 150 mm screw on filters on the Sigma: sonyaddict.com/2019/09/14/nisi-150mm-square-filter-holder-s5-sigma-14-24mm-f2-8-dg-dn-exclusive-model-released/
I did a review of this lens as well and it is a great lens and very sharp for it's price. For video it is also a great lens. Especially when you already have the 28-75 from Tamron. And as you said it gets the job done
I still can't decide if an 11mm zoom range is worth having around. I need a wide angle lens but I could get an F/1.8 or better prime lens for less money. What do you really gain with that 11mm of zoom?
Excellent street and people lens. Light, super sharp in the middle with good contrast, and 2.8. Probably not as much of a landscape lens. But, a great street sweeper.
If Tamron and Pentax ever merge, they could release the Tampax 17-28mm f2.8. No need for image stabilization as it will be super absorbant against camera shake.
There's no comparison, the Sigma simply blows the Tamron away. Much less distortion and sharp from corner to corner. It takes rear filters from Sigma only, but now you can use Nisi filters as well: sonyaddict.com/2019/09/14/nisi-150mm-square-filter-holder-s5-sigma-14-24mm-f2-8-dg-dn-exclusive-model-released/
I mean, comparing a $2k piece of glass to a $900 piece of glass is going to have it's disadvantages. The Tamron is lighter but more plasticy feeling while the Sony lens is heavy but more solid feeling. But in the end you're saving roughly $1000 and getting somewhat close to the same picture quality.
I have an A6000 and after 8 years it's almost dead, Viewfiner doesn't work, doesn't recognise the lens have the time. Anyway I have the 55-200mm Sony lens and all I photograph is wildlife, everything from Hummingbirds to Frogs. Would love to know if 18-300m is the next step up for me and also what new body should I get? The 55-200 doesn't cut the mustard anymore, it's crap aperture and just not crispy at all. People are suggesting A6400. My budget is around 1k USD.
French bread (well... breads, as there are hundreds) = best ever. Period. Same as you... would eat big chunks just for the pleasure of it. (nice review !)
I just ordered this Sigma and realised it doesn't take normal filteres, not that I use them often. Hopefully a review comes soon so I can change my order if needed
The tamron has 3 advantages over the Sigma. Tamron use the same filter thread in both zooms, while Sigma has none. 2nd, Tamron's lens hood is removable to you avoid the lens hood shading light away during closeups, which the lens is capable of. And third is the cheaper pricing and weight.
Here's the thing about this lens. It's "affordable" at least in comparison to other native Sony lenses. It's does the job, it seems fine. It is lighter, less expensive but doesn't have the range of a 16-35......but for most people on a budget, this would be perfectly fine.
Absolutely right Jared..great review👌🏻
Check out this picture. I would love to get your opinion. Mainly because the guy got trashed for taking a “normal” picture with a Sony A9 and a Sony 24mm prime. People are becoming ridiculous with what they believe to be worthy of praise, and bash others for not posting over edited photos.
m.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10220194612999894&id=1363933266&set=gm.974204802939941&source=48
Yep ! you're right ! the essential is go get and share great pictures and memories, and i think this lil' guy will do an awesome job without having to sell the car !
Too many compromises. I'll take the gm
Just go 16-35mm, f4 and more versatility. It's not PRO because is not f2.8 as for me 11mm of the focal length is not Pro enough.
Outside of its "affordability", for some of us, it's weight matters. For someone who travels a lot, and wants to be able to balance their kit on their gimbal without issues, it makes sense to go with this over native glass. Especially when the differences are negligible.
I own the 28 - 75 and plan on purchasing this one.
GBOY185 bingo, I have no problems paying for the GM, rigging it up can get extremely heavy and finicky if you have to rebalance. I also own the 12-24g, excellent for gimbal, but filters are difficult, and lens is a tad too wide and heavy
Yep - I have the 17-28 and 28-75 too, and weight was one of the majn factors. In an ideal world, I would have loved the overlap that a 16-35 would have afforded, but really my use cases for each lens really overlap. Sadly, Tamron don’t offer anything the the 70-200 space, but I would consider selling my G Master should they release something in that range
@@simianinc They actually released a teaser a few days ago which seems to include a 70-200 or similiar. They will announce it in October. See TamronVids latest video on TH-cam!
well if you get the gm and u can do smooth handheld the gimble is useless to bring :) smooth handheld on a lens without IS is no bueno
This exactly the reason why I choose this lens for a trip - weight!
Jared what about Video Quality and AF when Moving Shots using Gimbal ???
