One year later. I have started using the Tamron 18-300 on my new a6700. Both new to me at the same time. After loosening up or smoothing out the zoom mechanism with daily messages, I got some incredible results shooting bees on my great leaf shrub. I set the camera to focus on insect and off I went firing away. I uses a variety of focal lengths depending on where I was standing. This is an amazing couple as if made for each other. When I could get a lock-on with a bee, very hard when they vanish from sight, I got relatively good to great images. Bees are not cooperative. I finally got one to pose for me and what a shot. The upside is that this is a great lens, a do-all for those working with moving subjects like insects. It's sharp and snaps into focus immediately. Of course I have to give a lot of credit to the best aps-c camera on the market, the Sony a6700.
Thank you for your review. I have been using this lens on my A7RV when visiting New England in 2022, and when visiting Japan in 2023. I have been very satisfied with this all-in-one kit for traveling light for photographing landscapes, wildlife, and limited “macros”. The quality is very good especially at f5.6, around 300mm it’s a bit soft unless you use f8.0. Recently I toured the Western United States from the west coast to the National Parks including Yellowstone. I usually carried the Tamron 20-40mm on my A7RV and my brand new A6700 with the Tamron 18-300. This APSC combo was so successful that I utilized this for close to 80% of my photos and even tried clear image zoom at 2x ( 900mm equivalent) with pretty good results when needed. If I really need a heavier very high resolution set up, then I can use my Sony 70-200 GM II, but then again we are talking about a lens that is almost twice the weight and 4.3 times the price and less “all-in-one”
What a time in the photography world we are living in. I remember a super zoom in the DSLR days meant a lot of compromises. This was given and accepted. Sharpness takes a nose dive at most focal length especially wide open, vignetting, chromatic abberation, ultra slow focusing, etc. Variable aperture was always accepted. Variable aperture aside, it is amazing how Tamron nearly did away with most of the compromises on this lens.
Variable aperture is always going to be an issue of a 300mm zoom at this price. As you say it'll make a great all one upgrade from the Sony 16-50 & 55-210. Great review as always 🙌
We are in APS-C heaven. This + the Sigma 18-50 can cover almost anything the average person will ever need, and both are pretty cheap comparing to the competition. Hope there are more of such bargains coming out soon.
If you had to get only one of these 2 (Tamron 18-300 or Sigma 18-50), which one would you get? - Primarily for outdoor shooting in good light conditions
Before the SonyA6000, my camera was a canon SX230. A compact with 28-394mm f/3.1-5.9. I still miss having all that focal lengh in one camera, but I just couldn't feel right to go back to a smaller sensor. This lens is a dream come true. It wouldn't be as compact as a compact camera, but way more compact than having to carry the kit lens, a 30mm 1.8 meike and a 135mm vivitar like I do now.
Much depends on what Fuji you have. I just got the X-T4, specifically as it has IBIS and works well with the OIS of the lens. However I am not a videographer. I would recommend checking out videos from trusted sources like: Justin Abbott th-cam.com/video/BrVCg557YWM/w-d-xo.html and Jake Sloan: th-cam.com/video/2dk55irRpZ0/w-d-xo.html
Thanks for this review. I'm not going to run out and buy this lens right now, but I'm thinking about getting it. My everyday lens on the a6600 is the Sony 18-135, and I've been very pleased with it in terms of compact size, light weight, and satisfactory performance. This new 18-300mm would be the ideal travel lens for the extra reach. I will now pay attention to how often I am in a situation where I want a longer lens than the 18-135.
I have the sigma 16 and 56 1.4, but I’m looking for long distance one, and I’m between the Sony 18-135 or Tamron 18-300, which one do you thing is a nice one?
@@sarwita77 I owned both, sony 18-135 and tamron 18-300. I sold sony and did half a year with the tamron. I was very disapointed with the results in terms of sharpness and it is annoyingly big compared to the sony. I re-bought the sony and sold tamron in the end. The size and quality of sony is more important to me than the longer telephoto range. I added the Sony 70-350 for tele quality and am very satisfied with it. Tamron is versatile but lacks quality.
Keeping it to 620 grams is pretty impressive. Paired with an a6400, the total weight is about one kilogram. For me that still makes it a viable travel lens. I’ll be interesting to see how many they sell and for what use cases. 🤔
As was already mentioned, this lens is probably an alternative not to Sigma 18-50 2.8 or Tamron 17-70 2.8, as it's darker and bigger, but to Sony 70-350. With the same size and apertures we get much more in terms of the focal lengths. I usually walk through the park with my Tamron 11-20 2.8 for the wide-angle shots, Tamron 17-70 2.8 for midrange and Sony 70-350 for taking photos of birds. So I have to change 17-70 with 70-350 really often. This lens seems to replace both of them. Tamron 11-20 2.8 and Tamron 18-300 seem to be a really cool duo for travelling.
Sony 70-350 is far better. I have had them. Now I am on Sony 70-200 f4 and Sony 18-105 f4 +50 1.8 - all oss lenses. Use at the a6500 that has Ibis as well - great solution 😁
@@tanmaysakpalofficial Hi! I have both Tamron 18-300 and Sony 70-350. I almost never use Sony 70-350 because I don't find these extra 50 mm to really matter. I didn't compare these lenses side to side (a good idea for the video, yes), but I think Sony has an edge in stabilization (approx 1 stop). Tamron is a very universal lens and ideal for bright day photography.
@@AlexDunaykin thank you so much for the reply and your insights. Since you have both the lens, I think it'll be a good idea if you can do a detailed comparison between the 2 👍
@@tanmaysakpalofficial Thank you for your question! It inspires me to do videos. I didn't make videos for a long time, but now I see that you and other people in comments are interested in the comparison of Sony 70-350 and Tamron 18-300 and as long as I have these two lenses and I almost never use Sony it is a good idea to make a video about these two lenses and to decide what to do with them. I travel a lot now, but starting at September I plan to teach at school in Budva so I will stay for a long time in one place and be able to upack all my photo\video gear and to make reviews. Thank you for you inspiration again!
Definitely tempted by the 'all in one' prospect and that big focal range, especially for days when I don't want to carry a kit a bag. I have an A6000 and tend to use the Sony E 35mm and the Sony 70-350mm. However, given the overlap between this and the zoom I already have I'm not sure I can warrant the extra expenditure (given that the Sony was quite an investment). Do you have a view on the image quality of this Tamron with the Sony 70-350mm?
Hello! What is the best or not expensive Vnd filter for tamron 18-300mm sony for video. I bought a k&f concept nano-d but when I zoom out to 200-300 mm the video is very noisy. Thank you for your response.
I didn’t want to wait for B&H to get them in so I found that Procam in Laviona, MI had an “early release” batch (10) so I drove the fifty miles to pick one up. My purchase was at 4PM eastern just before your review was pushed. Thanks for your review as you nailed my reasons for getting it as an “all-in-one” and the performance in the few short hours I’ve had it look fantastic! My opinion is that if you want perfect shots in multiple situations than multiple lenses would be better, however if you want all-in-one OR you are going on vacation and can only bring ONE lens than this 18-300 is for you. In closing I’ll say that I have been waiting for this review as I place a high value on your testing/review but, I just couldn’t wait any longer when the opportunity came to pick one up. It all worked out as you confirmed my suspicions of the lens users like me. You are also one of the few English/non-Tamron reviews on TH-cam to date.
Several months ago, one of the professional photographers TH-cam channels did a video on a single lens camera he took on a cruise. In that video, he showed how you can get quality images from a budget all in one lens ( a Tamron lens). We carry two cameras, my a7r3 and her a6600 (she like the size and weight of the a6600 and will not use the larger camera). I am going to see if she will carry the camera and this lens, if so, we will buy on. Weight is everything with lenses. This is a good choice for travel by boat or air.
