Depending on your use case scenarios, they aren't always directly comparable: the Sony comes with a wider range of focal lengths and maxes out much further than the Tamron. If what you want is a "step up" kit lens replacement, then 100% the Tamron beats the Sony hands down. But the wider zoom range in the compact form factor puts it above the Tamron in other scenarios. For my use case, having that wider range is more of an advantage than the speed of the Tamron lens. I shoot with primes for the focal lengths I use most often (9mm, 16mm, 35mm and 50mm) - and the 18-105 is an ideal addition that covers everything else and provides me with an "almost telephoto" lens that I can fit into my very compact camera bag (Hadley Pro Small) without having to swap out one of my primes.
In this case - yes, absolutely the Sony 18-105 has a wider range and yes it is very convenient. It is one of the reasons to buy it. But what is also important that the Sony is darker thanks to f/4.0 unlike the Tamron with its f/2.8. For aps-c cameras it is nonetheless important, further the Tamron is sharper a little bit. Of course it doesn’t mean that the Sony lens are bad, maybe for someone it will be better choice, I just said that my personal winner in this comparison is Tamron)
@@vladsuvorov I do think its a case of "Horses for courses" and what you intend to use the lens for will be the determining factor for which is the better one. I use my camera for stills and shooting raw, f4 is good enough in most cases to get enough detail to fix anything in lightroom/photoshop. If I need a nice fast lens, that's what my primes are for.
The Tamron sounds like it is a step up from my Sony/Zeiss 16-70 as a photo/stills lens although I don't think it has any advantage over my Sony 16-55 F2.8 G lens on a camera with IBIS. For me the 18-105, which I also have , is a different beast because of the power zoom and extended range which is great for video because I can zoom using a remote i.e. not touch the camera. I should mention that I always video from a tripod or at the very least a monopod with legs. I guess it all depends on how you want to use a lens ...
I think it all depends on focal length of course with which you are shooting. To be honest I didn’t notice difference between them. Both of them are great in stabilising.
Regarding the Gimbal Friendliness, you do realize that there is a "thing" inside that moves forward and backward, right? It just doesn't move "outside" of the lens, like the Tamron. But the "thing" (inner glass on a rail and motor) does move around. And it does influence the gimbal balance, a bit. Not much. I see this comment on all 18-105 reviews. It is a wrong perspective. You can not fake laws of physics. Things have to move, to create the optical "zoom" effect.
@@vladsuvorov Thank you for the review and time, as well! Pfff, I also have thought of it until today or recently. I am still learning about lenses, cameras and optics.
@@vladsuvorov He's probably asking if the 35mm difference between the two lenses would make a huge difference if you're using it for telephoto purposes. From my experience 35mm focal length difference is basically you taking two or three steps towards your object, so I'd like to think it won't make a huge difference. Or you can always use your clearimage zoom if you don't mind compromising your image quality a bit. Between these two lenses, I'd still pick the Tamron for its f2.8. But since I picked up the sigma 18-50mm f2.8 the other day, I decided to skip the 17-70mm entirely for now.
Coming from a 18-105 user, I think it makes... I tested both lenses in a camera store, and imagine if you have a 50mm lens. The 105 is double the size or zoom, or crop. The Tamron only like x 1.5 times. Although, not such a great difference in comparison to a 200mm... haha. You get a closer reach, but what I love on the 18-105 is the steady zoom in feature. It is sooooooo cool, when filming stuff.
![Tamron 17-70 F2.8 vs Sigma 18-50 F2.8 Lens Comparison | Best APS-C Zoom Lens for Sony [A6400, A6700]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nZA_J1t3eac/mqdefault.jpg)
![Tamron 17-70 F2.8 vs Sigma 18-50 F2.8 Lens Comparison | Best APS-C Zoom Lens for Sony [A6400, A6700]](/img/tr.png)
The BEST zoom lenses for Sony a6400!
Why 720p...???
I have the 18-105 and I'm pretty happy with it.
Just got my tamron 17-70 for my a6400 and it’s so much sharper and better in low light compared to me 18-105
I was having the same question: is it really? Especially for video work?
Thanks.
Depending on your use case scenarios, they aren't always directly comparable: the Sony comes with a wider range of focal lengths and maxes out much further than the Tamron. If what you want is a "step up" kit lens replacement, then 100% the Tamron beats the Sony hands down. But the wider zoom range in the compact form factor puts it above the Tamron in other scenarios.