After using it for three years, I really like this lens for travel. The range is surprisingly practical. I travel with this lens on an A7C and a Tamron 28-200 on an A7R4. They are light, compact, good enough images and cover all the situations. The only prime I carry is a 35mm GM. I recommend this lens.
I’m considering buying this even though it’s years old. Do you think it’s a good investment?
how do you like 28-200 vs 35-150?
Glad to see this, I have an a7II and I've been looking for a wide angle and when even the 16-35 f/4 is "expensive" used, moreso than this lens is new, it's nice to know that this lens does a good job.
This lens Is awesome. Sharp, light,compact, and much cheaper than others. Great work from Tamron
Everytime I find myself nerding for minor differences between the competition, your comments bring me back down to the ground. Really like your reviews :) Keep up the good job!
Love mine. Surprisingly sharp for a "affordable" non native lens
exactly
The contrast is really good as well.
SwitchRich You are ignorant. Native lens means it is same brand as the body, period.
Surprisingly? Well it’s been years that sigma make the sharpest lens and only 2k overpriced sony lens can match them. Now tamron step up too and the new samyang lens are matching or beating GM lens like the 85mm f1.4 af samyang at 550€ vs 2000€ for the gm. When those lens are coming out at those price tag we should support it instead of buying overpriced sony lens so the next time sony will give us a better pricing marketing
Need a sigma 14-24 f2.8 sony vs tamron 17-28 f2.8 comparison.
Can't seem to find one anywhere
I agree.....
Well the sigma is the better lens so if you need the extra width, extra IQ and don't mind the shorter long end, the sigma wins. I decided to get a 9mm prime and the tamron as my ultra to wide angle lens combo
It all depends on the usage patterns of the individual but these are the sort of generalised observations you need to consider.
1/ How often do you shoot wider than 17mm and would you be better served by an ultra wide zoom with its disadvantages, or is it better to have the more useful 17-28 range plus a very wide prime to get you to those rare can’t-get-wide-enough situations? It should be noted that the weight difference means it is possible to get the Tamron plus a small prime and still weigh less than the Sigma on its own.
2/ Do you like to use filters, because the Tamron has a reasonably smallish 67mm thread that is the same as the 28-70 and 70-180? On the Sigma I do believe you will be dicking around cutting gels to fit the rear filter holder, and that is not fun, and let’s face it, few people ever use the rear filter holder. Manufacturers only put it there to stop complaints about the lack of filter support.
3/ Do you like a lighter weight lens because the Sigma is almost 800 grams (795) while the Tamron is just a little over 400 (420) and at almost half the weight the difference is huge?
4/ Do you like stabilisation, because neither lens is going to suit you as neither has IS?
5/ Are you thinking about the rest of your basic f2.8 zoom kit? When considering how the Sigma does not have a 70-200 option and is heavy, and the Sony selection costs as much as a car, the Tamron 17-28/28-75/70-180 combination is practical on weight and cost.
For me I would prefer the 14mm of the Sigma, or the 12mm of the Sony, but the weight and practicality of the Tamron swings me in that direction, especially since all three lenses from all three brands have good image quality.
Jared, besides learning a lot from your videos, I have to say you are also very entertaining and a cool guy! Glad I found you on TH-cam.
Thanks for the video bro. I have both these lenses along with the A7iii. Love them. They work fine for me. Highly recommend them. Keep up the great work!!!
Been waiting for this one! Thanks Jared!
Later, love how you break this down. Debating getting this and the A7C and this was super helpful. Just can’t afford or justify Sony glass right now so this left me feeling so much better about my future purchase. Thanks man.
perfect timing!!! As i've just pulled the trigger on an a7iii. Thank you!
awesome!!! thank you so much for the feedback!
Yep same, I got the exact same setup, but might spend some cash on the Sony FE 90mm f/2.8 Macro G OSS , this setup I have used for most image types, the Macro is pretty good as is, But I do think this camera can pump out some amazing images, I just need to figure out how, haha, I too based my choice on budget and alot of research, I think Canon and Nikons older lenses and Systems are dropping in price so fast now, I could have scored some seriously decent second hand gear for either of the two brands for the cost I paid for this, but still!. this Sony setup is so worth it, and I can now see the Digital race which looked to have slow, shoot off especially with the video side evening out in the systems, they could most likely overtake static imagery soon, ? there will be a surge in short creative art video promo's, even though its here now, this is a whole new ball game if you use video , especially Adobe After Effects
Pulled the trigger a few months ago. Couldnt be happier. Have the 50mm and leaning on this Tamron as my main wide angle lens.
