It is. The Tamron is just it's gravestone. Just kidding. Hope for an a6600 with better evf and flippy screen plus SIII color science. That would be dope
I watched almost all the latest reviews of this lens and found yours is the best so far. You covered almost everything we want to know and even the tiny jitters of the background while using this lens to take video not to mention the comparison between this lens and the Sony equivalent. Very informative and full of fun. Respect!
This is great, being 2.8 it allows a crop frame camera to compete with full frame A7C +24-105 f/4 . A comparison would be interesting to see if A7C+24-105 at ISO 1600 compares to A6400+17-70 at ISO 800. I just got in December a Nikon Z5 +24-200 for travel. really happy with it (beautiful viewfinder). I have the Sony 16-55 f2.8, bit image stabilization, close focus and longer range make this an amazing lens. Travel, lifestyle assignments, portraits, fashion. Also this Tamron is better and more competitive than the Sony 16-70 f4. Also wider and more versatile than Sony A7x+ Tamron 28-200.
17-70 f2.8 APS-C is 25.5-105 f4.2 on full frame F2.8 is f2.8 in terms of exposure but on a full frame you'll get less nois and less Dof at F4 and one step higher ISO
I have the sony and was about to regret it until your final comparison. Thanks for that. If I were buying now, it would be a hard decision (I do have a stabilized body a6500). That $500 difference, the VC and the 70mm long end are pretty compelling arguments. Tamron's got a winner. I'm glad that we have some good choices now. Great review!
I watched this today, Oct 19, and Sigma has dropped a competitor in the mix: The Sigma 18-50mm F2.8. Looking forward to your review of the Sigma and possibly a three way comparison with the Tamron 17-70 and Sony 16-50.
This is great. Should give the same performance as a 24-105 on a full frame (which is usually my choice compared to the 24-70 F2.8). I still would go with full frame... I like having both aperture and shutter speed wheels.
I've owned all three. The 18-105 was crap. The 16-70 is very good. But the Tamron 17-70 was is the bomb. You can't beat f2.8 and it is sharper than the 16-70. The only thing I sometimes miss is the 1mm wider focal for the occasional landscape shot but usually I can just back up! 😊
so 2 years later I am just picking this up for my Sony ZV E10, it was a battle between this and the Sigma 18-50mm but I swayed towards the tamron because of the extra focal length and image stabilisation. thanks for all your reviews, they are great... do you think this lens still holds it's own 2years on from this video
Good for you, I sold this lens a few months ago since I bought a full-frame but planning on buying this again for my a6400, and that double-purpose use for my A7IV in crop mode.
if you're moving to full frame sometime in the future, wouldn't it be best to get the tamron 28-75 2.8 instead? I mean you can still use it on aps-c and you have the advantage of not needing to get another lens when you upgrade the body.
The problem is the crop factor. The 28-76mm would work close to 43-115mm on an apsc camera. This lack of wide-angle range can be ok for portraits if you have space to work. However a problem for other situations like landscape, street, events, etc. So is like to put a lot of money in a more versatile lens that will not be versatile in the camera you have on hands.
Also, lenses hold value. You wouldn’t lose much money if you kept this for a few years & then wanted to upgrade (considering you keep it in good condition etc). Can always sell it when the time comes.
At first when I saw the new Tamron I considered replacing my 16-55, but even tho it has better zoom range and stabilization (big deal for A6409 users) I decided to keep my Sony because of the image quality :)
yeah I think you're probably making the right choice. The 16-55 looks like an exceptional lens. I think if I had it, I wouldn't really be considering the Tamron too much either. But as someone who doesn't own either, that little bit of extra reach, VC and the much cheaper price has pretty much sold it for me. If I could get both at the same price, the Sony would probably win me over.
