For wildlife I'll use my 200-600. But the Tamron 50-400 would be so super nice for landscape. Add a wide-angle and you've covered everything with just two lenses. Thanks for a nice comparison video!
From the video it is evident that the best stabilization system belongs to Sigma 100-400, unless it's just the shooting conditions that change dramatically. Perhaps comparison in the same situation would be better. As for the aperture change on the various focal lengths the Sigma 100-400mm only offers its maximum f5 between 100 and 113mm, closing to f5. 6 between 113 and 235mm, after which it's f6. On the other hand the aperture change of Tamron 50-400 is as follows: a)50-60mm = f/4.5, b) 61-83mm = f/5.0, c) 84-150mm = f/5.6 and d) 151-400mm = f/6.3 which is much slower in a vast focal range when compared to the Sigma lens. As for the AF, I don't know if the software uprade of Tamron 50-400 improved it so much to reach the levels of the Sigma lens. So all we have for the Tamron is a better focal range with very good sharpness at 50mm and the micro capabilities, all these at a higher price than the Sigma (approximately 500 euros). Right?
12% vs 50% keeper rate between Tamron and Sigma is not just "a bit better" in my book. More like a dealbreaker. Also from your video it looks like the Sigma really stabilizes better. For me, going to 50mm and beyond means a lens switch anyway so I am sticking with the Sigma and some primes. Thanks for the helpful information.
Not really sure if it’s the lens or the photographer? Reason being is I’ve watched several videos comparing the tamron 150-500 and it’s about 80-90% the keeper rate of the Sony 200-600mm. If I’m getting 90% performance for a fraction of the price that’s what I would go for
In the tests I saw (including some of my own), Sigma retains very good central sharpness to 400mm, but gets very soft quickly outside of central area. Tamron 150-500 show more even performance over the frame, but gets progressively softer from 300mm on. Tamron 50-400mm looks very sharp at 50mm and gets a bit softer at 400mm with some curvature at the long end. So if only based on sharpness the 50-400 is overall a winner. What's also great is that you don't see any CA with this lens. Sigma in high contrast areas shows a very noticeable LOCA.
One thing that also might be of interest is that Sigma contemporary line lenses lack proper weather sealing. A rubber gasket at the mount and that's it. Unlike Tamron lenses that have additional internal gaskets.
Just got the Tamron 50-400. I find travel photography the most enjoyable so size and versatility was in high priority for me, +super fast af for wildlife and motorsport :))
Good stuff. If I was just starting out and was looking for a zoom there is no doubt I would buy the 50-400. It could easily be an everyday lens. If I didn't already own the 100-400, I "might" consider it but I really love the 100-400 and the 1.4 when lighting is good (for birding).
Hello RM Clark Are you still happy with the Sigma 100-400? Im currently searching a telephoto lens and not sure which i should take. The Tamron 150-500 looks good, but the weight is … 😅 weight of the sigma with 1100kg is really good. And is the Sigma also enough for wildlife? Many thanks
Thank you for the review. Great comparison and telling results. I have the 150-500 and do not like it on my A7RIV. The lens is heavy and the results are not that great. I tried it handheld and on a tripod with similar results. I am thinking that it might be the body-lens combo as my 70-300 gives me much better (sharper) results. I am thinking of letting both of them go for the 50-400. However, I have to try it first to make sure A7RIV likes the 50-400!!
@@leixo I borrowed the 50-400 from Tamron and had a chance to shoot is for a few weeks. It is a very sharp lens and results are comparable to my 70-180 in sharpness. It is a much more versatile than the 150-500 as it goes to 50mm with nice macro capability. It is just not long enough for serious wildlife work. I think for that the Sony 200-600 is the best choice but for medium reach the 50-400 is fantastic. I shot it wide open a lot just to see if its sharpness is acceptable and I am happy to report that it is sharp even wide open.
@@MrPetebuster1 I sent it in to Tamron. As it turned out the lens had an alignment issue which they fixed. Now the lens is perfect just like the rest of my Tamrons. I have been a photographer for 40 years and I have shot with six different systems. Over those years, I used a bunch of long lenses ranging from a Sigma 300 f2.8 to Canon 400 f2.8 and a bunch of long zooms including the Tamron 150-600 G2. I know how to use a telephoto lens. My 150-500 had an issue that is now gone.