I will receive this lens week.I can't wait to combine with my sony a7iii.Thanks Jared for the great reviews as always.Good Job👍
The rear filter system on the Sigma killed it for me. Decided to go for the Tamron.
I'm newish to photography, are filteres that necessary?
@@feeltheeffect85 yes. there is a whole field of filmmaking and long exposure you are going to have a hard time experiencing. not to mention you may not be able to shoot wide open on bright sunny days.
I have this lense and use it for video on a Ronin SC. It works equally well as a native lens in respect to auto focus (continuous). Love it!
Would i be better pairing this with an a6400 or a7ii ? They are the same price right now ($1000) with kit lens too.
The review I was waiting for *popcorn time*
does this lens have image stabilization
Can this zoom resolve the 60+ pixels of the A7IV?
Hi Jared, first thanks for all this reviews and everything you do.
I'd like to know how'd be this lens in comparison with the 16-35mm sony f4, is the f4 good for work? I'm planning to start on photography of weddings and some other areas, and also landscape which os my passion, so would a f4 be good or professional enough?
Sunny 'Parc' shot. Super bright with sharp shadows great for revealing any chromatic aberrations.
I love watching your video because your intro sentence is hilariously awesome
Thanks for your review! Furthermore, could ask you guys who has this lens did you notice that the aperture is really loud and gives quite sick noise or just mine is faulty? There is a rubbing, scratching voice when I switch on or off the camera and the aperture goes open and close. When I'm just setting the aperture only has clicking voice. I never felt/heard anything like this before from any lenses. Thanks in advance for the answers.
I just got this lens and I noticed a noise when focusing and you are in AF-S at like f9 or f11. When the lens opens the blades to focus faster the blades make a metal noise when they open and close. This is with Sony A7 III and aperture drive in AF as Standard cause you can't change it on this lens.
Has anyone experienced the same?
Use this for astro and land/nightscapes, picked it up barely used for $650 - it's pretty great for those purposes.
best to test lens sharpness at the sweet spot which is middle of range usually f/5.6 or f/8. Check DxO mark for details
Is it worth to get this instead of continuing using the Tamron 15-28 mm Sony A lense with adapter?
thanks for review Jared Polin, I think I like to do it.
Yeah I'd like to get the A7iii with those two Tamron lenses.
I have them both, and the a7iii honestly head to head with the G series lenses i didn't notice the difference'
Dude I miss raw talk, seeing that set makes me really miss it
If you're someone who doesn't regularly require a super-wide angle then this would be a perfect choice. I have (had until I dropped it) the 28-75 f2.8, image quality and sharpness was excellent. I would buy it again. For me the biggest issue is not having an AF/MF switch, but that is a personal preference. In this review there's no real telling how it will stack up to real world architecture but if it does, it's a perfect choice.
Awesome info for sure thanks mate
I would consider this lens, but I have the Sigma 24-35mm f/2 Art with the Sigma MC-11 adapter. Not as wide and definitely heavier but feels great and the photos are awesome
great video
which lens you think is more versatile for social media tamron 17-28mm or 20-40mm?
I'd get the sigma if it was even just like, 16-24, as long as it could accept regular filters and I didn't have to buy a whole filter kit just for the one lens. For my uses, an ultrawide will almost always be paired with a CPL. I really am not a fan of the tamron build quality and really wish I had another option here.
This is such a good lens for someone who want a affordable wide angle lens with this aparture
Im done trying to get this lens preordered ages ago and gave up when my ship date kept getting pushed back. It didnt smell right "preordering" while more and more reviews kept just popping up. All i wanted to do was buy a reasonable lens on the ultrawide side. I did snag the 28-75 and i've yet to take it off
I was waiting for the LMOUNT ALLIANCE to be worked in somewhere..maybe next time. Good overall review. I have the 28-75 and it is great but I think it does not focus as well as my Sony glass in low light but I saved a ton of money to buy more lenses. So I deal with it. I am looking to buy the 17-28 soon.
Hey Jared does this work on crop sensor bodies ?
Hell yeah, waiting for Sigma 14-24mm review. Considering to buy Sigma but I don't know how those internal filters works. Are they good? Does anyone have an experience with them? 🤔
For the internal filters you can only use the filters made by Sigma, as this is a filter solution that is new to this lens. But by time other manufacturers will probably start making them as well. Sigma has already made a new front filter holder especially designed for this lens: sonyaddict.com/2019/09/14/nisi-150mm-square-filter-holder-s5-sigma-14-24mm-f2-8-dg-dn-exclusive-model-released/
I have the Sony 12-24 f4 and although it's not 2.8, I'm more than happy with the option of the wider focal length for shooting real estate and landscapes. Was still a more expensive buy second hand though.