I recently picked up a 6100 (silver/black version which looks very nice) over the holidays to compliment my full frame Sony bodies. I wanted to have something small and compact that I can carry with me on less demanding tasks and trips. This is a workhorse lens that fills a gap in the aps-c lineup at a good price. I’m using my full frame lenses interchangeably but OSS is missing on many of them and no IBIS on the 6100. This is a godsend for darker environments and now on my wishlist. Thanks for the review.
I just bought this lens for my A6400 and can't wait to start shooting video and close up photos! For the price this lens is a beast. I own 2 tamron lenses 1 for sony and 1 for canon and they are amazing for the price. In all honesty the quality is really good and so far no client of mine has had any complaints about their photos. Tamron is a great company with some great prices for the quality of both image and lens. I definitely recommend their products to beginners and pros.
I've moved on from APSC to FF, but if I'm still using an APSC, the Tammy is a no brainer. You won't notice the IQ difference from the Sony F2.8 unless you're doing it side by side. And everything is easily correctable in post. The value you get from the Tammy easily makes it the best lens for Sony APSC. The larger size will be an adjustment but I think it's adaptable as this could be the lens on your camera 90% of the time. I have good experience with the Tammy FF, so I'm confident this is another good one from Tammy.
Got the sony 16-55 2.8, size is just perfect for the a6500, image is really awesome in all range, didnt try tamron but i always search the most minimalism size to travel and the sony one its not as big as tamron. I just use these lens right now, didnt miss other range. If you have the a6500 or a6600 go for the sony one, you dont need ibis on the lens.
Well the Tamron is not as sharp as those prime lenses, but in my opinion absolutely sharp enough. And you have less aperture, so that makes a difference for the bokeh/blurriness. But other than the Sigma lenses you have image stabilisation, wich is nice and you do not have to change the lens every now and then, wich is the biggest advantage of a zoom lens of course. You need to decide, if you really need the very crisp sharpness of the Sigma trio and the aperture of f1.4, or if being versatile without having to carry three lenses around with you is more important. But to answer your question straight: No, you won't get the exact same results. Less aperture and a little bit less sharpness is the price for that versatility.
This video was good, actually made me laugh at a few parts. VIBRATION CONTROL!, The TIP, The only way we would be able to tell is if we watch and subscribe.. cb hahaha.
Hello channel owner, I have watched a few videos on your channel to refer to the lens after watching, I am wondering between the 18-50mm sigma f2.8 lens and between the tamron 17-70 f 2.8. My need is to have a versatile lens that is more about shooting and shooting at a good level. Can the channel owner give me some advice? Thank you.!
Thank you Jason for your great review! I’ve a Sony a6500 and I'm a videomaker but, sometimes I made various shooting photos for the clients. I noticed a difference in term of sharp, Sony 16-55 is better but... as I understand it, there is no reason to buy the Sony 16-55 because the Tamron is definitely the best choise. (I’ve also a Sony 30mm 1.4 for portraits photos). I’d love to know what do you think about it. sorry for my english 😂 🇮🇹
Thanks mate, great video. I was just in search for a comparison and I love your videos about the right settings for the Alphas as well. This is especially great for someone new to this eco system (I was using a Canon EOS 600D with a Tamron 18-70 f2,8 and a Sigma 70-200 f2,8) Unfortunately, it seems that the most of the E-Mount lenses are not providing this great arperture, therefore I'm very intersted in these two glasses
It's interesting to hear how several people have been tripped up with the focus ring and zoom ring between this Tamron and the Sony 16-55G lens when Sony's very own 70-350G lens has the Zoom ring on the outside and the focus ring on the inside like this Tamron. I use the Sony 70-350G lens quite a bit and its Zoom and Focus rings are identical to this Tamron lens which is great news for me, because I get tripped up going from it to the Sony's 55-210 lens which seems to be similar to the 16-55G.
I would rather it be a 16-60 f2.8 if possible. I have the lens and it always seems to be not quit wide enough. A true 24mm ff width seems to be a sweet spot for me.