@@leixo I had the 50-400 on loan from Tamron for a few weeks about two months ago. The lens is fantastic. It is as sharp as my 70-180 and 28-75 G2. BTW, I sent my Tamron 150-500 to Tamron for a check up. As it turned out, the lens had a misaligned element. They were able to fix it and now the lens is perfect. I have listed the 150-500 and shortly will list my 70-300 for sale and replace them with the 50-400. The range of the 50-400 is more useful to me. I bought the 150-500 to do wild life which never happened. The 70-300 is a great lens too but is a little short on the long end and a little long on the short end! I think the 50-400 is a good compromise. I shot some macro images with the 50-400. It is an amazingly versatile lens with pro class image quality. I primarily shoot landscapes. For a few weeks, I had the 20-40 and the 50-400 at the same time. On a day long outing, I was able to capture images ranging from 20mm to 400mm with only two lenses. How is that for versatility?!
In my experience the AF on sigma and Tamron lenses is pretty bad on the lower tier bodies (a7iii/iv) but on my a9 they are flawless so camera makes a big difference.
I just got the Sigma 100-400. Get that extra ~$500 together and get the Tamron. I also use the Sigma 120-300 (f/2.8) for my Nikon D500, and now using the Sigma 100-400 ... I gotta figure it's just a Sigma thing and it's just not as sharp as I would like. I also have the Tamron 35-150 (yes, I know, comparing f/2.8 to 6.3) and the quality is so much better even with needing to crop it extra tight.
Great video. If only I don't own the sigma 100-400 already. This would be an excellent addition. The 50 sure comes in handy if I just want to carry 1 lens
Can you give your thoughts on the Sony 100-400 vs the new Tamron? Used copies of that lens are now in a range where if the performance is there, the cost would be justified. I tend to take my camera out snowboarding to get photos.
I've been watching all your videos for the sigma and tamron telephoto lenses. I really hoped for more info on video performance with samples. There is basically nothing on the internet about it. I do more video than photo currently still with a Panasonic GH5 and 100-400 panaleica. But I am considering getting the new Sony a6700 and looking at which lens to get. The 200-600 sony is just a bit out of my budget. Would really appreciate some feedback on video and even a specific video about wildlife video lenses. Thanks, great reviews.
@@Pokzy I did get the a6700 and went with the Sigma 150-600. Previously I have owned the old Canon 7D Mark II DSLR and 100-400II lens and after that a Panasonic GH5 with Leica 100-400. I love pretty much everything about the a6700 apart from the low resolution viewfinder and LCD. That is noticeable and annoying. Everything else is slightly better than the GH5 and the autofocus (once you figure out how to use the tracking correctly) is amazing. The Sigma lens is also very good but it is big and heavy compared to the 100-400 lenses I have used before. Stabilization and sharpness is great and the focus keeps up with birds so no complaints. I can also hand hold video at 600mm if I have a good stance and a bit of bracing, maybe a tree or sitting down. Hope that helps.
@@CrazyAboutFlyFishing Thanks for your feedback ! Currently I will stick with the 150-500. The reason I change all my gear is to change my heavy 200-500. The sigma 150-600 is close to him... I always carry with me a telephoto while hiking in mountains (6h to 10h hikes) The 150-500 will be great for this and can also fit in my smaller backpack (while sigma can't..)
Many thanks for the review 🙏 it was really helpful and informative. But I still dont know which lens i should get. Tamron 50-400 or the Sigma 100-400. Which one is sharper and which AF is better? Thanks in advance
Sigma best value for money and best bokeh, tamron 50-400 price is too close to 150-500, I would definitely pick longer reach for that price. The only thing that is temping with tamron 50-400 is macro capabilities ;)
Sigma is the cheapest, which is not the same as the best value for money. I find the missing 50-100mm very valuable. Btw Tamron 150-500 is on sale at the same $1299 price as the 50-400. I didn't like 150-500 lens because it's much heavier and 150mm is too long in many situations.
The A7iv may not be the best platform for testing a lens' AF : mine struggles with 70 200 f2.8 GM2 on runners. Hit rate results heavily depend on light conditions, reaching 80% at the most under bright sunlight at 6 FPS.
A7IV AF is incredible and should not be struggling to hit 6fps with a GM lens. Play with your settings and of course in difficult situations its still just a machine.