Sony 1224f4 is very sharp. Great lense
I wonder... did you knock those camera positioned at the corner
Bought the Tamron 1728 two weeks ago, damn satisfied with the result
Greatjob don't EVER give up the SMELL test! that IS the TRUE measure!
Can you take a video about the comparison of the sigma 14-24 2.8 vs GM 16-35 2.8 vs tamron 17-28 2.8
Thanks Jared, now I want to visit Philadelphia again. I have had more fun in Philadelphia than in Paris.
just got the A7Riii, mostly do photography, do you recommend this lens. And I love a wide angle for sure.
Buy primes if ur on to photography
Lens smells like a croissant!! I'm sold!! 😅😂
Would it be better to go for the 2 tamron lenses or the Sony G 24-105 F4 as a starter kit if im getting an a7iii?
Proabably the Tamrons as you will get the added F-stops and ultimately the G master will be a good all rounder in those areas but the two tamrons will be better in their distinctive areas when compared to the sony.
But your milage may vary.
Can we get a full review of the sigma 14-24? Im hoping for it since it is in the video
14-24. Coming soon.
I had a 16-35gm i sold it for this tamron, because of the size and weight, and its same sharpness quality, so i just lost 29-35mm but for the size weight and price its more than whorth it.
Thats good to know. Can I ask how's the autofocus? Looking to purchase one for live events. Thanks
good info
deciding between this and the sigma 14-24... really like the sigma but i hate how you can’t use front filters
Thanks for the open and neutral analysis Jared! What about the Sony Zeiss 16-35 4.0? It has an more versatile focal range and OSS, so I can also use it on my A73 + B cam A6400. It has currently a very close price to the TAMRON. Instead of the TAMRON 28-70 I would go x the Sony G 24-105 4.0.
Sony is better...the IS and build on that lense, in addition to extra range make it overall a better lense
Where can I find a lens with IBIS in it huh fro?
Love your videos
9:23 "When I do, I eat it" lol lol lol lol
How well does this lens handle in low light ?
Nice review! Looking forward to your real world review of A7r4☀︎
Can people stop saying this is a lens you buy when you can't afford a $2,000 Sony Lens? It is utterly ridiculous and has nothing to do with what someone can and cannot afford. It is an absolute bang for your buck and it can go head to head 16-35mm and find that the Tamron is damn near the same quality as the Sony. While it saves the user over $1,000, it does not mean the person cannot afford it. Why wouldn't anyone want to save a thousand dollars? I hate how people are making Tamron out to be some entry-level lens. They hold up amazingly and I dont agree with this review. I cant wait to get this lens.
The Tamron trinity will be complete by October, ie 17-28mm, 28-75mm & 75-180mm (all f/2.8). Amazing times to have full frame cameras with affordable f/2.8 zoom lenses
Cheap plastic budget Trinity. Woohooo
Love that lens!
What do you think about the NIKKOR Z 17-28mm?
Waiting on that sigma review 🙏
I bought it two weeks ago in China. My friend brought it back to Canada. Great lens and great deal. It’s only $1300 CAD...$220 cheaper than the local price with tax. Lol
Sony 16-35 and tamron 17-28 which one is good ?
Just curious, do I have tonown Light Room in order to buy your Light Room Presets?
Get Capture One and develop your own styles: blog.captureone.com/creating-styles-presets/
Sony and C1 is the best combination anyway!
🤣 thanks for entertaining and comprehensive review. Would you recommend it for real estate videography?
i have the lens and i am happy with it
i shot a lot of video work and i love to get really light with my gear
so there was no other Lens for me, i had the Batis 18mm but ive send it back for the tamron.
also on the Sigma 14-24 you cant screw Filters on, so this is a absolute dealbreaker for me especially if you shoot video.
The lens ist really sharp, i love the new lens coating of tamron!
there are of corse some drawbacks, specially with the barrel distortion
but overall this lens Kicks Ass and i hope the new Tamron lenses will to
ive rather support Tamron than Sony with theyr utopic Price policy
You can use Nisi 150 mm screw on filters on the Sigma: sonyaddict.com/2019/09/14/nisi-150mm-square-filter-holder-s5-sigma-14-24mm-f2-8-dg-dn-exclusive-model-released/
Markus Machamuta why you gave back the batis? I am not sure on which one buy... batis or this...