I was wondering why nobody was talking about this thing , a zoom lens like this at 2.8 that doesn’t cost more than everything in the Sony apsc ecosystem has been what we’ve been asking for for the longest time 🙌🏾
Thanks dude. Great review of this lens. Lack of oss on ff is why I have stayed in apsc, and this lens is top of my list. Btw, what was the ultrawide lens you shot on? Worth it?
Just remember that in a vintage lens line-up there was a Tamron 28-105 f/2.8 for full frames. Back then it wasnt good, but today we certainly do have the technology to make it happen....
Good review! I think it’s the perfect lens for APSC but I’m using my 17-28mm on a crop for the moment. My full frame stuff I have a ton more lenses to work with for wide shots.
I had them both for testing, kept the Tamron, sold the Sigma. My opinion: Sharpness is equally good on both lenses, can't go wrong with either of them. Sigma has a bit smoother Bokeh. Tamron has the better minimum focus distance, meaning you get closer to the subject and can do almost macro photos. Sigma is cheaper and way more compact, it is amazingly small for a zoom lens with that fast aperture. BUT it has no image stabilizer. The Tamron has that vibration control, wich works really well. Sigma has only 18-50 mm while the Tamron gives you 1 more mm in wide angle and 15(!) more mm on the telephoto end. But Tamron is more expensive, larger and heavier. So in the end, what is more important to you? You have to choose between: small, lightweight, smoother bokeh and cheaper, but less zoomrange and no stabilisation (Sigma) vs. more zoomrange, stabilisation, better focal distance, but bigger, heavier and more expensive (Tamron). I went with the Tamron and am happy with it. The only downside to me is size and weight. Sometime i wish it would be smaller. But then i wouldnt have that focal range and stabilisation 🤷♂ Sharpness does not really make a difference on those lenses.
good stuff Jason. Tamron did a great job. the 24-105 zoom range is a great walk around 1 zoom for travel / street and every day shots. f/2.8 constant aperture is great. lenses are expensive. you get what you pay for. For now Ill use my Canon mount Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 lens with my Metabones or other adapters ;) but this looks enticing for my a6500/a6000 setup
Hi Jason Vong, thx for your experience review. If you have to choose between the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 in combination with the Tamron the Tamron 70-180 f2.8. Or the 17-28 f2.8 and the 28-75 f2.8 lens what will be your choice and why? I am lazy and don't want to chance. Do Photo, persons, landscape, buildings and sports. Filming is a great hobby and i want to buy the Sony A6700. Greatz and thank you in foward.
I think this Tamron lens is a steal at $800. I almost pulled the trigger on the Sony 16-50 f2.8, for my A6400. So I guess it’s good that I didn’t. I use the Tamron 24-70 at work on an a7II. I’ll put it on my wishlist.
My favorite lens is my Tamron 28-75/2.8 on my Nikon D80. Used it for portrait and food shoots. I'm tempted to switch to Sony just for the 17-70/2.8. Just waiting for their next APS-C body. Hopefully in DSLR form rather than rangefinder. If Tokina makes their 11-16/2.8 or 11-20/2.8 in E-mount, that would be awesome as well.
Just ordered that lens. Exited to use it. Little surprised for that $ it's not made in Japan. Will be on a6600 which has in body stabilization. Will be my first non Sony lens for that body.
That's why I'm here too. But at the end of the day, both lenses are for different purposes. The 17-70 has more range at the wide-angle and at the tele-range and comes with image stabilization. However, the sigma is significantly more compact, cheaper and lighter which definitely plays a role on the APS-C market (to save weight and money) Nevertheless I think I will chose the Tamron 17-70, while keeping the kit-lens for hiking and stuff like that.
Sooooo... APS-C is Not Dead...? 😆
Oh it’s dead. Tamron just didn’t get the memo about the upcoming a7c
I hope not. I upgraded my a6000 just a little over a year ago to the a6400. And I never get to use it right now.
