I hear ya, and am now reviewing the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G Lens which is very similar to the 24-50mm, but significantly more zoom range including the wide view Tamron offers.... How much does the f/4 effect the show is what I am trying to figure out how to best illustrate for the review/ comparison..👊
@@Jason_Hermannyeah I tried the f4 today and it seemed to go down to 1000 iso in the well lit store room. I wonder what the iso is like in darker rooms like event lighting. Can just put my lenses on f4 and see for myself sometime lol. Not sure if the f4 is parfocal either
If you are a (non high frame rate) mostly stills shooter, the Tamron would probably do everything you need it to. The image quality is very high. But if you are shooting video, especially for weddings where you absolutely will be doing focus pulls and you don't want your footage to look like you just handed the camera to the bride's three-beers-into-it Uncle Bob, then it is the Sony.
I already own the Tamron and am happy with it but I bought that to replace my Tamron 17-28 as I wanted a wide angle zoom that gave me a more "normal (40-50ish) long end so I didn't have to change lenses as much for walking around purposes. It strikes me that this new Sony lens , starting at 24, is more likely to compete with a standard zoom lens , the 24( or 28) to 70 ( or 75) lens. Then is starts to make sense to me rather than 'competing' with the 20-40..... Oh no, I may have to buy it after all, ha ha! Thanks Jay for getting this comparison video out so quickly!
@@martin9410 Yes, that 20mm is what got me to buy it after being frustrated with the 17 -28 not giving me enough at the long end! The Tamron lens is a good fit on my a7C
I love this. Excellent job showing damn near everything people would be looking for in a comparison. I recently got an A7iv body but never knew there was a difference in lens type as far as APSC vs full frame so I expected my Sigma 16 and Sony 18-105 to work fine on the A7iv, little did I know lol. So now I need a full frame lens and have been looking into the 20-40 for a bit. It might be my first choice. If anyone else has a better suggestion let me know please. I need the wide of the 20mm but also the ability to zoom a little would be great.
The active stabilization does work, but after testing last night it doesn't appear to work as good as the Sony lens at the same focal length... It is an option though to enable though with the Tamron. Perhaps a new Tamron firmware update would help with that, as that is what Sony claims...
“24 is more popular than 20”???!!!! Says who? You can’t make ANY lens WIDER but you can crop. I want a wide angle zoom that’s lightweight, small, sharp, and affordable. I travel, shoot stills, very little video, on an A7C. For me it’s this Tamron v Sony 20-70 f4 (which I’ve hired and loved but it’s bigger physically and is a major hit on my bank balance). Aside from some generalisations, it was useful to see these 2 compared. Looking forward to your comparison of the Tamron to the Sony 20-70.
Says the sales of 24mm primes vs 20mm primes ;) I hear ya though and again the Tamron 20-40mm is a great option! Working on the 20-70mm now and comparing to the Tamron a bit also...
A little different yes, due to the number of aperture blades... 11=Sony vs 9=Tamron so the sun-stars will have more or less rays.... Sorry I did not get an example of that, but I will for the 20-70mm lens I am testing now against the Tamron 20-40mm...
There is no question that the new Sony lens is quite good, however, I think the Tamron wins (at least for me). First, if I want 50mm, all I have to do is just crop a little and I have 50mm which still leaves me a lot of MP. Secondly, I can't make the Sony lens go any wider. I can't adjust it for 20mm, so I'm out of luck. Thirdly, there is a big price difference between the two. I think the Sony is just a bit overpriced. As far as sharpness, the Sony might be a tad sharper, but the Tamron is still very sharp. So in my book, the Tamron is just a much better deal.
I have a Sony 55mm f1.8, Tamron 50-400mm and a Viltrox 16mm F1.8. I got the telephoto for hiking, animals, zoo, etc. If i wanted to go vacation to a new city would it be worth getting a 20-40mm + 55mm + 50-400 or should i just keep the ones i have??
Yeah, it would be very nice to have the 20-40mm for travel in my opinion... It's always a challenge when traveling I find, because you want everything, but it comes at such a cost hauling it all around... I think you have it covered well enough though in all honesty. You have the 16mm for wide angle, the 55mm is awesome for street, food, family photos, and so much more, then you have the awesome telephoto option as well. The versatility of the 20-40mm would be nice for walking around though, don't get me wrong... All the best, Jay
Active stabilization is a digital crop + sensor stabilization so if the lens itself has no stab it will behave the same as far as I know. Dynamic active stab is another level of digital stab that only some Sony cameras and lenses are compatible with...
@@Jason_Hermann Chris Brockhurst did a video on the topic sometime ago, but most recently, Jake Sloan also demonstrated how Sony lenses provide better image stabilization.
For me I would rather have the wider 24mm if I was forced to pick between these two options but it would be a hard decisions, because the extra reach is also really nice to have for portraits and stuff like that. So it would really depend on what else I have in my camera bag?? The extra reach is really nice on the Sigma but 28mm can be tight is "some" situations depending on what your style is and so on. Really tuff call here...
24mm is more popular than 20mm ??? Tamron has 24mm!!! and 20-24mm is extra!!! I personally think 20-40mm range is better, more useful than 24-50mm range
Yeah I totally hear ya and you are not alone. There is no doubt it is a great range to have on a lens and depending on your needs it is better than the 24-50mm range.... And yes to be clear 24mm is a more popular focal length than 20mm as used by photographers in general.... If you look a prime lenses you will notice 24mm, 35mm, 50mm to be in general the most popular prime lenses that sell the most. Now, that does not mean 20mm is not still very popular also as I have the 20mm f/1.8 G Lens myself, so I agree ;) