I don’t get how 1/3 of a stop makes this lens “so dark”? What’s the alternative? Even the 100-400 GM isn’t a stop brighter at 300mm (5x the cost 2.5x the weight).
Hi Chris (& Jordan) I’ve been using a Canon EF 70-300L IS f4-5.6 with metabones passive converter on my A7R3. I bought it used, it’s a wonderful lens, and a very flexible (and uncommon) focal length. It’s much larger & heavier than the Tamron in your review, but brighter, the IS works great with the Sony IBIS, and although I sometimes wish for more reach when shooting wildlife, I’ve managed to get some great footage. And it’s not too big that I can travel with it.
I love the fact that these guys are so famous in Calgary that everywhere they walk they find a DPReview TV sticker on something. Remember us on your way to the hall of fame guys.
I'd like to see a handholding test especially for a lens like this, to get a feeling for how well the IBIS holds up vs lens IS at the well-into-tele range. Doesn't need to be quite as extensive as trying all sorts of shutter speeds, but a handheld clip of each lens at different focal lengths with and without IBIS to give people a feeling of how it might perform, plus a short note on what kind of SS you reckon you can get away with a reasonable hitrate on.
I've got the tamron 70-180 2.8 on an a6000 (so no ibis) and I have been able to shoot even below 1/100 with very very decent results. loving tamron for this lens
@@professionalpotato4764 gah... this makes me miss my panasonics. My G9 allowed me to handhold an old 300 mm F4 prime, 600 mm equivalent without an issue. I really do miss that level of stabilization now that I moved to full frame Sony. 😓
@@thatsreallyamoon I've never handled a Panasonic before, but I can only imagine and dream it's a million times better. Sony's IBIS wasn't that great. I'm using Fuji XT4 now, and it's ok. Good for standing shots, but panning isn't great. I hope I can pick up a G9 one day. It looks like a very fun camera to use.
@@professionalpotato4764 it's pretty good. It has excellent features and 10 bit video. The stabilization is top tier, like Olympus. The only reasons I swapped were I wanted face-tracking autofucs for fast gimbal movements, as well as low light improvements. Sony gave me that, but I left behind a LOT.
If i was you i would simply add the 70-300 to get the best focal range and keeping f2’8 from 28 to 75. 300mm (450mm super 35) is good range. 28-200 is good if you don’t want to change the zoom in harsh conditions.
Several years back I bought the Tamron SP 70-300 for my Canon 7d mk1. Very cheap... yet amazing quality so long as the light was right. I find with all zooms that trying to reach too far with them is always disappointing. Be realistic with its reach and the results are better. 🙂👍
The Sony 70-300 G what’s the first lens I bought when I switched from Nikon to Sony a little over three years ago and let me tell ta, it’s a piece of shit. The much older Nikon version had better consistency and sharpness. @1,200 it’s a ripoff. The Tamron Is very reasonably priced for what it does and will give newcomers and enthusiasts a good affordable option and alternative. Sony should permanently reduce their cost to around $650. It’s an old lens.
Whatever one may think about the Tamron's performance, it is at least close to what a 70-300 used to cost for DSLRs. I never considered the Sony G 70-300 because you could get the Sony G 70-200 F4 for the same price. Not the same range, but at least constant F4.
I rented this lens over the long Christmas weekend, and I thought the photos looked soft. I had trouble getting pictures in focus (even using manual focus some of the time), especially at night. Take enough pictures of something, and it will come out good enough. Before I buy, I would want to rent the comparable Sony lens and the near-comparable Sigma lens.
Beans on Toast??? WTF? That can’t be a thing. I ain’t falling for that one. ... Maybe with some maple sirup ... Eh, I still don’t see how that can be edible. Some alien sh... I gotta look it up.
WHY no mention of the very capable Nikon 70-300 AF-P/VR? It's a fantastic lens and I'm a happy owner. It's the same configuration as the Tamron, and would have made for a much more viable comparison. ;)
I bought this Tamron and so far, it is excellent. I never owned the 70-300mm AF-P (I had the DX version though for the D500). Anyway, there is a pretty significant size and weight advantage going with the Tamron on a Sony plus face and both human and pet eye detect.