Yes, this lens will make my a6000 more useful !!! Thanks for your review
It is. The Tamron is just it's gravestone.
Just kidding. Hope for an a6600 with better evf and flippy screen plus SIII color science. That would be dope
Not YET
This paired with the Sony 70-350 will be a travellers dream. All that range in 2 lenses both with 67mm filters.
Great point, that’s killer!
Got my 17 70 today so have this pair
@@paulclarke4571 dem.. great for u
I have this exact set up and just added a Samyang 12mm for my a6400. Next up Sony 200-600 for wildlife and sports.
I watched almost all the latest reviews of this lens and found yours is the best so far. You covered almost everything we want to know and even the tiny jitters of the background while using this lens to take video not to mention the comparison between this lens and the Sony equivalent. Very informative and full of fun. Respect!
Thanks Jeff! Means a lot! Always striving hard to show case as much aspect of the gear as possible while maintaining the fun energy!
@@JasonVongYou're smashing it every time Jason 👌👍😉
I was about to upgrade my a6400 to the a7c and this lens walks in 😁🤣
Me too
I had no intentions of upgrading yet, so finding out about this lens pushed that eventual upgrade back even further lmao.
Best review of the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 i’ve seen so far 😀 makes me not doubt my purchase (pre-order) of it.
enjoy it!
@@JasonVong will do. It ain’t coming til probably end of january of mid february! Hahah.
I got mine on 13. its awesome and feels really good in hand man :)
@@stefanhabbig320 great to hear!!!!! what camera do you use? I have the A6500. Mine is arriving on February 4.
edrixc i got an a6400, fits well! You will have fun and the handling will be better with ur slightly bigger grip :)
This is great, being 2.8 it allows a crop frame camera to compete with full frame A7C +24-105 f/4 . A comparison would be interesting to see if A7C+24-105 at ISO 1600 compares to A6400+17-70 at ISO 800. I just got in December a Nikon Z5 +24-200 for travel. really happy with it (beautiful viewfinder). I have the Sony 16-55 f2.8, bit image stabilization, close focus and longer range make this an amazing lens. Travel, lifestyle assignments, portraits, fashion. Also this Tamron is better and more competitive than the Sony 16-70 f4. Also wider and more versatile than Sony A7x+ Tamron 28-200.
Dang, I want that 17-70 2.8 on my full frame
Same!
@@jeffrendered3564 why not 5.6? Lol bcs bokeh and low light maybe?
But yeah FF 2.8 would probably be huge so u would not want it either:)
17-70 f2.8 APS-C is 25.5-105 f4.2 on full frame
F2.8 is f2.8 in terms of exposure but on a full frame you'll get less nois and less Dof at F4 and one step higher ISO
YOOOO! I was just watching your GoPro 9 videos a few months back! It was incredibly helpful :D
*Brother* - is this lens applicable for full frame camera? Or which lens should buy in f.2.8 in tamron for full frame camera?
Thanks Jason! You’re my go to guy for anything Sony related. I appreciate all the work you put in!
The like and the comment is for Vivian being such a trooper and tolerating your BS!
Time to get Vivian a helmet. 😐
I have the sony and was about to regret it until your final comparison. Thanks for that. If I were buying now, it would be a hard decision (I do have a stabilized body a6500). That $500 difference, the VC and the 70mm long end are pretty compelling arguments. Tamron's got a winner. I'm glad that we have some good choices now. Great review!
I watched this today, Oct 19, and Sigma has dropped a competitor in the mix: The Sigma 18-50mm F2.8.
Looking forward to your review of the Sigma and possibly a three way comparison with the Tamron 17-70 and Sony 16-50.
FINALLY!!!! A good range. good aperture of 2.8 PLUS VC-Stabilisation!!!