I've got the Sigma trio for my A6300 plus a newish Tamron 17-70. I'm looking to get a longer focal length zoom and can't decide between this lens (Tamron 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 Di III-A VC VXD) or the Sony E 70-350 mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS. I shoot video and stills (which I often print large) almost almost always on a tripod. Right now in Ontario, the Tamron lens is about $70 less than the Sony. I could sell my Tamron 17-70 i suppose and just have the one Tamron 18-300 or build on top of the 17-70 with the Sony 70-350. I'm just not sure which route I should go.
Thank you for this review. I appreciate your low-key presentation and excellent image examples - btw your models are both lovely (your family?). I have just bought a Fuji X-T4, and although I got the FX16-80 lens, I was looking at a one-solution unit that could come with me when travelling. I have checked several reviews and they all seem to be consistent in suggesting that this new Tamron unit is a worthy solution to my requirement - considering the vast zoom range, this unit is quite remarkable and most issues can be sorted easily in PP. Right now, my X-T4 has been stuck in the supply chain in Australia for three weeks (I live in NZ), so while I have got the Tamron unit, I shall have to patiently wait until the rest turns up to see how it performs!
I bought this lens just today. I work on a whale watching boat over the summer and that is what this lens is for. Otherwise I use Sigma 16mm, Samyang 12mm, and 7Artisans 7.5mm to make other videos for this TH-cam channel. Thank you very much for the review.
Thats a good question. The 70-350 has the same variable aperture shortcomings, but it has a better zoom ring and it feels better made. Optically, this 18-300 is just a touch better. Given the price difference, the Tamron makes a lot of sense.
I am wondering the same, I am looking for a APS-C telescope lens and the Sony 70 - 350 G seems to be the best option, but since this one can go up to 300 mm, maybe it would be a good option. It would be nice to have a comparison ;)
@@geopapa80 Oh my. That’s what I was going to say. Never thought an all in one 18-300 would be able to compete with, let alone beat a Sony G lens. Was thinking about picking the Sony up for a Zoo/birding lens but maybe I’ll have to consider this one.
Hi @Arthur is worth using the Tamron 18-300mm to replace Sony 16-55mm f2.8 + Sony 70-350mm for travel? I do take video from time to time and photos in forest, so it’s low lighting. I can see that I will be saving heaps on weight alone and time from not changing lens. But in practice it seems the sharpness will be hard to achieve in low light, not to mention the wider end is a bit too narrow for landscape.
If you're looking for a cheaper alternative to the Sony 70-350, I'd say buy it. But for an everyday lens, get the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 or the Sigma 18-50 f2.8. Low light is pretty terrible with APS-C, so fast lenses are way more important on this platform than on FF.
Absolutely correct, just yesterday i tried shooting portraits with my D3300 55-200 at 70mm f/4.2, damn i had to keep shutter at 1/30 s ISO 400. I had ring light but it was not sufficient indoors.
@@amitkrupal1234 people seem to forget that 1.5x crop applies to everything. Which means that every stop of light you go down on FF is actually 1.5 stops on APS-C.
@@neogod29 That is not correct. The 1.5x crop does not apply to the light gathering ability of a lens. You use identical settings to achieve proper exposure regardless of sensor size. But, [given the same focal length] an APS-C sensor must be physically positioned at a distance 1.5x further from the subject in order to achieve the same framing as a FF sensor. So, the APS-C sensor will require a focal ratio of f/1.2 to match the depth-of-field presentation of the FF sensor.
@@Yougimpytube I don't know if you own both APS-C and FF cameras, but I do. I can tell you from first hand experience that APS-C cameras DO NOT gather the same amount of light. It's physically impossible. Even the diffent focal length changes the amount of light the camera gathers. The reason they mark everything the same, is to cause less confusion.
Thanks for another awesome lens review @ArthurR :) gonna be a while before i decide on this lens though as I have just got my first ever full manual lens (Newer 35mm f/1.7 that you reviewed 5 years ago!!!!) and it inspired me to purchase it.
I am going to buy this lens but it won't spend a ton of time on the camera. I have the 17-70 and I think it is just about perfect for an everyday carry lens. I would really miss the 2.8. There are times the added range will come in handy for wildlife and the such.
Long time viewer, great channel Arthur! Question (if you have time)... Do you think this is worth replacing my Sony 70-350? THX and have a great rest of your week :) - Brett
Would you get this lens over the Sony 70-350mm? I’ve seen you have reviewed both but I’m curious if you would choose it over the Sony. I know this is an old video but not sure if you’re still commenting on this.
Well. As a travel lens this looks great but… the low light issue probably is a dealbreaker. I have the new Tamron 17-70, and paired with the Sony 70-350 on my a6600, it’s an excellent kit. Just that pesky lens swapping to deal with. But the Tamron 17-70 can do better in low light. So there you are. Very good review. THANKS!!!
We rock the same gear. Not just the pesky swapping to have in mind though. Our lenses are considerably sharper. Several reviewers confirmed this. For an unpretentious traveller, however, this lens is heaven.
We are rookies and just got the 11-20mm Tamron and have the 17-70. Thinking the next one would be the Sony 70-350. I wonder how annoying it really will be switching lenses
@@damonluvisi How are you liking your 11-20? I have it and although the weather sealing & f2.8 are great features, I find myself using my 10-18 f4 more often due to the OSS (shooting on A6100 & A6400: no ibis).
I am considering this lens. My favourite travel lens for outdoor daytime shots is my old silver Sony 18-200 f3.5 - 6.3 (SEL18200).The Tamron would give me an extra 100mm range (200 mm extra if I use Clear Image Zoom). I mostly only take stills so the video drawbacks you mentioned are not very significant for me. I do like the image quality I get from my old lens though (even compared to my 18-105) so I would not want to move down in that regard. I suppose my other option would be to take the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 lens paired with a Sony 70-350mm zoom. This would have the advantage of having a useable medium zoom lens for indoors and general walkabouts together with an even longer zoom range than using the Tamron 18-300mm. Of course this would also be at a much higher cost and more weight to lug around when sightseeing plus more need to change lenses. Decisions ... decisions .... :-)
Don't. I did and regret. It's not good from 200-300mm. The 28-200 2.8-5.6 is way better. I got the Sony 70-200 f4 now and the Sony 18-105 f4. Much better.
I have the Tamron 17 - 70 and Sony 70 - 350. Obviously there was not this option at the time but generally I use each for different situations so having separate lenses is really not a hassle. I wouldn't want the slower speeds either as that limits you to outdoor use only. Not a problem with the long zoom since that is used strictly outside
@@asbjrnhagennielsen6560 I have the 18-105 f4 but use it only for video. The 28-200 focal range does not appeal to me (more suitable for full frame - I shoot APSC ). The 70-200 F4 is out of my price range. I am looking for increased range (greater than 200mm) over what I have now with OSS and at a price within my budget (max 1500 CAD for a lens) and not too heavy to lug around all day when travelling.
@@dgross2009 Thanks. I am thinking that that sounds like a good combination. The 17-70 would be useful inside churches, castles and museums and as a general lens. The 70-350 would give me lots of reach when needed outside to capture architectural details, and distant objects. Having said that, the 18-300 long would cover everything I would need for outdoors so I would only need to switch when inside. Oh well, my travelling is still on hold for now because of the pandemic so I will have some time to think :-)
Although not the greatest optically, the 18-105 is great for video, especially gimbal work since the zoom is internal and doesn’t change the balance of the lens. If that’s your primary focus then it’s the right choice.