Even though I shoot both Sony and Canon one of my favorite lenses was the Canon EF 70-300/4-5.6L IS and I still own it and will adapt it to both Canon RF and Sony FE. Sure it’s heavier but like is faster aperture range.
Thank you so much for this video review on Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 DI III RXD Sony FE im about to buy it and it has pro and cons as you said , but compared to what im going to use it for as an simi rookie amatour , im pretty sure i have good time with this lens :)
Hi, I also use this excellent Tamron telephoto lens with my Z6 II. I would like to know if it is possible to use it in combination with the Nikon Z TC-2.0x teleconverter. Thanks.
i could use some advice! i have a chance to buy a used tsmron 70-300mm. but there's a problem with it sometimes, when you zoom to much it doesn't work, but if you restart the camera then it works again. its just like 40$ but I'd like to know if its worth it anyway and or if you can fix it somehow? maybe its his camera thats malfunctioning? give me some guidance please 🙌
@@niccollsvideo I am currently deciding whether to buy this lens for Sony a7r3. I don’t know if the lens can have a sharp image produced in a 42mp body?
Thinking that something like this lens purchased used with a Sony A6xxx camera body might be a better option than a Panasonic Lumix FZ-1000M2. Price wise pretty similar and would be able to grow further with a mirrorless setup. 🤔
Thank you for the fact and honest opinion from an experience photographer. This lens is not F2.8. What you pay what you get. You are very good to covey the fact to the viewers like us. Keep up the good work.
Just get the tamron canon ef 70-300mm from 7 years ago and mount it to a Sony camera. It has image stabilization and pretty good image quality. You can also get for under $300 used.
This is on sale right now for 499.00 with a 6 year warranty and no adapter needed. I imagine it's better than the Canon from 7 years ago as well. Add in the cost of that adapter and you're still not getting native performance. I think it's worth just going with the new Tamron and you get the size advantage in the end.
2:30 Noob question: Pany has some lenses with "micro-motors" (i.e. 25mm f/1.4) as well as those with linear and stepper motors. What is this and how does it relate to the other two?
You’re comparing apples and pickles. The 100-400 will blow this away by far. The 70 to 300 is an enthusiast beginner lens whereas the 100-400 is more targeted at professionals.
@@airdailyx the sigma is one of the "contemporary" lenses though, not their A grade stuff, so it's a fair query, I believe the Sigma has great stabilization so the low light isn't much of a problem, slow shutters are possible
I'd also be interested in a comparison. Yes, the Sigma is about twice the price and weight of the Tamron, but that's similar to the Sony 70-300 FE (edit: and the 70-350 for Sony APS) and you get 400mm like the Sony 100-400 which costs 2x the Tamron. It's less a comparison "I'd like spec X, which one is best", more "Starting from the Sony 70-300 (edit: or 70-350), I could either pay less or get 400mm. What are the ups and downs of that?".
Definitely want to see this comparison as well! Currently debating between the two lenses. Tamron without the IS + Sony body with IBIS at 300mm vs Sigma with IS + Sony body with IBIS.
The Tamron 70-300mm VC USD was really good. The VC very powerful and with F4-5.6 faster. Can't deny that this lens at that price(i do not think it's any good value) is nothing short of a dissapointment.
Sony own some share of Tamron. The connection doesn't end there. If you see, sony APSC lens of 18-200 and 70-350, you'll see the similarities in design with Tamron's. Conclusion? Sony doesn't let Tamron have a proper advantage like VC against Sony with the cheaper price.
I had that lens in F mount. I now have this lens for FE mount. It's definitely smaller and faster to focus and although I no longer have the 70-300mm VC in F mount, this lens seems sharper especially on the longer end.
I get confused by posted focal lengths when dealing with APS-C lenses. Is this "300mm" the amount of zoom we'd see on a full-frame 300mm lens? Or should this advertised "300mm" be multiplied by a crop factor to produce a full frame equivalent?