Loving the whole vibe of this video! It’s just so much fun to watch 😁
This is great. Should give the same performance as a 24-105 on a full frame (which is usually my choice compared to the 24-70 F2.8). I still would go with full frame... I like having both aperture and shutter speed wheels.
Great production value!
Looks like an ads show lol
So no 6500? That's racist....
Great review! As a fan of zoom lenses, the range on this lens is exceptional! Definitely could be your one lens for run and gun.
Poor Viv glad she is OK. And this is what I have been waiting on from the great Vong
How do you think this compares against the 18-105 f4 G and the Zeiss 16-70 F4?
I cant decide which one to get as well.
this is better imo. better low light and lower apeture.
I've owned all three. The 18-105 was crap. The 16-70 is very good. But the Tamron 17-70 was is the bomb. You can't beat f2.8 and it is sharper than the 16-70. The only thing I sometimes miss is the 1mm wider focal for the occasional landscape shot but usually I can just back up! 😊
so 2 years later I am just picking this up for my Sony ZV E10, it was a battle between this and the Sigma 18-50mm but I swayed towards the tamron because of the extra focal length and image stabilisation.
thanks for all your reviews, they are great...
do you think this lens still holds it's own 2years on from this video
Hello, I am between the same two lenses. How did it go with the tamron? I have zve10 too
Good for you, I sold this lens a few months ago since I bought a full-frame but planning on buying this again for my a6400, and that double-purpose use for my A7IV in crop mode.
if you're moving to full frame sometime in the future, wouldn't it be best to get the tamron 28-75 2.8 instead? I mean you can still use it on aps-c and you have the advantage of not needing to get another lens when you upgrade the body.
The problem is the crop factor. The 28-76mm would work close to 43-115mm on an apsc camera. This lack of wide-angle range can be ok for portraits if you have space to work. However a problem for other situations like landscape, street, events, etc. So is like to put a lot of money in a more versatile lens that will not be versatile in the camera you have on hands.
Also, lenses hold value. You wouldn’t lose much money if you kept this for a few years & then wanted to upgrade (considering you keep it in good condition etc). Can always sell it when the time comes.
I was looking for your review on this Lens. Cool effect of blue arrows! Thank you for creating this video Jason!
thanks for watching!
I’ve been waiting for you to review this lens! Awesome review vid and I cannot wait to get it for my 6600! 😄
thanks for waiting and watching :D
Glad to see you back on TH-cam!
At first when I saw the new Tamron I considered replacing my 16-55, but even tho it has better zoom range and stabilization (big deal for A6409 users) I decided to keep my Sony because of the image quality :)
yeah I think you're probably making the right choice. The 16-55 looks like an exceptional lens. I think if I had it, I wouldn't really be considering the Tamron too much either. But as someone who doesn't own either, that little bit of extra reach, VC and the much cheaper price has pretty much sold it for me. If I could get both at the same price, the Sony would probably win me over.
Watching this video is kind of robbing my wallet 😆 but thank you for the review, will get this lens soon, (soon, soon, soon)
Same here.
yeah, soon!
can you do a comparison between this and the king of aps-c lens the sony 18-105?
your editing skills are getting better!
It looks awesome! The question is tamron 17-70 or sony g 18-105 ?
No question, Tamron for the win. I owned the 18-105 and was disappointed. Not sharp.
I recently picked up a 6100 (silver/black version which looks very nice) over the holidays to compliment my full frame Sony bodies. I wanted to have something small and compact that I can carry with me on less demanding tasks and trips. This is a workhorse lens that fills a gap in the aps-c lineup at a good price.
I’m using my full frame lenses interchangeably but OSS is missing on many of them and no IBIS on the 6100. This is a godsend for darker environments and now on my wishlist. Thanks for the review.
I just bought this lens for my A6400 and can't wait to start shooting video and close up photos! For the price this lens is a beast. I own 2 tamron lenses 1 for sony and 1 for canon and they are amazing for the price. In all honesty the quality is really good and so far no client of mine has had any complaints about their photos. Tamron is a great company with some great prices for the quality of both image and lens. I definitely recommend their products to beginners and pros.