I agree, but at the same time the 18-105 is a very dated lens. I'd rather have the Tamron 17-70 or Sigma 18-50 which are both better optically for video and photo. You get f2.8 and improved sharpness but not as much of a zoom range. But the difference in sharpness is huge.
I would get either Sigma 16 + Sigma 18-50, or the Tamron 17-70 not because the Sony 18-105 is not good optically but because of the f2.8 vs f4. The difference in IQ is there but it is nowhere near huge imo.
bought it for conference video production, paired with a6400, this is great lens. my other three a6300 are using sony 18-135. with that kind of setup I'm set for a looong time. image is IMHO a bit better than on 18-135, and that 300mm reach helps a lot
So which one is your favorite? I'm looking for a travel lens and am in doubt between the 18-135 as it's nice and compact on my 5100 and this Tamron 18-300 but I'm afraid it might be too bulky.
i think this completes what in my opinion is, the complete APSC Sony kit: - 1. Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f2 -- vlogging/landscape/astro 2. Sigma 56 f1.4 - portraits 3. Tamron 18-300 - travel Now all i need is money 😂
@@geopapa80 nah..23 mm is too much for my indoor needs...which is why i had to choose the 12mm. if i needed faster, i would have gone sigma 16 1.2. which is both wider and faster than the viltrox you mention. but i really need that 12mm. i also like taking pictures of skylines and building's facade..even 16mm, on an apsc doesn't do justice.
I have an a6000 with the Sony 10-18 f4, the 16-50 kit lens, and the 55-210. I'd like to upgrade, especially to a better kit lens. It's great that there are now many options, but it leaves me confused! Until recently, I thought the Tamron 17-70 would be my next lens, but now the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 is about to be released, and it is much lighter and cheaper than the Tamron 17-70. But then there are are other options, like the Sony 18-105 G lens, or for an even lighter more compact lens there is the Sony 18-135. Now I am even more confused, as this Tamron 18-300 looks very interesting ! One question: for this Tamron 18-300, how is the sharpness and image quality in the 70-300mm range, compared to the Sony 55-210? In other words, if I got this lens to replace both my kit lens and my 55-210, would I be getting better image quality compared to the 55-210?
Cómo le hubiesen gustado a los fotógrafos antiguos un zoom así . Probé este lente de un amigo y es muy satisfactorio . Aún cuando se invierta mucho dinero en g master aquellos lentes si que darán mejores resultados pero no tanto como uno cree en comparación con el 18-300. Si al g master de 1 a 10 obtiene 10, al tamron le doy 8,5 lo cual es bastante alto . Si crees que la diferencia la hacen pequeños detalles entonces junta dinero por el g master . Si eres de lo que cree que la diferencia está en fotógrafo entonces anda por el tamron. Yo tengo primes pero recomiendo el tamron
I'd also like to know if this is a good replacment for the sony 18-135. I have the sigma 150-600 with MC-11 so this feels like the sweet spot lens to bridge the gap.
@@brandonhimmelreich2379 I went ahead and bought it and have been using it for a few months. It's been my go to lens when I'm heading out in the morning for a walk or nature photography.
I think the better compromise is the Sony 18-135mm. It covers you from a full-frame equivalent of 27-200mm which effectively covers 2 of the lenses of the holy trinity (obviously not at F2.8 though... and not quite 24mm) and covers what most people need for an "all in one" zoom. The size and weight are also a really good balance on a crop body. 300mm on a crop body is equivilant of 450mm... I don't think most people need that - especially at F6.3 (which is effectively like shooting at F8 on a full-frame body in terms of FOV, bokeh and noise performance). That would be my advice anyway. Obviously, if you think that will work for you - great! But most people would be better suited with the 18-135.
I'm also perfectly content with my 18-135mm and would prefer not to lug around this much larger and heavier Tamron. I'm actually waiting for the complete opposite, an updated and sharper replacement to Sony's ultra compact 16-50mm, so that I can tuck my Sony aps-c into a large jacket pocket. Tamron, Sigma, Sony, any takers?
@@davidpp33 I stopped buying the original 16-50mm because it breaks to easily. My only suggestion is to do what I have.... Get yourself the 20mm F2.8 pancake lens. It limits your range but gives you good pocketability - and at 35mm is a pretty good focal length to work with most the time.
Not really my cup of tea, but it is cool to see Tamron rounding out their trifecta with the 11-20 2.8, 17-70 2.8, and now this. All at a 67mm filter size. Pretty satisfying. Personally still freaking out about Sigmas 18-50mm f2.8. Can’t wait for it to ship.
It seems like the optimal tourist lens, my only concern is the size and heft. 620 grams isnt too bad but isn't it front heavy? I would also appreciate a case made exactly for the lens + camera or the benefit of having only a single lens is lost by having to have some non fitting large bag.
My EDC or close to hand kit in the car is 16-50mm and 55-210mm with close up lens and teleconverter. Seems this lens will be a more practical, improved option whilst keeping weight compromise to an acceptable level.
Can you make a video comparing stabilization for video and photos found in this Tamron lens, with other Sony lenses with OSS? compare these once on a camera with no IBIS then again compare them with alphas with IBIS. This w=should tell us what is the best gimbal-free stabilization option for Sony apsc users. I am thinking something like a6600 with this Tamron lens would be excellent for telephoto as at that long focal length every little shake gets magnified so perhaps this Tamron works in that respect better with a6600 IBIS??? Would Love to hear your feedback in case you do make a video on this topic. Thanks! Have a great Day!
Thanks for the review. I am disappointed that it is not a parfocal and that zooming in and out during video is not smooth but I may still get it exclusively for photography since I don't do a lot of video anyway. I own the e70-350 but I always seem to find myself switching lenses or using two cameras to cover the wide viewing angles.
I am planning on purchasing the Tamron lens. The other reviews were positive for outdoor work. Which is where I will be using it mounted to a Sony a7R IV. It should make up for any grainieness.
Thank you Arthur for your review of this lens. This review was directly linked for me to purchase based on your full and unbiased review; the samples were very helpful. You are right, at this time there isn't an all-in-one like this lens for the price. I am moving on from the Sigma 16mm 1.4 to this lens since the a6000 will be doing more wildlife and nature shots. The Sigma will be missed though. Also, thanks for mentioning the student discount, it is very hard to find this lens at a discount or on sale.
Nice pictures, but you missed one very important item. Apparently nobody knows one of the most valuable items of this Tamron 18 - 300 mm: the zoom ratio. The 16,6 zoom ratio enables the photographer to select just one person from a group after making the shot of the whole group. Or during a photo safary selecting just one animal besides the second shot of the hirt. So from an overview to a "close-up"; two different shots from the the same spot, without moving.
Hi Arthur, love your videos. I need a little help choosing between Tamron 18-300mm or Sigma 18-50mm. I know they are different use cases probably but if I had option to choose just one, what do you suggest based on sharpness and practicality .. I must had, I have a Sigma 16mm separately so this zoom lens doesn’t need to be used in low lights. Thank you Adding my camera is a6600
I am looking for an upgrade to my XC50-230mmF4.5-6.7 and Fuji recently launched the XF70-300mmF4-5.6 which costs more and does not let in all that much more light at 300mm. I gotta give it to Tamron on this amazing release!
I own the 50-230mm, I can personally see no reason not to replace it with the 18-300 except cost. It will provide better macro, longer reach, WR, higher IQ, almost the same size in camera bag. Will be a perfect compliment to my 23 f2 and 50 f2.
Do you think this would be the best lens option for trying to capture little league baseball from various viewpoints on an A6700? Mostly stills, maybe some video.
Hi Arthur R. I really enjoy watching your lense review videos. your videos are reallyreally professional. I have a request. I am trying to choose my lense setup between 1. tamron 18-300mm Single lense setup 2. tamron 17-70 & tamron 70-300mm Double lense setup. (My camera is sony A6000) I saw many videos comparing Sony 70-350 vs tamron 70-300 but I have not seen any video comparing tamron's 18-300mm vs tamron's 70-300mm. can you make a video of comparing them? I really wanna know how much quality should I be expecting to sacrifice on the quality of longrange shots over the convinience of wide range of local length. Thankyou.
I acquired the 18 300 about a week ago and autofocus in daylight is very good but I tried to take a photo of a full moon last night but all I could see through the camera was a very bright white round image yet with the naked eye it was a fairly detailed looking moon. any suggestions
Yo thats what I have! I’m really happy with it tbh. The 70-350 is super sharp at 350 mm and the 17-70 is the sharpest lens I own. But I do get irritated at switching out lenses, which is why I’m considering this. The variable aperture isn’t too bad because I never used the 2.8 in low light anyways. I just need a solid comparison between the 70-350 and the 18-300 at the telephoto side.
@@uthmanjimmy1377 I used to carry those two lenses wherever I went but now I leave the 70-350 out because it’s a hassle to switch lenses when I’m shooting outside. Also, I don’t need those long focal length unless I’m in zoo or safari to shoot birds and animals.
@@networm64 I don’t doubt that. What is wondering is how much better is it? If the 70-350 is vastly sharper, I probably won’t be happy with the 18-300 since I got used to the sharpness of the 70-350. If they are close enough though… I think it a worthy sacrificing my 2 lens combination for a 1 lens solution
@@purplecorde haha I’m the opposite! I keep my 70-350 on my a6500 and use my iPhone for ultrawide shots and video. I enjoy the unique perspective that the 70-350 gives me.
Tamron is producing the 18-400mm for APS-C dSLR cameras too. Sadly there is no a-mount versions of this lens and no chance of using an LA-EA3 adapter on e-mount cameras with this lens. The autofocus EF metabones and Sigma adapters for e-mount cameras don't offer autofocus. I hoped of a Tamron e-mount version of 18-400mm. Instead the 18-300mm version appeared which is much better than the 55-200mm or the 70-350mm lenses by Sony. The Tamron 18-300mm has an equivalent 35mm focal length range of 27-450mm. The Sony full frame e-mount 24-240mm lens on APS-C cameras becomes 36-360mm but it is much heavier, larger than the Tamron 18-240.
This was looking like a compelling (and cheaper) alternative to the Tamron 17-70mm that I have been wanting. I'm glad you highlighted the issues with zooming and focusing in video mode which is my main interest. I'm back on the 17-70mm bandwagon. Also, best of luck with the kitchen remodel at 8:29. I know that headache all too well.
First NO-MUSIC review video and it wasn't an issue. Thanks Arthur
Didn't even realize till I read this comment hah
One year later. I have started using the Tamron 18-300 on my new a6700. Both new to me at the same time. After loosening up or smoothing out the zoom mechanism with daily messages, I got some incredible results shooting bees on my great leaf shrub. I set the camera to focus on insect and off I went firing away. I uses a variety of focal lengths depending on where I was standing. This is an amazing couple as if made for each other. When I could get a lock-on with a bee, very hard when they vanish from sight, I got relatively good to great images. Bees are not cooperative. I finally got one to pose for me and what a shot. The upside is that this is a great lens, a do-all for those working with moving subjects like insects. It's sharp and snaps into focus immediately. Of course I have to give a lot of credit to the best aps-c camera on the market, the Sony a6700.
спасибо приятель ! я как раз присматриваю обьектив для своей а6700
So at 70mm.. the F still at 3,5?
Post results on your yt bro
Thank you for your review. I have been using this lens on my A7RV when visiting New England in 2022, and when visiting Japan in 2023. I have been very satisfied with this all-in-one kit for traveling light for photographing landscapes, wildlife, and limited “macros”. The quality is very good especially at f5.6, around 300mm it’s a bit soft unless you use f8.0. Recently I toured the Western United States from the west coast to the National Parks including Yellowstone. I usually carried the Tamron 20-40mm on my A7RV and my brand new A6700 with the Tamron 18-300. This APSC combo was so successful that I utilized this for close to 80% of my photos and even tried clear image zoom at 2x ( 900mm equivalent) with pretty good results when needed. If I really need a heavier very high resolution set up, then I can use my Sony 70-200 GM II, but then again we are talking about a lens that is almost twice the weight and 4.3 times the price and less “all-in-one”
What a time in the photography world we are living in. I remember a super zoom in the DSLR days meant a lot of compromises. This was given and accepted. Sharpness takes a nose dive at most focal length especially wide open, vignetting, chromatic abberation, ultra slow focusing, etc. Variable aperture was always accepted. Variable aperture aside, it is amazing how Tamron nearly did away with most of the compromises on this lens.
Even then, variable aperture is just a necessary sacrifice for keeping the lens relatively light and compact (considering the zoom range)
Your reviews are a must see for Sony APSC users, Arthur! Could you compare side by side this lens with the Sony 70-350?
Please, I would love to watch that comparison
Indeed, would love to see that, can't decide between 18-300 and 70-350
I had the Sony 70-350 and this Tamron 18-300. The Sony is very superior. I returned the 18-300.
@@asbjrnhagennielsen6560 superior in image quality? Sharpness? Chromatic abberation? Bokeh? Stabilization? Or in every way?
@@PatrickWithCamera Mainly sharpness at 300mm disappointing. Also grain (because of the f6.3 I belive).
The 28-200 2.8-5.6 is so much better.
Variable aperture is always going to be an issue of a 300mm zoom at this price. As you say it'll make a great all one upgrade from the Sony 16-50 & 55-210. Great review as always 🙌
We are in APS-C heaven. This + the Sigma 18-50 can cover almost anything the average person will ever need, and both are pretty cheap comparing to the competition. Hope there are more of such bargains coming out soon.
you're absolutely right. one light, small and bright, one that covers it all. i would say add a sigma 1.4 of your choice and you're done.
I alao suggest the Samsung 12mm f2, manual focus but great for astro or wide landscapes.
@@the_lost_navigator7266 You mean SAMYANG
@@sweatyalpaca yes, autocorrect often doesn't!
If you had to get only one of these 2 (Tamron 18-300 or Sigma 18-50), which one would you get? - Primarily for outdoor shooting in good light conditions
Could you do a review on the Tamron 18-300mm F/3.5-6.3 Di III vs Sony 70-350 lens.
Thank you.
@arthur I am interested to the same review, please could you do it?
Before the SonyA6000, my camera was a canon SX230. A compact with 28-394mm f/3.1-5.9. I still miss having all that focal lengh in one camera, but I just couldn't feel right to go back to a smaller sensor. This lens is a dream come true. It wouldn't be as compact as a compact camera, but way more compact than having to carry the kit lens, a 30mm 1.8 meike and a 135mm vivitar like I do now.
Thanks, A comparison with sony 18-135 plus sony 70-350 will be very appreciated 👍
This lens has my curiosity for Fuji, I like the wide zoom range. Wonder how good the lens stabilization is for video?