Thanks for the review on this lens, Between yourself and Arthur R .. you have convinced me to give this lens a whirl!. Picked it up at a steal for £432 including delivery and hoping it delivers on my Sony A6400.. I have the 55-210 Sony OSS lens so it will be interesting to compare the difference with the 2 lenses (oss to non) ..
Did you get the chance to compare the two? I have the 55-210 and am debating getting the 70-300, to use on an A7C. I mainly use the 55-210 on my A6400, am wondering if an IBIS FF body with a native full-frame lens is a big difference vs 55-210 on A7C in crop mode...
@@rctudose I only have the APS-C Sony A6400 here.. but having compared the 2 lenses in person.. the Tamron for me was a whole new lease of life. I typically do wildlife or landscape photography and i found the tamron needs very little clean up post shoot for it to turn out a very clean decent photo. Will i ditch my 55-210... no.. i find it is still on par with the tamron at the lower end (55-100mm) before the tamron takes over
@@rctudose Arthur and DPReview got the review spot on i reckon.. to each their own opinions on that though.. true its not the best out there.. it is soft at the extremes.. but in the right conditions, in raw.. bit of post.. it cleans up nice. remember light is key.. and you need a bright sunny day for the tamron.. otherwise it is quite flat.
@@oddtechman The 2.8 is too bulky, too expensive and too limited in reach for my use (nature and concert shots far away from the stage, if we ever get back to that). As long as it beats the 55-210, I'll be on the hunt for a good deal on the 70-300. Cheers and thanks!
We try to keep our lens tests at base ISO, so any softness you see in the images is not the result of noise reduction. In practical cases, of course boosting the ISO is not an issue, but it's not ideal for a lens review.
@@thatjordandrake Thank you. I first noticed this tune in Z 50 preview and I immediately fell in love with it. Thank you again and I appreciate your work. I'll surely use it.
How good is it for APSC cameras? is it better than 70-350mm by sony? The reason I'm asking this is I've read using FF lens on APSc camera causes less light, as equivalent aperture size increases by 1.5, is this true?
there's a reason these old 70-300s move for under 100$ used :P I'm actually surprised you didn't mention the 28-200. It's a much better travel lens and much brighter. 300 is cool, but 200 is enough. I think this lens is... DOA :D
Phones are the future for people who don’t give a shit about photography and just like walking around taking pictures. indeed camera manufacturers are selling fewer cameras just like computer manufacturers are selling fewer computers than 20 years ago. But does that mean the industry is dying? Hell no. Mirrorless and computational photography is the future. But that said, look at film photography. That has made a huge significant comeback. People who have a true desire for photography eventually get bored with their phones looking for something more significant. Professional Sporting events, weddings and the like are not going anywhere. Hence there will always be a camera market. And to that end, mirrorless is the new standard.
@M Tech That's much more understandable, I'd agree that the mainstream market for cameras is definitely dying because of smartphones. However, it's gonna be at least a decade until they're gonna be able to fit the capabilities of a current professional grade camera into a smartphone, but even so there's always gonna be a market for actual cameras because they're also constantly improving.
Lack of IS in the lens is one thing I don't understand for a lens like this. I mean if it was a 70-200 MAYBE I'd see that being that a 70-200 is generally faster by 1 stop at least, but for a travel zoom that might be used by the average photographer (or hobbyists, beginner) I think they needed to include IS regardless, even if it meant making the lens $100-$150 more than what it was, as IBIS is only effective up to a point (usually when you start reaching the triple digit FLs does it become significantly less effective, and certainly by about 150-200mm IBIS is almost useless for most things).
Unless you do landscape photography and use a tripod. But yeah, handholding will be challenging. Especially in low light situations. IBIS will help, but it'll be a struggle keeping the ISO down for sure. Denoising software to the rescue.
Was the lens hood necessary on a cloudy day? Lens is already too long and you’re adding to it. Unless you were showing off. ISO up to 1600 is not an issue with new Sony full frame cameras. Some grain adds nice character to the photos. IBIS is amazing so handholding is not a problem down to 1/15 second shutter. Unless you’re overly weak and have shaky hands. This is an awesome, affordable sharp lens. But he is complaining about the lens letting in only a fraction less light than overpriced Sony at telephoto end. What a joke review!