@@StefanMalloch Please let me know the settings you recommend for runners coming towards the camera, full body. I feel I've tried them all and I'd love to stop whining about the A7iv AF.
Other than the Sigma (which is priced very well compare what you get for $849)… these two Tamron lenses are overpriced, $1300 for the zoom range only because other than that, these lenses are slow, and the autofocus is not as good as the Sigma’s. This is not a professional lens but it has a professional lens price… I wonder what hobbyist would buy this lens for $1300 🤌🏻. Tamron should have priced it lower like $989. Their professional lenses like the 28-75 G2 is cheaper much better yes not a super zoom but 90% the people will get a shorter zoom at first. Also that lens is still very versatile, so I just wonder how many of 50-400 will be sold in the first 6-12 month. Good luck Tamron 😅
I think you are right with the pricing. I am waiting for Tamron to offer a $200 rebate. Then, the 50-400 is closer to price it should have been from the beginning. BTW, I already have the 150-500 and do not like it much. It is heavy and the results I am getting are not that great. I much rather have the 50-400. I was looking for a longer lens than my 70-300. The 150-500 is longer but at a weight and $$ cost. If Tamron priced the 50-400 around $1,000, they would sell a lot more.
I own the 150-500 and compared it to the 100-400 and the sigma was way sharper. On 24mp i was able to crop the sigma to 500mm and it was still sharper. Bought the Tamron for 1500€ and I'm trying to sell it since months at 900€
I had both Sigma 100-400 and Tamron 150-500. Sigma is definitely sharper at the center, but the corners at 400m are soft. Tamron starting losing sharpness already at 300mm. But Sigma suffers from LoCA, and Tamron doesn't. Sigma also has more vignetting wide open. It's a bad time selling Tamron as it's on sale at $1299.
talking about big budget, it is funny because the 150-500 is barely 50€ more expensive than the 50-400- What's going on with Tamron lately? They're more expensive than Sigma, tells out they're partially owned by Sony, lol
wow! very useful. I see none of them is even close to acceptable for handheld video at the telephoto end. Good to know- definitely a no-buy decision. Kind of sucky CAF, too.
Sigma weather sealing in the contemporary line is a total disappointment. The Tamron lenses, unlike Sigma contemporary, have internal gaskets and not only at the mount. Don't understand why Sigma does that, but I guess they want you to spend the big buck on the Art series 🤷
sans aucun doute la série annulée serait bien mieux que les anus du pouvoir, ses ralentis éclaté, ses acteurs en surjeux et sans oublier son scénario qui tient sur un bout de PQ.
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.920 | 3 พ.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KwiW2M_kAg4/mqdefault.jpg)
For wildlife I'll use my 200-600. But the Tamron 50-400 would be so super nice for landscape. Add a wide-angle and you've covered everything with just two lenses. Thanks for a nice comparison video!
From the video it is evident that the best stabilization system belongs to Sigma 100-400, unless it's just the shooting conditions that change dramatically. Perhaps comparison in the same situation would be better. As for the aperture change on the various focal lengths the Sigma 100-400mm only offers its maximum f5 between 100 and 113mm, closing to f5. 6 between 113 and 235mm, after which it's f6. On the other hand the aperture change of Tamron 50-400 is as follows: a)50-60mm = f/4.5, b) 61-83mm = f/5.0, c) 84-150mm = f/5.6 and d) 151-400mm = f/6.3 which is much slower in a vast focal range when compared to the Sigma lens. As for the AF, I don't know if the software uprade of Tamron 50-400 improved it so much to reach the levels of the Sigma lens. So all we have for the Tamron is a better focal range with very good sharpness at 50mm and the micro capabilities, all these at a higher price than the Sigma (approximately 500 euros). Right?
50-400 for sure
12% vs 50% keeper rate between Tamron and Sigma is not just "a bit better" in my book. More like a dealbreaker. Also from your video it looks like the Sigma really stabilizes better. For me, going to 50mm and beyond means a lens switch anyway so I am sticking with the Sigma and some primes. Thanks for the helpful information.
Not really sure if it’s the lens or the photographer? Reason being is I’ve watched several videos comparing the tamron 150-500 and it’s about 80-90% the keeper rate of the Sony 200-600mm. If I’m getting 90% performance for a fraction of the price that’s what I would go for
The Tamron got much better with the latest firmware update.
I bought the 50-400 when it first came out and it replaced 3 other lenses. It is almost always on my camera. However it is very heavy.
Sigma 60-600mm f/4.5-6.3 coming on January 12. Also, Tamron 150-400mm f/2.8-5.6 Di III VC VXD coming soon.
In the tests I saw (including some of my own), Sigma retains very good central sharpness to 400mm, but gets very soft quickly outside of central area. Tamron 150-500 show more even performance over the frame, but gets progressively softer from 300mm on. Tamron 50-400mm looks very sharp at 50mm and gets a bit softer at 400mm with some curvature at the long end. So if only based on sharpness the 50-400 is overall a winner. What's also great is that you don't see any CA with this lens. Sigma in high contrast areas shows a very noticeable LOCA.
At what magnification??
I was hoping to see some comparison between the Sigma and the new Tammy, especially in terms of sharpness and contrast. Thanks for the video anyway!
One thing that also might be of interest is that Sigma contemporary line lenses lack proper weather sealing. A rubber gasket at the mount and that's it. Unlike Tamron lenses that have additional internal gaskets.
Yup. Agreed. Especially when these are outdoor lenses. Deal breaker for me
Just got the Tamron 50-400. I find travel photography the most enjoyable so size and versatility was in high priority for me, +super fast af for wildlife and motorsport :))
Great review as always! Hard choices very hard choices! Tamron is killing it!
Good stuff. If I was just starting out and was looking for a zoom there is no doubt I would buy the 50-400. It could easily be an everyday lens. If I didn't already own the 100-400, I "might" consider it but I really love the 100-400 and the 1.4 when lighting is good (for birding).
Hello RM Clark
Are you still happy with the Sigma 100-400? Im currently searching a telephoto lens and not sure which i should take.
The Tamron 150-500 looks good, but the weight is … 😅 weight of the sigma with 1100kg is really good.
And is the Sigma also enough for wildlife?
Many thanks
Thank you for the review. Great comparison and telling results. I have the 150-500 and do not like it on my A7RIV. The lens is heavy and the results are not that great. I tried it handheld and on a tripod with similar results. I am thinking that it might be the body-lens combo as my 70-300 gives me much better (sharper) results. I am thinking of letting both of them go for the 50-400. However, I have to try it first to make sure A7RIV likes the 50-400!!
When you test it, tell us what you think about it!
@@leixo I borrowed the 50-400 from Tamron and had a chance to shoot is for a few weeks. It is a very sharp lens and results are comparable to my 70-180 in sharpness.
It is a much more versatile than the 150-500 as it goes to 50mm with nice macro capability. It is just not long enough for serious wildlife work. I think for that the Sony 200-600 is the best choice but for medium reach the 50-400 is fantastic.
I shot it wide open a lot just to see if its sharpness is acceptable and I am happy to report that it is sharp even wide open.
I have the same and its excellent its not the lens its you, its not a marriage its about using it properly, what shutter speeds are you using??
@@MrPetebuster1 I sent it in to Tamron. As it turned out the lens had an alignment issue which they fixed. Now the lens is perfect just like the rest of my Tamrons.
I have been a photographer for 40 years and I have shot with six different systems. Over those years, I used a bunch of long lenses ranging from a Sigma 300 f2.8 to Canon 400 f2.8 and a bunch of long zooms including the Tamron 150-600 G2. I know how to use a telephoto lens. My 150-500 had an issue that is now gone.
@@leixo I had the 50-400 on loan from Tamron for a few weeks about two months ago. The lens is fantastic. It is as sharp as my 70-180 and 28-75 G2.
BTW, I sent my Tamron 150-500 to Tamron for a check up. As it turned out, the lens had a misaligned element. They were able to fix it and now the lens is perfect. I have listed the 150-500 and shortly will list my 70-300 for sale and replace them with the 50-400. The range of the 50-400 is more useful to me. I bought the 150-500 to do wild life which never happened. The 70-300 is a great lens too but is a little short on the long end and a little long on the short end!
I think the 50-400 is a good compromise. I shot some macro images with the 50-400. It is an amazingly versatile lens with pro class image quality. I primarily shoot landscapes. For a few weeks, I had the 20-40 and the 50-400 at the same time. On a day long outing, I was able to capture images ranging from 20mm to 400mm with only two lenses. How is that for versatility?!
In my experience the AF on sigma and Tamron lenses is pretty bad on the lower tier bodies (a7iii/iv) but on my a9 they are flawless so camera makes a big difference.
I have it on the a7iv the af is spot on so afraid thats nonsense
I just got the Sigma 100-400. Get that extra ~$500 together and get the Tamron.
I also use the Sigma 120-300 (f/2.8) for my Nikon D500, and now using the Sigma 100-400 ... I gotta figure it's just a Sigma thing and it's just not as sharp as I would like. I also have the Tamron 35-150 (yes, I know, comparing f/2.8 to 6.3) and the quality is so much better even with needing to crop it extra tight.
Sony a7 III, not sure what to get... Airshows, some birdphotography, and general shooting. Is sigma the best then?
Great video. If only I don't own the sigma 100-400 already. This would be an excellent addition. The 50 sure comes in handy if I just want to carry 1 lens
Can you give your thoughts on the Sony 100-400 vs the new Tamron? Used copies of that lens are now in a range where if the performance is there, the cost would be justified. I tend to take my camera out snowboarding to get photos.
GM is superior in every way except obvious versatile focal length and mfd.
I've been watching all your videos for the sigma and tamron telephoto lenses. I really hoped for more info on video performance with samples. There is basically nothing on the internet about it. I do more video than photo currently still with a Panasonic GH5 and 100-400 panaleica. But I am considering getting the new Sony a6700 and looking at which lens to get. The 200-600 sony is just a bit out of my budget. Would really appreciate some feedback on video and even a specific video about wildlife video lenses. Thanks, great reviews.
Hey ! I'm going to switch to a Nikon Zac 200-500 for a Sony a6700,
Did you get the Sony a6700 ? I'm interesting on feedback and wich lens you get
@@Pokzy I did get the a6700 and went with the Sigma 150-600. Previously I have owned the old Canon 7D Mark II DSLR and 100-400II lens and after that a Panasonic GH5 with Leica 100-400. I love pretty much everything about the a6700 apart from the low resolution viewfinder and LCD. That is noticeable and annoying. Everything else is slightly better than the GH5 and the autofocus (once you figure out how to use the tracking correctly) is amazing. The Sigma lens is also very good but it is big and heavy compared to the 100-400 lenses I have used before. Stabilization and sharpness is great and the focus keeps up with birds so no complaints. I can also hand hold video at 600mm if I have a good stance and a bit of bracing, maybe a tree or sitting down. Hope that helps.
@@CrazyAboutFlyFishing Thanks for your feedback !
Currently I will stick with the 150-500. The reason I change all my gear is to change my heavy 200-500. The sigma 150-600 is close to him...
I always carry with me a telephoto while hiking in mountains (6h to 10h hikes) The 150-500 will be great for this and can also fit in my smaller backpack (while sigma can't..)
@Pokzy sounds like a good option, the Sigma is definitely very big and would be tough to take on a big hike like that. Enjoy the new gear.
Great review. If you put them 3 side by side it will give people a bitter idea in term of sizes.
Many thanks for the review 🙏 it was really helpful and informative.
But I still dont know which lens i should get. Tamron 50-400 or the Sigma 100-400.
Which one is sharper and which AF is better?
Thanks in advance
50-400 would be my pic! Specially after the firmware update.
Great one thanks! Would love to see how these lenses compares to the new Sigma 60-600
Coming soon!
@@StefanMalloch amazing! Thanks!
@@StefanMalloch Any update on 60-600?
A pity Tamron is not in the L-mount system as a 50-400 works well together with the 20-60 kit zoom.
It’s not for professional work but i wanna take motorsports photos, you think the 150-500 is better in terms of autofocus
Hello sir is TAMRON 150-500mm is Compatible with A7C?😅
Yes Absolutely.
Good Video!
Thanks for the visit
Sigma best value for money and best bokeh, tamron 50-400 price is too close to 150-500, I would definitely pick longer reach for that price. The only thing that is temping with tamron 50-400 is macro capabilities ;)
For wildlife, yes. For everything else the 50-400 is a no-brainer
Sigma is the cheapest, which is not the same as the best value for money. I find the missing 50-100mm very valuable. Btw Tamron 150-500 is on sale at the same $1299 price as the 50-400. I didn't like 150-500 lens because it's much heavier and 150mm is too long in many situations.
Sigma is automatically disqualified for zooming counterclockwise. Sad, because Sigma makes great lenses, but I can’t use their zooms.
The A7iv may not be the best platform for testing a lens' AF : mine struggles with 70 200 f2.8 GM2 on runners. Hit rate results heavily depend on light conditions, reaching 80% at the most under bright sunlight at 6 FPS.
A7IV AF is incredible and should not be struggling to hit 6fps with a GM lens. Play with your settings and of course in difficult situations its still just a machine.
@@StefanMalloch Please let me know the settings you recommend for runners coming towards the camera, full body. I feel I've tried them all and I'd love to stop whining about the A7iv AF.
I currently have the Tamron 28-200 and the Sigma 100-400. I'm so tempted to sell my Sigma and get the Tammy 50-400.
我是賣掉了28-200 換買50-400
Other than the Sigma (which is priced very well compare what you get for $849)… these two Tamron lenses are overpriced, $1300 for the zoom range only because other than that, these lenses are slow, and the autofocus is not as good as the Sigma’s. This is not a professional lens but it has a professional lens price… I wonder what hobbyist would buy this lens for $1300 🤌🏻. Tamron should have priced it lower like $989. Their professional lenses like the 28-75 G2 is cheaper much better yes not a super zoom but 90% the people will get a shorter zoom at first. Also that lens is still very versatile, so I just wonder how many of 50-400 will be sold in the first 6-12 month. Good luck Tamron 😅
I think you are right with the pricing. I am waiting for Tamron to offer a $200 rebate. Then, the 50-400 is closer to price it should have been from the beginning. BTW, I already have the 150-500 and do not like it much. It is heavy and the results I am getting are not that great. I much rather have the 50-400. I was looking for a longer lens than my 70-300. The 150-500 is longer but at a weight and $$ cost. If Tamron priced the 50-400 around $1,000, they would sell a lot more.
I own the 150-500 and compared it to the 100-400 and the sigma was way sharper. On 24mp i was able to crop the sigma to 500mm and it was still sharper. Bought the Tamron for 1500€ and I'm trying to sell it since months at 900€
Sounds like you had a poor copy - I find the tamron much sharper than the sigma at the long end and sold the latter as prefer the longer reach.
@@lafonevc5663 Thats what i think too. Is also has a very odd look in the bokeh
I had both Sigma 100-400 and Tamron 150-500. Sigma is definitely sharper at the center, but the corners at 400m are soft. Tamron starting losing sharpness already at 300mm. But Sigma suffers from LoCA, and Tamron doesn't. Sigma also has more vignetting wide open.
It's a bad time selling Tamron as it's on sale at $1299.
Thank you!
why isn't anyone comparing it to the 70-300???
talking about big budget, it is funny because the 150-500 is barely 50€ more expensive than the 50-400- What's going on with Tamron lately? They're more expensive than Sigma, tells out they're partially owned by Sony, lol
wow! very useful. I see none of them is even close to acceptable for handheld video at the telephoto end. Good to know- definitely a no-buy decision. Kind of sucky CAF, too.
If you plan on buying a high MP camera then don't buy the Tamron. On my A7III it was fine, but on A7RV the images are really soft.
sorry. Is the sigma 100-400mm weather sealing lens? thank you
Its a weather sealed design like most but not water proof.
Sigma weather sealing in the contemporary line is a total disappointment. The Tamron lenses, unlike Sigma contemporary, have internal gaskets and not only at the mount. Don't understand why Sigma does that, but I guess they want you to spend the big buck on the Art series 🤷
Thx for the comparison. But I think the AF speed of the body is pretty important and an A7iv is not a good choice for this test.
The A7iv has phenomenal auto focus.
Micro jitters ruin the video with tamron. sigma is better in this aspect. Easy to stabilize in post.
All of us saying 50 400 will return for sigma or tamron 150500 eventually.
Where do you live ? You have marmots, colibris...
sans aucun doute la série annulée serait bien mieux que les anus du pouvoir, ses ralentis éclaté, ses acteurs en surjeux et sans oublier son scénario qui tient sur un bout de PQ.
🤝😎