Much depends on what Fuji you have. I just got the X-T4, specifically as it has IBIS and works well with the OIS of the lens. However I am not a videographer. I would recommend checking out videos from trusted sources like:
Justin Abbott
th-cam.com/video/BrVCg557YWM/w-d-xo.html
and Jake Sloan:
th-cam.com/video/2dk55irRpZ0/w-d-xo.html
terrrible
Thanks for this review. I'm not going to run out and buy this lens right now, but I'm thinking about getting it. My everyday lens on the a6600 is the Sony 18-135, and I've been very pleased with it in terms of compact size, light weight, and satisfactory performance. This new 18-300mm would be the ideal travel lens for the extra reach. I will now pay attention to how often I am in a situation where I want a longer lens than the 18-135.
I have the sigma 16 and 56 1.4, but I’m looking for long distance one, and I’m between the Sony 18-135 or Tamron 18-300, which one do you thing is a nice one?
Get the 18-300mm, I currently have a fuji 50-230mm and the extra reach at the tele would be nice
Hi,i think that 18-135 is similar performer to 18-300, cost almost the same but tamron gives more reach. I recomend 18-300 no doubt
@@sarwita77 I owned both, sony 18-135 and tamron 18-300. I sold sony and did half a year with the tamron. I was very disapointed with the results in terms of sharpness and it is annoyingly big compared to the sony. I re-bought the sony and sold tamron in the end. The size and quality of sony is more important to me than the longer telephoto range. I added the Sony 70-350 for tele quality and am very satisfied with it. Tamron is versatile but lacks quality.
Keeping it to 620 grams is pretty impressive. Paired with an a6400, the total weight is about one kilogram. For me that still makes it a viable travel lens. I’ll be interesting to see how many they sell and for what use cases. 🤔
As was already mentioned, this lens is probably an alternative not to Sigma 18-50 2.8 or Tamron 17-70 2.8, as it's darker and bigger, but to Sony 70-350. With the same size and apertures we get much more in terms of the focal lengths. I usually walk through the park with my Tamron 11-20 2.8 for the wide-angle shots, Tamron 17-70 2.8 for midrange and Sony 70-350 for taking photos of birds. So I have to change 17-70 with 70-350 really often. This lens seems to replace both of them. Tamron 11-20 2.8 and Tamron 18-300 seem to be a really cool duo for travelling.
Sony 70-350 is far better.
I have had them.
Now I am on Sony 70-200 f4 and Sony 18-105 f4 +50 1.8 - all oss lenses. Use at the a6500 that has Ibis as well - great solution 😁
Have you compared Tamron 18-300 with Sony 70-350? Quality & reach on the long range ? Does the extra 50mm matter especially for wildlife?
@@tanmaysakpalofficial Hi! I have both Tamron 18-300 and Sony 70-350. I almost never use Sony 70-350 because I don't find these extra 50 mm to really matter. I didn't compare these lenses side to side (a good idea for the video, yes), but I think Sony has an edge in stabilization (approx 1 stop). Tamron is a very universal lens and ideal for bright day photography.
@@AlexDunaykin thank you so much for the reply and your insights. Since you have both the lens, I think it'll be a good idea if you can do a detailed comparison between the 2 👍
@@tanmaysakpalofficial Thank you for your question! It inspires me to do videos. I didn't make videos for a long time, but now I see that you and other people in comments are interested in the comparison of Sony 70-350 and Tamron 18-300 and as long as I have these two lenses and I almost never use Sony it is a good idea to make a video about these two lenses and to decide what to do with them. I travel a lot now, but starting at September I plan to teach at school in Budva so I will stay for a long time in one place and be able to upack all my photo\video gear and to make reviews. Thank you for you inspiration again!
Definitely tempted by the 'all in one' prospect and that big focal range, especially for days when I don't want to carry a kit a bag. I have an A6000 and tend to use the Sony E 35mm and the Sony 70-350mm. However, given the overlap between this and the zoom I already have I'm not sure I can warrant the extra expenditure (given that the Sony was quite an investment). Do you have a view on the image quality of this Tamron with the Sony 70-350mm?
Hello! What is the best or not expensive Vnd filter for tamron 18-300mm sony for video. I bought a k&f concept nano-d but when I zoom out to 200-300 mm the video is very noisy. Thank you for your response.
any plans on comparing tamron 18-300 with sony 18-105/18-135 and 70-350?
I didn’t want to wait for B&H to get them in so I found that Procam in Laviona, MI had an “early release” batch (10) so I drove the fifty miles to pick one up. My purchase was at 4PM eastern just before your review was pushed.
Thanks for your review as you nailed my reasons for getting it as an “all-in-one” and the performance in the few short hours I’ve had it look fantastic! My opinion is that if you want perfect shots in multiple situations than multiple lenses would be better, however if you want all-in-one OR you are going on vacation and can only bring ONE lens than this 18-300 is for you.
In closing I’ll say that I have been waiting for this review as I place a high value on your testing/review but, I just couldn’t wait any longer when the opportunity came to pick one up. It all worked out as you confirmed my suspicions of the lens users like me. You are also one of the few English/non-Tamron reviews on TH-cam to date.
How much cost??
@@takrad981 $699 like everywhere else .
Several months ago, one of the professional photographers TH-cam channels did a video on a single lens camera he took on a cruise. In that video, he showed how you can get quality images from a budget all in one lens ( a Tamron lens). We carry two cameras, my a7r3 and her a6600 (she like the size and weight of the a6600 and will not use the larger camera). I am going to see if she will carry the camera and this lens, if so, we will buy on. Weight is everything with lenses. This is a good choice for travel by boat or air.
Can you please compare this with the 70-350 g lens and compare sharpness at the longer ends.
I'm so glad, I choose Sony apsc system, so many cheap and fantastic lens to buy😂💕
Things changed a lot in the last few years.
I've got the Sigma trio for my A6300 plus a newish Tamron 17-70. I'm looking to get a longer focal length zoom and can't decide between this lens (Tamron 18-300mm F3.5-6.3 Di III-A VC VXD) or the Sony E 70-350 mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS. I shoot video and stills (which I often print large) almost almost always on a tripod. Right now in Ontario, the Tamron lens is about $70 less than the Sony. I could sell my Tamron 17-70 i suppose and just have the one Tamron 18-300 or build on top of the 17-70 with the Sony 70-350. I'm just not sure which route I should go.
Thanks for sharing, my quest for affordable telephoto lens is now complete.. i will consider it and will buy soon. Thank you for lovely review
Thank you for this review. I appreciate your low-key presentation and excellent image examples - btw your models are both lovely (your family?). I have just bought a Fuji X-T4, and although I got the FX16-80 lens, I was looking at a one-solution unit that could come with me when travelling. I have checked several reviews and they all seem to be consistent in suggesting that this new Tamron unit is a worthy solution to my requirement - considering the vast zoom range, this unit is quite remarkable and most issues can be sorted easily in PP. Right now, my X-T4 has been stuck in the supply chain in Australia for three weeks (I live in NZ), so while I have got the Tamron unit, I shall have to patiently wait until the rest turns up to see how it performs!
I bought this lens just today. I work on a whale watching boat over the summer and that is what this lens is for. Otherwise I use Sigma 16mm, Samyang 12mm, and 7Artisans 7.5mm to make other videos for this TH-cam channel. Thank you very much for the review.
Which one would you recommend for Sony a6400. Tamron 18-300 or Sony 70-350?
Everyone wants to know this! Please someone compare these two lenses!
I vote for this also!
Looking for a comparasion between Sony 18135 and the Tamron 18300!
I'd love to see a comparison between this and Sony 24-240 FE
How does it stack up in your opinion to the Sony 70-350mm G?
Also wondering this!
Thats a good question. The 70-350 has the same variable aperture shortcomings, but it has a better zoom ring and it feels better made. Optically, this 18-300 is just a touch better. Given the price difference, the Tamron makes a lot of sense.
I am wondering the same, I am looking for a APS-C telescope lens and the Sony 70 - 350 G seems to be the best option, but since this one can go up to 300 mm, maybe it would be a good option. It would be nice to have a comparison ;)
@@ArthurR The Tamron is better optically than the 70-350mm? Well I didnt expect this..
@@geopapa80 Oh my. That’s what I was going to say. Never thought an all in one 18-300 would be able to compete with, let alone beat a Sony G lens. Was thinking about picking the Sony up for a Zoo/birding lens but maybe I’ll have to consider this one.
Hi @Arthur is worth using the Tamron 18-300mm to replace Sony 16-55mm f2.8 + Sony 70-350mm for travel? I do take video from time to time and photos in forest, so it’s low lighting. I can see that I will be saving heaps on weight alone and time from not changing lens. But in practice it seems the sharpness will be hard to achieve in low light, not to mention the wider end is a bit too narrow for landscape.
If you're looking for a cheaper alternative to the Sony 70-350, I'd say buy it. But for an everyday lens, get the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 or the Sigma 18-50 f2.8. Low light is pretty terrible with APS-C, so fast lenses are way more important on this platform than on FF.
Absolutely correct, just yesterday i tried shooting portraits with my D3300 55-200 at 70mm f/4.2, damn i had to keep shutter at 1/30 s ISO 400. I had ring light but it was not sufficient indoors.
@@amitkrupal1234 people seem to forget that 1.5x crop applies to everything. Which means that every stop of light you go down on FF is actually 1.5 stops on APS-C.
@@neogod29 That is not correct. The 1.5x crop does not apply to the light gathering ability of a lens. You use identical settings to achieve proper exposure regardless of sensor size. But, [given the same focal length] an APS-C sensor must be physically positioned at a distance 1.5x further from the subject in order to achieve the same framing as a FF sensor. So, the APS-C sensor will require a focal ratio of f/1.2 to match the depth-of-field presentation of the FF sensor.
@@Yougimpytube I don't know if you own both APS-C and FF cameras, but I do. I can tell you from first hand experience that APS-C cameras DO NOT gather the same amount of light. It's physically impossible. Even the diffent focal length changes the amount of light the camera gathers. The reason they mark everything the same, is to cause less confusion.
Thanks for another awesome lens review @ArthurR :) gonna be a while before i decide on this lens though as I have just got my first ever full manual lens (Newer 35mm f/1.7 that you reviewed 5 years ago!!!!) and it inspired me to purchase it.
Great review.
Would love to see this compared to Sony 70-350m apsc lens. Especially on the telephoto end.
I am going to buy this lens but it won't spend a ton of time on the camera. I have the 17-70 and I think it is just about perfect for an everyday carry lens. I would really miss the 2.8. There are times the added range will come in handy for wildlife and the such.
Trueeeee
70-350 is a better choice when coupled with your 17-70.
@@trym2121 maybe for outdoor, but for indoor 17 is a must have
Thank you for that review. Any chance you could compare the lens to the 18-105 or 18-135? Thanks
This is exactly what I've been wanting for my X-E1. Thanks for the great vid!
Long time viewer, great channel Arthur!
Question (if you have time)...
Do you think this is worth replacing my Sony 70-350?
THX and have a great rest of your week :) - Brett
Would you get this lens over the Sony 70-350mm? I’ve seen you have reviewed both but I’m curious if you would choose it over the Sony. I know this is an old video but not sure if you’re still commenting on this.
Well. As a travel lens this looks great but… the low light issue probably is a dealbreaker. I have the new Tamron 17-70, and paired with the Sony 70-350 on my a6600, it’s an excellent kit. Just that pesky lens swapping to deal with. But the Tamron 17-70 can do better in low light. So there you are. Very good review. THANKS!!!
We rock the same gear. Not just the pesky swapping to have in mind though. Our lenses are considerably sharper. Several reviewers confirmed this. For an unpretentious traveller, however, this lens is heaven.
We are rookies and just got the 11-20mm Tamron and have the 17-70. Thinking the next one would be the Sony 70-350. I wonder how annoying it really will be switching lenses
@@damonluvisi How are you liking your 11-20? I have it and although the weather sealing & f2.8 are great features, I find myself using my 10-18 f4 more often due to the OSS (shooting on A6100 & A6400: no ibis).
@@damonluvisi do you think is a goof combination to have 11-20mm and the 17.70 mm? would you purchase again both?Thanks
@@plgl76 so looks like it’s been a year already, honestly this camera is for my wife and she never uses the 11-20.
Please compare this with the Sony 70-350G!
I am considering this lens. My favourite travel lens for outdoor daytime shots is my old silver Sony 18-200 f3.5 - 6.3 (SEL18200).The Tamron would give me an extra 100mm range (200 mm extra if I use Clear Image Zoom). I mostly only take stills so the video drawbacks you mentioned are not very significant for me. I do like the image quality I get from my old lens though (even compared to my 18-105) so I would not want to move down in that regard. I suppose my other option would be to take the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 lens paired with a Sony 70-350mm zoom. This would have the advantage of having a useable medium zoom lens for indoors and general walkabouts together with an even longer zoom range than using the Tamron 18-300mm. Of course this would also be at a much higher cost and more weight to lug around when sightseeing plus more need to change lenses. Decisions ... decisions .... :-)
Don't. I did and regret. It's not good from 200-300mm.
The 28-200 2.8-5.6 is way better.
I got the Sony 70-200 f4 now and the Sony 18-105 f4. Much better.
I have the Tamron 17 - 70 and Sony 70 - 350. Obviously there was not this option at the time but generally I use each for different situations so having separate lenses is really not a hassle. I wouldn't want the slower speeds either as that limits you to outdoor use only. Not a problem with the long zoom since that is used strictly outside
@@asbjrnhagennielsen6560 I have the 18-105 f4 but use it only for video. The 28-200 focal range does not appeal to me (more suitable for full frame - I shoot APSC ). The 70-200 F4 is out of my price range. I am looking for increased range (greater than 200mm) over what I have now with OSS and at a price within my budget (max 1500 CAD for a lens) and not too heavy to lug around all day when travelling.
@@dgross2009 Thanks. I am thinking that that sounds like a good combination. The 17-70 would be useful inside churches, castles and museums and as a general lens. The 70-350 would give me lots of reach when needed outside to capture architectural details, and distant objects. Having said that, the 18-300 long would cover everything I would need for outdoors so I would only need to switch when inside. Oh well, my travelling is still on hold for now because of the pandemic so I will have some time to think :-)
@@gabithemagyar Consider my setup which is the RX10iv as my all arounder and the a6500 paired with 10-18, 24 Zeiss and 18-105PZ.
Will purchase for travel, replacing 18-200 Sony for a6600. Thorough review!
This is better than sony 18-105 f4? I want to buy a zoom lens but am not sure which one. Excellent videos!!
Although not the greatest optically, the 18-105 is great for video, especially gimbal work since the zoom is internal and doesn’t change the balance of the lens. If that’s your primary focus then it’s the right choice.
I agree, but at the same time the 18-105 is a very dated lens. I'd rather have the Tamron 17-70 or Sigma 18-50 which are both better optically for video and photo. You get f2.8 and improved sharpness but not as much of a zoom range. But the difference in sharpness is huge.