And distortion can probably be fixed with software. At the end, the tamron seems superior to sony, sharper, half price with distortion only at 300mm. And yes with a7c pictures are very good upto 25600 iso and still better than any other camera up to 51200 iso. ( a7c is better than a7siii, nikonz6ii, canon r6 at 51200 iso) and tamron is really lightweight and fit well a7c weight.
I Agree. My sony a7c is very good at high iso and would not have any issue at 6400 iso. I can film even In the dark at 12800 with f2.8 iso without issue. The cap is only for bright day you are right, i would not use it with cloudy day. I think this tamron 70-300 (105-450 super 35 mode) is good to complement 17-28 f2.8 and an all in one or kit range 28-200 or 28-75 f2.8 or 24-105 f4 and stay light.
Chris is just on a whole other level of dad jokes. Out of this world
I don’t get how 1/3 of a stop makes this lens “so dark”? What’s the alternative? Even the 100-400 GM isn’t a stop brighter at 300mm (5x the cost 2.5x the weight).
Agreed. Can't find any alternative with something like f2.8, at least not something affordable.
Please keep up the Noct scale :D
I still can't believe that a Noct weighs roughly the same as four of these Tamrons. WTH were they thinking at Nikon?
Thank you. A really well-made, no nonsense, straight-talking video. Much appreciated.
I have the sony 70300G lens, always my first choice in travel and hiking.
Hi Chris (& Jordan) I’ve been using a Canon EF 70-300L IS f4-5.6 with metabones passive converter on my A7R3. I bought it used, it’s a wonderful lens, and a very flexible (and uncommon) focal length. It’s much larger & heavier than the Tamron in your review, but brighter, the IS works great with the Sony IBIS, and although I sometimes wish for more reach when shooting wildlife, I’ve managed to get some great footage. And it’s not too big that I can travel with it.
I love the fact that these guys are so famous in Calgary that everywhere they walk they find a DPReview TV sticker on something. Remember us on your way to the hall of fame guys.
I'd like to see a handholding test especially for a lens like this, to get a feeling for how well the IBIS holds up vs lens IS at the well-into-tele range. Doesn't need to be quite as extensive as trying all sorts of shutter speeds, but a handheld clip of each lens at different focal lengths with and without IBIS to give people a feeling of how it might perform, plus a short note on what kind of SS you reckon you can get away with a reasonable hitrate on.
I've got the tamron 70-180 2.8 on an a6000 (so no ibis) and I have been able to shoot even below 1/100 with very very decent results. loving tamron for this lens
@@MarioPalomera Sounds a bit far fetched tbh. That's 270mm equivalent. Are you using a tripod or pure handheld?
@@professionalpotato4764 gah... this makes me miss my panasonics. My G9 allowed me to handhold an old 300 mm F4 prime, 600 mm equivalent without an issue. I really do miss that level of stabilization now that I moved to full frame Sony. 😓
@@thatsreallyamoon I've never handled a Panasonic before, but I can only imagine and dream it's a million times better. Sony's IBIS wasn't that great. I'm using Fuji XT4 now, and it's ok. Good for standing shots, but panning isn't great. I hope I can pick up a G9 one day. It looks like a very fun camera to use.
@@professionalpotato4764 it's pretty good. It has excellent features and 10 bit video. The stabilization is top tier, like Olympus. The only reasons I swapped were I wanted face-tracking autofucs for fast gimbal movements, as well as low light improvements. Sony gave me that, but I left behind a LOT.
Owners of a 28-75... does it make sense buying the 70-300.. or selling the 28-75 and getting the 28-200? Thoughts?
Very good question
If i was you i would simply add the 70-300 to get the best focal range and keeping f2’8 from 28 to 75. 300mm (450mm super 35) is good range. 28-200 is good if you don’t want to change the zoom in harsh conditions.