For my use case, having that wider range is more of an advantage than the speed of the Tamron lens. I shoot with primes for the focal lengths I use most often (9mm, 16mm, 35mm and 50mm) - and the 18-105 is an ideal addition that covers everything else and provides me with an "almost telephoto" lens that I can fit into my very compact camera bag (Hadley Pro Small) without having to swap out one of my primes.
In this case - yes, absolutely the Sony 18-105 has a wider range and yes it is very convenient. It is one of the reasons to buy it. But what is also important that the Sony is darker thanks to f/4.0 unlike the Tamron with its f/2.8. For aps-c cameras it is nonetheless important, further the Tamron is sharper a little bit.
Of course it doesn’t mean that the Sony lens are bad, maybe for someone it will be better choice, I just said that my personal winner in this comparison is Tamron)
@@vladsuvorov I do think its a case of "Horses for courses" and what you intend to use the lens for will be the determining factor for which is the better one.
I use my camera for stills and shooting raw, f4 is good enough in most cases to get enough detail to fix anything in lightroom/photoshop.
If I need a nice fast lens, that's what my primes are for.
Channel looks great, keep it up the subs will come
Thank you so much🥹Please subscribe as well🙂
The Tamron sounds like it is a step up from my Sony/Zeiss 16-70 as a photo/stills lens although I don't think it has any advantage over my Sony 16-55 F2.8 G lens on a camera with IBIS. For me the 18-105, which I also have , is a different beast because of the power zoom and extended range which is great for video because I can zoom using a remote i.e. not touch the camera. I should mention that I always video from a tripod or at the very least a monopod with legs. I guess it all depends on how you want to use a lens ...
Tamron 17-70 is amazing zoom lens for e-mount 🤗
I have Sony since 2018 and Tamron for a month. I think Sony has better stabilization. What's your opinion?
I think it all depends on focal length of course with which you are shooting. To be honest I didn’t notice difference between them. Both of them are great in stabilising.
The 17 - 70 is huge! I did not realize
Regarding the Gimbal Friendliness, you do realize that there is a "thing" inside that moves forward and backward,
right?
It just doesn't move "outside" of the lens, like the Tamron. But the "thing" (inner glass on a rail and motor) does move around.
And it does influence the gimbal balance, a bit. Not much.
I see this comment on all 18-105 reviews. It is a wrong perspective. You can not fake laws of physics.
Things have to move, to create the optical "zoom" effect.
It is interesting, I have never thought about it in this way) Thank you for your comment and thoughts.
@@vladsuvorov Thank you for the review and time, as well!
Pfff, I also have thought of it until today or recently.
I am still learning about lenses, cameras and optics.
Which of the lenses has the better stabilisation for handheld video? Tamron 17-70 VC or Sony 18-105 OSS?
As for me they’re the same in stabilization.
@@vladsuvorov Then that's great! Since the 18-105 Sony has one of the best OSS out there..
The 18-105 stabilization is far better.
Влад, привет. Видел пару комментов на ютуб, что тамрон 17-70 засасывает в себя пыль как сумашедший. На твоем объективе есть пылинки внутри?
Хай, в мене такого не було.
Thank you Vlad Im getting the 17 - 70 Tamron lens with SONY FX30 - thank you for the great comparison video :)
Thank you bro, great choice!☺️
17-70 is the best
Like that accent, it's like mine.
The 35mm diference in telephoto it's a huge diference?
I’m sorry, I didn’t understand the question( What did you mean when you said telephoto?
@@vladsuvorov the long end of the focal range
@@vladsuvorov He's probably asking if the 35mm difference between the two lenses would make a huge difference if you're using it for telephoto purposes.
From my experience 35mm focal length difference is basically you taking two or three steps towards your object, so I'd like to think it won't make a huge difference. Or you can always use your clearimage zoom if you don't mind compromising your image quality a bit.
Between these two lenses, I'd still pick the Tamron for its f2.8. But since I picked up the sigma 18-50mm f2.8 the other day, I decided to skip the 17-70mm entirely for now.
Coming from a 18-105 user, I think it makes...
I tested both lenses in a camera store, and imagine if you have a 50mm lens.
The 105 is double the size or zoom, or crop.
The Tamron only like x 1.5 times.
Although, not such a great difference in comparison to a 200mm... haha.
You get a closer reach, but what I love on the 18-105 is the steady zoom in feature.
It is sooooooo cool, when filming stuff.
What?
On est en 2024 presque il faut peut-être arrêter les vidéos pourrie en 720