I would get either Sigma 16 + Sigma 18-50, or the Tamron 17-70 not because the Sony 18-105 is not good optically but because of the f2.8 vs f4. The difference in IQ is there but it is nowhere near huge imo.
bought it for conference video production, paired with a6400, this is great lens. my other three a6300 are using sony 18-135. with that kind of setup I'm set for a looong time. image is IMHO a bit better than on 18-135, and that 300mm reach helps a lot
So which one is your favorite? I'm looking for a travel lens and am in doubt between the 18-135 as it's nice and compact on my 5100 and this Tamron 18-300 but I'm afraid it might be too bulky.
@@HighContrast89 for travel 18-135 is better as its super compact, i use 18-135 for travel all the time. 18-300 is really bulky
Just bought a Sony 70-350 mm this summer for a trip. Wish this one had been out then. Another great review.
The Sony 70-350 is much better, and has oss. The oss is really important up beyond 200mm.
I had bought at the same time, and kept the Sony.
i think this completes what in my opinion is, the complete APSC Sony kit: -
1. Samyang/Rokinon 12mm f2 -- vlogging/landscape/astro
2. Sigma 56 f1.4 - portraits
3. Tamron 18-300 - travel
Now all i need is money 😂
Perfect
Good choices but you'll need something fast for indoors. Maybe the viltrox 23mm 1.4? More money...
@@geopapa80 nah..23 mm is too much for my indoor needs...which is why i had to choose the 12mm. if i needed faster, i would have gone sigma 16 1.2. which is both wider and faster than the viltrox you mention. but i really need that 12mm. i also like taking pictures of skylines and building's facade..even 16mm, on an apsc doesn't do justice.
@@efficaciousuave The Sigma lenses (16, 30, and 56) are f1.4, not f1.2!
@@krishnastock corrected. Thanks! printing mistake! 😅
Tamron is on fire! Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I'll be picking one up for sure.
a great vacation lens :O that way I dont have to take a bunch of different lenses. love it
4:26 in the corners the little stains. Looks like your sensor picked up some dust or dirt. Its only visible when shooting with narrow aperture.
I am using Sony's 24 to 240mm and consider buying the Tamron 18 to 300.instead any comment? Are Tamron a better lens?
I havent tested the 24-240mm, but from what ive read its a good lens. Would be an interesting comparo.
Would you recommend this for a walkaround lens for personal shots while hiking and traveling?
Wow, I think I'm going to buy this lens! Super cool lens for bird photography, and exactly in my price range
How about a comparison between this and the SEL18200?
I have an a6000 with the Sony 10-18 f4, the 16-50 kit lens, and the 55-210. I'd like to upgrade, especially to a better kit lens. It's great that there are now many options, but it leaves me confused! Until recently, I thought the Tamron 17-70 would be my next lens, but now the Sigma 18-50 f2.8 is about to be released, and it is much lighter and cheaper than the Tamron 17-70. But then there are are other options, like the Sony 18-105 G lens, or for an even lighter more compact lens there is the Sony 18-135. Now I am even more confused, as this Tamron 18-300 looks very interesting !
One question: for this Tamron 18-300, how is the sharpness and image quality in the 70-300mm range, compared to the Sony 55-210? In other words, if I got this lens to replace both my kit lens and my 55-210, would I be getting better image quality compared to the 55-210?
If sharpness is your main concern, I would look at some Prime lenses for your desired focal lengths.
Sharpness is ok, you should check Dustin Abbot's review
Cómo le hubiesen gustado a los fotógrafos antiguos un zoom así . Probé este lente de un amigo y es muy satisfactorio . Aún cuando se invierta mucho dinero en g master aquellos lentes si que darán mejores resultados pero no tanto como uno cree en comparación con el 18-300. Si al g master de 1 a 10 obtiene 10, al tamron le doy 8,5 lo cual es bastante alto . Si crees que la diferencia la hacen pequeños detalles entonces junta dinero por el g master . Si eres de lo que cree que la diferencia está en fotógrafo entonces anda por el tamron. Yo tengo primes pero recomiendo el tamron
@@sarwita77 y entre este tamron 18 300 y el tamron 17 70 cual se te hace mejor lente?
Thanks for the review. Would you recommend this as a replacement for the sony 18-135 and 55-210? I am using a Sony A6400
I'd also like to know if this is a good replacment for the sony 18-135. I have the sigma 150-600 with MC-11 so this feels like the sweet spot lens to bridge the gap.
@@brandonhimmelreich2379 I went ahead and bought it and have been using it for a few months. It's been my go to lens when I'm heading out in the morning for a walk or nature photography.
@@gungravex1988 so the lens works with the MC-11 Adapter on a A6400?
@@brandonhimmelreich2379 don’t need converter
Arthur, what will be better - tamron 18-300 or sony 70-350 for crop-camera A6400, if i need 300-350 mm?
Just bought this. Will have to see how it does on my A6700 and events.
I think the better compromise is the Sony 18-135mm. It covers you from a full-frame equivalent of 27-200mm which effectively covers 2 of the lenses of the holy trinity (obviously not at F2.8 though... and not quite 24mm) and covers what most people need for an "all in one" zoom. The size and weight are also a really good balance on a crop body. 300mm on a crop body is equivilant of 450mm... I don't think most people need that - especially at F6.3 (which is effectively like shooting at F8 on a full-frame body in terms of FOV, bokeh and noise performance). That would be my advice anyway. Obviously, if you think that will work for you - great! But most people would be better suited with the 18-135.
I'm also perfectly content with my 18-135mm and would prefer not to lug around this much larger and heavier Tamron. I'm actually waiting for the complete opposite, an updated and sharper replacement to Sony's ultra compact 16-50mm, so that I can tuck my Sony aps-c into a large jacket pocket. Tamron, Sigma, Sony, any takers?
@@davidpp33 I stopped buying the original 16-50mm because it breaks to easily. My only suggestion is to do what I have.... Get yourself the 20mm F2.8 pancake lens. It limits your range but gives you good pocketability - and at 35mm is a pretty good focal length to work with most the time.
Not really my cup of tea, but it is cool to see Tamron rounding out their trifecta with the 11-20 2.8, 17-70 2.8, and now this. All at a 67mm filter size. Pretty satisfying.
Personally still freaking out about Sigmas 18-50mm f2.8. Can’t wait for it to ship.
I have the 17-70mm f2.8 and it’s amazing.
What made you go for the Sigma 18-50?
It seems like the optimal tourist lens, my only concern is the size and heft.
620 grams isnt too bad but isn't it front heavy? I would also appreciate a case made exactly for the lens + camera or the benefit of having only a single lens is lost by having to have some non fitting large bag.
I think tourists would be happier with the Sony 18-135mm.
My EDC or close to hand kit in the car is 16-50mm and 55-210mm with close up lens and teleconverter. Seems this lens will be a more practical, improved option whilst keeping weight compromise to an acceptable level.
Can you make a video comparing stabilization for video and photos found in this Tamron lens, with other Sony lenses with OSS?
compare these once on a camera with no IBIS then again compare them with alphas with IBIS. This w=should tell us what is the best gimbal-free stabilization option for Sony apsc users.
I am thinking something like a6600 with this Tamron lens would be excellent for telephoto as at that long focal length every little shake gets magnified so perhaps this Tamron works in that respect better with a6600 IBIS???
Would Love to hear your feedback in case you do make a video on this topic.
Thanks! Have a great Day!
Thanks for the review. I am disappointed that it is not a parfocal and that zooming in and out during video is not smooth but I may still get it exclusively for photography since I don't do a lot of video anyway. I own the e70-350 but I always seem to find myself switching lenses or using two cameras to cover the wide viewing angles.