"roughly the weight of an American silver dollar" - am I going crazy or is that statement just not even close to accurate?
loving the tamron 70-180 2.8, please Tamron create a tele-converter even if we have to loose autofocus!
How much more stable is the Sony lens OSS + camera IBIS when compared to the Tamron with only the camera's IBIS?
good question
So good guys! Even this 70-300 looks incredible! Make me so proud to be Canadian. Looking forward visit you one day in Calgary! 👍
Several years back I bought the Tamron SP 70-300 for my Canon 7d mk1. Very cheap... yet amazing quality so long as the light was right. I find with all zooms that trying to reach too far with them is always disappointing. Be realistic with its reach and the results are better. 🙂👍
The weight of an American silver dollar? I wish I had THAT silver dollar!
The Sony 70-300 G what’s the first lens I bought when I switched from Nikon to Sony a little over three years ago and let me tell ta, it’s a piece of shit. The much older Nikon version had better consistency and sharpness. @1,200 it’s a ripoff. The Tamron Is very reasonably priced for what it does and will give newcomers and enthusiasts a good affordable option and alternative.
Sony should permanently reduce their cost to around $650. It’s an old lens.
Whatever one may think about the Tamron's performance, it is at least close to what a 70-300 used to cost for DSLRs. I never considered the Sony G 70-300 because you could get the Sony G 70-200 F4 for the same price. Not the same range, but at least constant F4.
I rented this lens over the long Christmas weekend, and I thought the photos looked soft. I had trouble getting pictures in focus (even using manual focus some of the time), especially at night. Take enough pictures of something, and it will come out good enough. Before I buy, I would want to rent the comparable Sony lens and the near-comparable Sigma lens.
Three British references in the last three weeks. Have you been watching old uk comedies?
Beans on Toast??? WTF? That can’t be a thing. I ain’t falling for that one. ... Maybe with some maple sirup ... Eh, I still don’t see how that can be edible. Some alien sh... I gotta look it up.
greetings from beans on toast land! you guys are too good
lack of IS in this type of lens is really a bummer
been a fan of the dp review web site for years now - just discovered the youtube channel now :)
audio is not synced when I play this video. doesn't match mouth movement.
WOW! I do get some great reward for staying up until 6AM!!!!
WHY no mention of the very capable Nikon 70-300 AF-P/VR? It's a fantastic lens and I'm a happy owner. It's the same configuration as the Tamron, and would have made for a much more viable comparison. ;)
I bought this Tamron and so far, it is excellent. I never owned the 70-300mm AF-P (I had the DX version though for the D500). Anyway, there is a pretty significant size and weight advantage going with the Tamron on a Sony plus face and both human and pet eye detect.
Even though I shoot both Sony and Canon one of my favorite lenses was the Canon EF 70-300/4-5.6L IS and I still own it and will adapt it to both Canon RF and Sony FE. Sure it’s heavier but like is faster aperture range.
UK people love eating chicken pie(pasty), especially the ones made by Greggs
No sarcastic funny intro for this video? IMPOSTERS!
Please review Nikon z6 ii because I'm planning to buy one
Is this a good full frame lens for fashion runway shoots?
Thank you so much for this video review on Tamron 70-300mm f/4.5-6.3 DI III RXD Sony FE
im about to buy it and it has pro and cons as you said , but compared to what im going to use it for
as an simi rookie amatour , im pretty sure i have good time with this lens :)
Where's Jordan for the video features of this lens?
Hi, I also use this excellent Tamron telephoto lens with my Z6 II. I would like to know if it is possible to use it in combination with the Nikon Z TC-2.0x teleconverter. Thanks.
Just got this for a safari we are going to. Should do the job nicely I think. More than enough for what I need.
This might be a great lens for telephoto landscapes.
i could use some advice! i have a chance to buy a used tsmron 70-300mm. but there's a problem with it sometimes, when you zoom to much it doesn't work, but if you restart the camera then it works again. its just like 40$ but I'd like to know if its worth it anyway and or if you can fix it somehow? maybe its his camera thats malfunctioning? give me some guidance please 🙌
Hi Chris:) it’s so nice to hearing Mandarin from you as one of the Chinese fans!!! But Mapo tofu is actually a very common cuisine in China😂
Yes it is! It's also super popular in Japan and one of my personal favorites growing up!