Commented for the hard work Jason did for this video.
Love this new editing style! 😍
Such a beautiful layout!
In India, 18-105 & 16-70 both are $300 & $200 less than Tamron 17-70 f/2.8 which is great for travel or beginner wedding photography
I've been looking forward to your review! So excited to get this lens for my 6100.
production values going up big time. congrats man =)
Awesome video, your channel is full of incredibly helpful videos. Appreciate all the time you put into it!!
I was on the fence about buying this lens but you made it such an obvious choice to buy it, thank you
I've moved on from APSC to FF, but if I'm still using an APSC, the Tammy is a no brainer. You won't notice the IQ difference from the Sony F2.8 unless you're doing it side by side. And everything is easily correctable in post. The value you get from the Tammy easily makes it the best lens for Sony APSC. The larger size will be an adjustment but I think it's adaptable as this could be the lens on your camera 90% of the time. I have good experience with the Tammy FF, so I'm confident this is another good one from Tammy.
Great review and a lot of fun!!! Props to Vivian! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
This video was unexpectedly super funny lol your delivery is very good and I learned a lot.
Got the sony 16-55 2.8, size is just perfect for the a6500, image is really awesome in all range, didnt try tamron but i always search the most minimalism size to travel and the sony one its not as big as tamron. I just use these lens right now, didnt miss other range. If you have the a6500 or a6600 go for the sony one, you dont need ibis on the lens.
This is what apsc needed! Finally an all in one solution!
Can Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 give the same result as 3 separate lenses SIGMA 16mm 1.4 / SIGMA 30mm 1.4 / SIGMA 56mm 1.4? I want to use it for portraits
Well the Tamron is not as sharp as those prime lenses, but in my opinion absolutely sharp enough. And you have less aperture, so that makes a difference for the bokeh/blurriness. But other than the Sigma lenses you have image stabilisation, wich is nice and you do not have to change the lens every now and then, wich is the biggest advantage of a zoom lens of course. You need to decide, if you really need the very crisp sharpness of the Sigma trio and the aperture of f1.4, or if being versatile without having to carry three lenses around with you is more important. But to answer your question straight: No, you won't get the exact same results. Less aperture and a little bit less sharpness is the price for that versatility.
Definitely your best review! Covering all points into details and awesome editing and stuns 😅
thanks for watching!! :D
This video was good, actually made me laugh at a few parts. VIBRATION CONTROL!, The TIP, The only way we would be able to tell is if we watch and subscribe.. cb hahaha.
hahaha! glad you enjoyed it! :D thanks for watching
One of Jason’s best!
This lens has a full frame equivalent of 25.5 - 105 reach because of the 1.5 apsc crop. Great video.
Hello channel owner, I have watched a few videos on your channel to refer to the lens after watching, I am wondering between the 18-50mm sigma f2.8 lens and between the tamron 17-70 f 2.8. My need is to have a versatile lens that is more about shooting and shooting at a good level. Can the channel owner give me some advice? Thank you.!
Thank you Jason for your great review! I’ve a Sony a6500 and I'm a videomaker but, sometimes I made various shooting photos for the clients. I noticed a difference in term of sharp, Sony 16-55 is better but... as I understand it, there is no reason to buy the Sony 16-55 because the Tamron is definitely the best choise. (I’ve also a Sony 30mm 1.4 for portraits photos). I’d love to know what do you think about it. sorry for my english 😂 🇮🇹
Thanks mate, great video. I was just in search for a comparison and I love your videos about the right settings for the Alphas as well.
This is especially great for someone new to this eco system (I was using a Canon EOS 600D with a Tamron 18-70 f2,8 and a Sigma 70-200 f2,8)
Unfortunately, it seems that the most of the E-Mount lenses are not providing this great arperture, therefore I'm very intersted in these two glasses
Thank you for this! Will definitely get the Tamron lens now.