I am planning on purchasing the Tamron lens. The other reviews were positive for outdoor work. Which is where I will be using it mounted to a Sony a7R IV. It should make up for any grainieness.
Thank you Arthur for your review of this lens. This review was directly linked for me to purchase based on your full and unbiased review; the samples were very helpful. You are right, at this time there isn't an all-in-one like this lens for the price. I am moving on from the Sigma 16mm 1.4 to this lens since the a6000 will be doing more wildlife and nature shots. The Sigma will be missed though. Also, thanks for mentioning the student discount, it is very hard to find this lens at a discount or on sale.
nice video, great pictures,
I am stuck in between of tamron 16-300mm and tamron 18-300mm
one day soon will get one of them anyway
Nice pictures, but you missed one very important item.
Apparently nobody knows one of the most valuable
items of this Tamron 18 - 300 mm: the zoom ratio.
The 16,6 zoom ratio enables the photographer to select
just one person from a group after making the shot of
the whole group.
Or during a photo safary selecting just one animal
besides the second shot of the hirt.
So from an overview to a "close-up"; two different shots
from the the same spot, without moving.
Hi Arthur, love your videos. I need a little help choosing between Tamron 18-300mm or Sigma 18-50mm. I know they are different use cases probably but if I had option to choose just one, what do you suggest based on sharpness and practicality .. I must had, I have a Sigma 16mm separately so this zoom lens doesn’t need to be used in low lights. Thank you
Adding my camera is a6600
Hi, between this lens and Sony 70-350 G lens wich one you recommend?
up for this,
Sony 70-350 combined with tamron 17-70 i super!
Good review.own one did very well for travel ,macro/close up is this lens strong point though not the best but for the weight &size.
I am looking for an upgrade to my XC50-230mmF4.5-6.7 and Fuji recently launched the XF70-300mmF4-5.6 which costs more and does not let in all that much more light at 300mm. I gotta give it to Tamron on this amazing release!
I own the 50-230mm, I can personally see no reason not to replace it with the 18-300 except cost. It will provide better macro, longer reach, WR, higher IQ, almost the same size in camera bag. Will be a perfect compliment to my 23 f2 and 50 f2.
Just bought it--thanks for your review
i would like to see how it compares to sony 18-135 in the same focal range
Wonder why Tamron did not do a mirrorless version of there 18-400 Tamron lens they made for both Canon and Nikon Apsc DSLR camera's
Wish they would make a crazy lens like this for full frame
I was waiting for this review. Thanks!
Do you think this would be the best lens option for trying to capture little league baseball from various viewpoints on an A6700? Mostly stills, maybe some video.
Interesting. For eye autofocus, does the Tamron lens perform worse or the same as a Sony native lens? Assuming all the other settings are the same.
I've used native and Sigma lenses on an A6100, I can say that as a rule of thumb, eye AF will mostly perform better with a native lens
Is this lens better than the older Sony 70-350mm aps-c lens?
This lens or the SONY E 70-350MM F4.5-6.3 for kids soccer game outdoors?
What's the difference?
how is it compared to the 70-350 in the long end?
Looking out for a telephoto lens... This 1 vs Sony 70 - 350mm... Which 1 is suggested ??
Which one you this is better with quality photos, this one or tamron 70-300???
Hi Arthur R. I really enjoy watching your lense review videos. your videos are reallyreally professional.
I have a request. I am trying to choose my lense setup between
1. tamron 18-300mm Single lense setup
2. tamron 17-70 & tamron 70-300mm Double lense setup.
(My camera is sony A6000)
I saw many videos comparing Sony 70-350 vs tamron 70-300
but I have not seen any video comparing tamron's 18-300mm vs tamron's 70-300mm.
can you make a video of comparing them?
I really wanna know how much quality should I be expecting to sacrifice on the quality of longrange shots over the convinience of wide range of local length.
Thankyou.
How is this lens for taking detail photographs of the moon's surface, maybe with Sony Clear Image Zoom?
All I needed to know. Going to order mine soon. Thanks AR🤜🏼
Nice little lens for the money. Definitely can see some flaws but for the money it really is your all in one lens.
I acquired the 18 300 about a week ago and autofocus in daylight is very good but I tried to take a photo of a full moon last night but all I could see through the camera was a very bright white round image yet with the naked eye it was a fairly detailed looking moon. any suggestions
you have to lower the aperture and lower the ISO, or even fasten the shutter speed.
I own Tamron 17-70 f2.8 and Sony 70-350. I don’t think I want to replace those two with this new tamron lens because of the variable aperture..🥲
Yo thats what I have! I’m really happy with it tbh. The 70-350 is super sharp at 350 mm and the 17-70 is the sharpest lens I own.
But I do get irritated at switching out lenses, which is why I’m considering this. The variable aperture isn’t too bad because I never used the 2.8 in low light anyways.
I just need a solid comparison between the 70-350 and the 18-300 at the telephoto side.
Apart from that point your 70-350 is way more sharper at 200mm plus focals.
@@uthmanjimmy1377 I used to carry those two lenses wherever I went but now I leave the 70-350 out because it’s a hassle to switch lenses when I’m shooting outside. Also, I don’t need those long focal length unless I’m in zoo or safari to shoot birds and animals.
@@networm64 I don’t doubt that. What is wondering is how much better is it? If the 70-350 is vastly sharper, I probably won’t be happy with the 18-300 since I got used to the sharpness of the 70-350.
If they are close enough though… I think it a worthy sacrificing my 2 lens combination for a 1 lens solution
@@purplecorde haha I’m the opposite! I keep my 70-350 on my a6500 and use my iPhone for ultrawide shots and video.
I enjoy the unique perspective that the 70-350 gives me.
I use Tamrons 18-400mm option. I love it. Available for canon & Nikon.
I am totally confused, if I have the ZV-E10 and the Sigma 16 1.4, would you purchase the Tamron 17-70 mm or the Tamron 18-300 mm for traveling?
Tamron is producing the 18-400mm for APS-C dSLR cameras too. Sadly there is no a-mount versions of this lens and no chance of using an LA-EA3 adapter on e-mount cameras with this lens.
The autofocus EF metabones and Sigma adapters for e-mount cameras don't offer autofocus.
I hoped of a Tamron e-mount version of 18-400mm.
Instead the 18-300mm version appeared which is much better than the 55-200mm or the 70-350mm lenses by Sony.
The Tamron 18-300mm has an equivalent 35mm focal length range of 27-450mm.
The Sony full frame e-mount 24-240mm lens on APS-C cameras becomes 36-360mm but it is much heavier, larger than the Tamron 18-240.
What would you choose between this and the sony 70-350?
Thinking about it for my Fuji. Would like to see some reviews of the Fuji version but they don’t seem to be about at the moment. :(
This was looking like a compelling (and cheaper) alternative to the Tamron 17-70mm that I have been wanting. I'm glad you highlighted the issues with zooming and focusing in video mode which is my main interest. I'm back on the 17-70mm bandwagon. Also, best of luck with the kitchen remodel at 8:29. I know that headache all too well.
17-70 is a beast. I’ve been using it for video & photo and it’s amazing.
@@DennisMeetsWorld totally i in love with the lens!
Hi sir pls reply for me
Which lens is best for photography and videography
18-105 f4 sony
Or
Tamron 18-300 f 3.5-6.3
I have the Tamron 18 - 200 for my Canon 1200D. I love it.
How this lens vs the Sony 70-350 mm, F4.5-6.3, OSS, APS-C? Which one do you prefer? Tks!
Can you review the Tamron Trinity for full frame? 17-28, 28-75, and 70-180?
Please make a comparison with 70-350mm
It seems many of us want this comparison!