I like 臭豆腐
@@niccollsvideo I am currently deciding whether to buy this lens for Sony a7r3. I don’t know if the lens can have a sharp image produced in a 42mp body?
Can we expect to see the ZX1 on dpreview tv?
So I guess I was different in my DSLR days. My second lens was a 35 1.8.
Thinking that something like this lens purchased used with a Sony A6xxx camera body might be a better option than a Panasonic Lumix FZ-1000M2. Price wise pretty similar and would be able to grow further with a mirrorless setup. 🤔
Am i the only one who have seen the final stealt part? 6:38
at $549 i’m definitely interested even if it’s a just as a secondary lens i’d take out on weekend
Thank you for the fact and honest opinion from an experience photographer. This lens is not F2.8. What you pay what you get. You are very good to covey the fact to the viewers like us. Keep up the good work.
Mapo tofu is insanely good
Crank the ISO & clean it up with $50 software... BTW, the Tammy contrast beats the sony to death....
Just get the tamron canon ef 70-300mm from 7 years ago and mount it to a Sony camera. It has image stabilization and pretty good image quality. You can also get for under $300 used.
This is on sale right now for 499.00 with a 6 year warranty and no adapter needed. I imagine it's better than the Canon from 7 years ago as well. Add in the cost of that adapter and you're still not getting native performance. I think it's worth just going with the new Tamron and you get the size advantage in the end.
@@thinkinginpictures4071 yeah I’m stupid lol
Check you and your HD280 Pros' Jordan. Analytic. Nice.
I can never get enough of the conversion of product weights into Noct equivalents.
its like mac and chesse!!
Thank you
Can't wait for their 100-400
It would be nice of you review the new Tamron 18-300mm f/3.5-6.3 di iii-a vc vxd fuji x mount lense
Come on Tamron - bring this lens to Z mount!
The Nikon AF-P 70-300 FX is better even if you'll need to adapt it
Jordan, buddy, be honest. Is the sequence @0:47 a hidden cry for help? Is Chris beating you again?
Thank you for this review? It certainly helps with making a decision.
Thank god christ and jordan based in Canada.
2:30 Noob question: Pany has some lenses with "micro-motors" (i.e. 25mm f/1.4) as well as those with linear and stepper motors. What is this and how does it relate to the other two?
will this be compatible with CANON M50? thanks mate
Would love to see a comparison between this and the Sigma 100-400
You’re comparing apples and pickles. The 100-400 will blow this away by far. The 70 to 300 is an enthusiast beginner lens whereas the 100-400 is more targeted at professionals.
@@airdailyx the sigma is one of the "contemporary" lenses though, not their A grade stuff, so it's a fair query, I believe the Sigma has great stabilization so the low light isn't much of a problem, slow shutters are possible
I'd also be interested in a comparison. Yes, the Sigma is about twice the price and weight of the Tamron, but that's similar to the Sony 70-300 FE (edit: and the 70-350 for Sony APS) and you get 400mm like the Sony 100-400 which costs 2x the Tamron.
It's less a comparison "I'd like spec X, which one is best", more "Starting from the Sony 70-300 (edit: or 70-350), I could either pay less or get 400mm. What are the ups and downs of that?".
Definitely want to see this comparison as well! Currently debating between the two lenses. Tamron without the IS + Sony body with IBIS at 300mm vs Sigma with IS + Sony body with IBIS.
@@jochenkraus7016 you get 450mm in super 35 mode with the tamron 70-300 and it is super lightweight (very important)
But.. you kinda did make the joke by not making it. Touché.
Is this lens compatible with Sony tele converters!!
what lens was used to shoot this video, especially at 1:10 and 2:20 for example.
1/4 Noct ? so they are actually using this unit of measurement now :D
You're awesome! Thanks for this
The Tamron 70-300mm VC USD was really good. The VC very powerful and with F4-5.6 faster.
Can't deny that this lens at that price(i do not think it's any good value) is nothing short of a dissapointment.
Sony own some share of Tamron. The connection doesn't end there. If you see, sony APSC lens of 18-200 and 70-350, you'll see the similarities in design with Tamron's.
Conclusion? Sony doesn't let Tamron have a proper advantage like VC against Sony with the cheaper price.
@@trym2121 Yeah seems like it, also they won't allow Tamron to knock it out of the park for the other mounts.
I had that lens in F mount. I now have this lens for FE mount. It's definitely smaller and faster to focus and although I no longer have the 70-300mm VC in F mount, this lens seems sharper especially on the longer end.
Does this lens have any teleconverter compatibility?
every time you bring out the a7c its gray outside
I get confused by posted focal lengths when dealing with APS-C lenses. Is this "300mm" the amount of zoom we'd see on a full-frame 300mm lens?
Or should this advertised "300mm" be multiplied by a crop factor to produce a full frame equivalent?
Yes, they are adverstised as is for the sensor size. Meaning this lens would be a 27-450mm in FF.
Thanks for the review on this lens, Between yourself and Arthur R .. you have convinced me to give this lens a whirl!. Picked it up at a steal for £432 including delivery and hoping it delivers on my Sony A6400.. I have the 55-210 Sony OSS lens so it will be interesting to compare the difference with the 2 lenses (oss to non) ..
Did you get the chance to compare the two? I have the 55-210 and am debating getting the 70-300, to use on an A7C. I mainly use the 55-210 on my A6400, am wondering if an IBIS FF body with a native full-frame lens is a big difference vs 55-210 on A7C in crop mode...
@@rctudose I only have the APS-C Sony A6400 here.. but having compared the 2 lenses in person.. the Tamron for me was a whole new lease of life. I typically do wildlife or landscape photography and i found the tamron needs very little clean up post shoot for it to turn out a very clean decent photo. Will i ditch my 55-210... no.. i find it is still on par with the tamron at the lower end (55-100mm) before the tamron takes over
@@oddtechman Thanks for the reply, sounds like I'll have to make the jump too, then :)
@@rctudose Arthur and DPReview got the review spot on i reckon.. to each their own opinions on that though.. true its not the best out there.. it is soft at the extremes.. but in the right conditions, in raw.. bit of post.. it cleans up nice. remember light is key.. and you need a bright sunny day for the tamron.. otherwise it is quite flat.
@@oddtechman The 2.8 is too bulky, too expensive and too limited in reach for my use (nature and concert shots far away from the stage, if we ever get back to that). As long as it beats the 55-210, I'll be on the hunt for a good deal on the 70-300. Cheers and thanks!
Great review - thank you! Subscribed!
Solid review, thanks a bunch!
Got mine for 109 pounds
Beans on toast 🇬🇧
I never get tired of the Noct-Reverence.
love the S1H video. its just tops
He had to crank the ISO up to 500 on a full-frame camera. How awful! 🙄
What, was there one speck of noise in the whole image?
We try to keep our lens tests at base ISO, so any softness you see in the images is not the result of noise reduction. In practical cases, of course boosting the ISO is not an issue, but it's not ideal for a lens review.
@@thatjordandrake You're always the voice of reason.
Satay...my comfort food.
日本語の翻訳つけろ！
Awesome. Looks great!
Disappointing, and too slow. Tamron should & could do better!
What’s the name of that song playing from around 0:30 to 1:00? Can’t find it on Beatsuite. Thank you
It's called 'Building Bridges'. We use it quite a bit.
@@thatjordandrake Thank you. I first noticed this tune in Z 50 preview and I immediately fell in love with it. Thank you again and I appreciate your work. I'll surely use it.
great review as usual
NICE! thanks
How good is it for APSC cameras? is it better than 70-350mm by sony? The reason I'm asking this is I've read using FF lens on APSc camera causes less light, as equivalent aperture size increases by 1.5, is this true?
enough of the NOCT joke. Stale.
Nice.
engsub please!
there's a reason these old 70-300s move for under 100$ used :P I'm actually surprised you didn't mention the 28-200. It's a much better travel lens and much brighter. 300 is cool, but 200 is enough. I think this lens is... DOA :D
@M Tech I think DSLRs are dead. However, MILC or not, 70-300s suck on both systems :D
@M Tech You're out of your mind if you think Mirrorless isn't the future, very very few companies are still even making DSLRs.
Phones are the future for people who don’t give a shit about photography and just like walking around taking pictures. indeed camera manufacturers are selling fewer cameras just like computer manufacturers are selling fewer computers than 20 years ago.
But does that mean the industry is dying? Hell no. Mirrorless and computational photography is the future. But that said, look at film photography. That has made a huge significant comeback.
People who have a true desire for photography eventually get bored with their phones looking for something more significant.
Professional Sporting events, weddings and the like are not going anywhere. Hence there will always be a camera market. And to that end, mirrorless is the new standard.
what is almost dead is the MAINSTREAM photography market. Phones have taken over. The professional market is still alive and isn't going anywhere.
@M Tech That's much more understandable, I'd agree that the mainstream market for cameras is definitely dying because of smartphones. However, it's gonna be at least a decade until they're gonna be able to fit the capabilities of a current professional grade camera into a smartphone, but even so there's always gonna be a market for actual cameras because they're also constantly improving.
Sony has twice if not more features and quality than Tamron, so twice the price is justified. I would rather pay an extra 500-600 to get a Sony lens.
To this day I use my 70-300 ED 4.5-5.6 nikkor VR2, it is an extremely sharp, fast lens and the main one, light as a feather.
what the hell does 1/4 of a noct tell anyone?
Lack of IS in the lens is one thing I don't understand for a lens like this. I mean if it was a 70-200 MAYBE I'd see that being that a 70-200 is generally faster by 1 stop at least, but for a travel zoom that might be used by the average photographer (or hobbyists, beginner) I think they needed to include IS regardless, even if it meant making the lens $100-$150 more than what it was, as IBIS is only effective up to a point (usually when you start reaching the triple digit FLs does it become significantly less effective, and certainly by about 150-200mm IBIS is almost useless for most things).
Unless you do landscape photography and use a tripod. But yeah, handholding will be challenging. Especially in low light situations. IBIS will help, but it'll be a struggle keeping the ISO down for sure. Denoising software to the rescue.
How compared to Sony 70-350?
Why not the Sigma 100-400 FE?
thank you for your video
f 6.3 wooow thats a landscape f stop 😂 pitty you cant use it with 64 or 100 ISO , sorry guys iv got 180 - 550mm lenses faster .
Thoroughly unprofessional review; crass jokes; useless conclusions. Watch Jared Polen's review of this lens instead.
Maybe next time use a real, manly camera and not such a small, girly looking thing that looks like it disappears in his hands. 5D IV?
Was the lens hood necessary on a cloudy day? Lens is already too long and you’re adding to it. Unless you were showing off.
ISO up to 1600 is not an issue with new Sony full frame cameras. Some grain adds nice character to the photos.
IBIS is amazing so handholding is not a problem down to 1/15 second shutter. Unless you’re overly weak and have shaky hands.
This is an awesome, affordable sharp lens. But he is complaining about the lens letting in only a fraction less light than overpriced Sony at telephoto end. What a joke review!
And distortion can probably be fixed with software. At the end, the tamron seems superior to sony, sharper, half price with distortion only at 300mm. And yes with a7c pictures are very good upto 25600 iso and still better than any other camera up to 51200 iso. ( a7c is better than a7siii, nikonz6ii, canon r6 at 51200 iso) and tamron is really lightweight and fit well a7c weight.
I Agree. My sony a7c is very good at high iso and would not have any issue at 6400 iso. I can film even In the dark at 12800 with f2.8 iso without issue. The cap is only for bright day you are right, i would not use it with cloudy day. I think this tamron 70-300 (105-450 super 35 mode) is good to complement 17-28 f2.8 and an all in one or kit range 28-200 or 28-75 f2.8 or 24-105 f4 and stay light.