Please make a review of Tokina 50mm 1.4 FF Opera.
Hi sir..Do You recommend sony a7iii for wedding in india ..now im nikon crop body user .i wanna upgrade to Mirror less world
ThanKs in Advance
How is the group shots of people's any major difference sir
I'm using basic nikon dslr d5300 with 18 -140mm lens while im group shots in 18 mm its not sharp at all feeling bad
@Jpdpro Photography thank u sir for kind information 😊
I did a review of this lens as well and it is a great lens and very sharp for it's price. For video it is also a great lens. Especially when you already have the 28-75 from Tamron.
And as you said it gets the job done
Man I like your channel, I tried to buy a t-shirt but unfortunately do not send to Portugal ???? it's a shame 😒😢🤔
Haha nice one with the wind tunnel test.
Never mind the 14-24, double the weight and difficult to filter. On top of that, 24mm is too wide as your most narrow
This is great! Good decent lens for the non commercial full frame owners!
Good for commercial too. Ideal for real estate...
I still can't decide if an 11mm zoom range is worth having around. I need a wide angle lens but I could get an F/1.8 or better prime lens for less money. What do you really gain with that 11mm of zoom?
Can you get a 17mm f1.8 prime?
For this price?
Adobe has yet to release Camera RAW profiles for this lens.
Honestly, when I need to shoot 28mm, I just use my Ricoh GR III. Nothing beats that piece of Pentax perfection.
is 17-28mm legit for gimbal?
Excellent street and people lens. Light, super sharp in the middle with good contrast, and 2.8. Probably not as much of a landscape lens. But, a great street sweeper.
I mean you can do panorama stitching if it's not wide enough.
Can we do a raw talk soon? I miss all the important people lol
If Tamron and Pentax ever merge, they could release the Tampax 17-28mm f2.8. No need for image stabilization as it will be super absorbant against camera shake.
Lol
Which lens you were filming this video ?
IBIS is impossible (in body.....), but, does this lens have Image Stabilisation?
No, it doesn't. But is it really needed on a wide angle that is used with cameras that come with ibis? I don't miss it.
Just waiting for the 70-200 for going all way sony - tamron
Really cool lens!
I need a comparaison with the sigma 14-24 :)
There's no comparison, the Sigma simply blows the Tamron away. Much less distortion and sharp from corner to corner. It takes rear filters from Sigma only, but now you can use Nisi filters as well: sonyaddict.com/2019/09/14/nisi-150mm-square-filter-holder-s5-sigma-14-24mm-f2-8-dg-dn-exclusive-model-released/
Waiting for the review of that sigma though...
Plz do a review of 35-150mmm f2.8-4
Hi
What do you think, better this of the sony 16-35 f4? Spiking about quality
Thanks
Nice videos like always ; )
I mean, comparing a $2k piece of glass to a $900 piece of glass is going to have it's disadvantages. The Tamron is lighter but more plasticy feeling while the Sony lens is heavy but more solid feeling. But in the end you're saving roughly $1000 and getting somewhat close to the same picture quality.
I just bought this lens based on how it smells. Can't wait to sniff it.
I have an A6000 and after 8 years it's almost dead, Viewfiner doesn't work, doesn't recognise the lens have the time. Anyway I have the 55-200mm Sony lens and all I photograph is wildlife, everything from Hummingbirds to Frogs. Would love to know if 18-300m is the next step up for me and also what new body should I get? The 55-200 doesn't cut the mustard anymore, it's crap aperture and just not crispy at all. People are suggesting A6400. My budget is around 1k USD.
Jared reviewing Tamron 17-28MM f2.8:
"This is a lens. It works."
Pretty much. It’s what it does
I love checking out lenses I’ll never have 💃
French bread (well... breads, as there are hundreds) = best ever. Period.
Same as you... would eat big chunks just for the pleasure of it.
(nice review !)
What happened to 5 minute portraits anyways?
Waiting for compare with Sigma 14-24 2.8🤗
also a real world review
I just ordered this Sigma and realised it doesn't take normal filteres, not that I use them often. Hopefully a review comes soon so I can change my order if needed
@@feeltheeffect85 there are adapters to mount filters...but maybe not the circulars one...check online
Me too
The tamron has 3 advantages over the Sigma. Tamron use the same filter thread in both zooms, while Sigma has none. 2nd, Tamron's lens hood is removable to you avoid the lens hood shading light away during closeups, which the lens is capable of. And third is the cheaper pricing and weight.
I feel like I watched this before. Did you reupload this?
No