Happy to help!
Dope video! Ur vids are really helping me with making a decision for a new camera/lens!
It's interesting to hear how several people have been tripped up with the focus ring and zoom ring between this Tamron and the Sony 16-55G lens when Sony's very own 70-350G lens has the Zoom ring on the outside and the focus ring on the inside like this Tamron.
I use the Sony 70-350G lens quite a bit and its Zoom and Focus rings are identical to this Tamron lens which is great news for me, because I get tripped up going from it to the Sony's 55-210 lens which seems to be similar to the 16-55G.
I would rather it be a 16-60 f2.8 if possible. I have the lens and it always seems to be not quit wide enough. A true 24mm ff width seems to be a sweet spot for me.
I was wondering why nobody was talking about this thing , a zoom lens like this at 2.8 that doesn’t cost more than everything in the Sony apsc ecosystem has been what we’ve been asking for for the longest time 🙌🏾
there are a few other reviews out already but yeah the buzz seems kinda low on this lens. Hopefully this video will bring up the radar on it!
Bought this lens to pair with my 6400. Good review!
i have 6400 + tamron 17-70mm - Ronin SC can handle this set ???
Thanks dude. Great review of this lens. Lack of oss on ff is why I have stayed in apsc, and this lens is top of my list. Btw, what was the ultrawide lens you shot on? Worth it?
Recieved mine yesterday! My first good lens:D
Glad to hear you’re enjoying it!
jason vong style lens reviews are back!!
Just remember that in a vintage lens line-up there was a Tamron 28-105 f/2.8 for full frames. Back then it wasnt good, but today we certainly do have the technology to make it happen....
Jason!!! Great great video mate. Loved it.
When she fell off and hit the deck... the video like was absolutely deserved *applause*
Great vid as always man!
Damn! A video upload from you makes me so happy. I don't even own any Sony camera. Keep it up!
haha thanks for stopping by!
I love that road from Zion to Bryce, wish I had a nice camera on a gimbal to capture it when I was there.
Deciding on a lens is so hard 😩 but these vids definitely help, so thank you! Just not fully decided for my a6000 quite yet.
Hello, which one did you buy? how did it go?
Got mine last Tuesday!
Perfect for me.
Hey Jason,
Thank you for the new video!
Vivian got the like. Good content on the lens. Wondering if the pulsing effect on the background has gone away with the FX-30 and newer cameras.
Just got this lens and omg can't wait to go to Yosemite national park and get some cinematic vids
Oh no! Poor Vivian! What a great co-host 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻 also the lens sounds great lol
I love your review so much
What is a good starter camera if you want to learn how to take good pictures of nature
Good review! I think it’s the perfect lens for APSC but I’m using my 17-28mm on a crop for the moment. My full frame stuff I have a ton more lenses to work with for wide shots.
great vid! thank you! i feel better about my 16-55g lol
Great review. Thank you for showing our options. Price range is definitely exciting tho.
Just curious, what is the choice between Tamron 17-70 vs Sigma 18-50?
I had them both for testing, kept the Tamron, sold the Sigma. My opinion: Sharpness is equally good on both lenses, can't go wrong with either of them. Sigma has a bit smoother Bokeh. Tamron has the better minimum focus distance, meaning you get closer to the subject and can do almost macro photos. Sigma is cheaper and way more compact, it is amazingly small for a zoom lens with that fast aperture. BUT it has no image stabilizer. The Tamron has that vibration control, wich works really well. Sigma has only 18-50 mm while the Tamron gives you 1 more mm in wide angle and 15(!) more mm on the telephoto end. But Tamron is more expensive, larger and heavier. So in the end, what is more important to you? You have to choose between: small, lightweight, smoother bokeh and cheaper, but less zoomrange and no stabilisation (Sigma) vs. more zoomrange, stabilisation, better focal distance, but bigger, heavier and more expensive (Tamron). I went with the Tamron and am happy with it. The only downside to me is size and weight. Sometime i wish it would be smaller. But then i wouldnt have that focal range and stabilisation 🤷♂ Sharpness does not really make a difference on those lenses.
@@schnubbel76 thank you so much, I chose Sigma because of the size and weight.
You guys are awesome! Loved the review. Thank you.
Great video content. Thank you for the honest and detailed review.
one lens to rule them all...Im absolutely sold
Great review! Same questions:
1) Tamron vs. Sony 18-105
2) Tamron vs. Sigma Trio
- Hybrid shooter that owns both alternatives
good stuff Jason. Tamron did a great job. the 24-105 zoom range is a great walk around 1 zoom for travel / street and every day shots. f/2.8 constant aperture is great. lenses are expensive. you get what you pay for. For now Ill use my Canon mount Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 lens with my Metabones or other adapters ;) but this looks enticing for my a6500/a6000 setup
Tamron for Sony e-mount rocks...glad Vivian is ok
Potatoe Jet is that you? 🧐….lmfao 😂😂😂 .
Great review! Appreciate all of the info!
already have 16-55 F2.8, and I still plan to buy this Tamron 17-70 F2.8
Dude! This video was awesome. Subbed😀
Love the video man. What is the name of the stick you are vlogging with? Subbed!
A6500 + Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 or A7c + Sigma sigma 28-70 f2.8?
Balls, tips and goodness knows what else? Jason is definitely feeling frisky. Is Spring around the corner? :-) Ta for the review.
i plan to get the A6600 whit this tamron 17/70mm and also an adapter for using my canon & sigma glass. tank's for you're work Jason.
Smooth dialogue Mr.Vong 😏
ive taken that exact same frame at zion and this sold me instantly
I’ve watched this video four times already
Hi Jason Vong, thx for your experience review. If you have to choose between the Tamron 17-70 f2.8 in combination with the Tamron the Tamron 70-180 f2.8. Or the 17-28 f2.8 and the 28-75 f2.8 lens what will be your choice and why? I am lazy and don't want to chance. Do Photo, persons, landscape, buildings and sports. Filming is a great hobby and i want to buy the Sony A6700. Greatz and thank you in foward.
Great review - lol not dead at all mate, A6400 FTW!! haha
Will be buying one for my a6400 when the lens becomes available in Australia.
@@robertcudlipp3426 100% I think will be a good option ! Keen to see what price point it will be down under
@@ln5641 Will always be waaay more than in northern America, everything is always so much more expensive!
I think this Tamron lens is a steal at $800.
I almost pulled the trigger on the Sony 16-50 f2.8, for my A6400. So I guess it’s good that I didn’t. I use the Tamron 24-70 at work on an a7II.
I’ll put it on my wishlist.
My favorite lens is my Tamron 28-75/2.8 on my Nikon D80. Used it for portrait and food shoots.
I'm tempted to switch to Sony just for the 17-70/2.8. Just waiting for their next APS-C body. Hopefully in DSLR form rather than rangefinder.
If Tokina makes their 11-16/2.8 or 11-20/2.8 in E-mount, that would be awesome as well.
I’m all about the fruit loops had me dead 💀😂😂😂
Just ordered that lens. Exited to use it. Little surprised for that $ it's not made in Japan. Will be on a6600 which has in body stabilization. Will be my first non Sony lens for that body.
Do you think that this lense is better than sigma 18-50 2.8?
That's why I'm here too. But at the end of the day, both lenses are for different purposes. The 17-70 has more range at the wide-angle and at the tele-range and comes with image stabilization. However, the sigma is significantly more compact, cheaper and lighter which definitely plays a role on the APS-C market (to save weight and money)
Nevertheless I think I will chose the Tamron 17-70, while keeping the kit-lens for hiking and stuff like that.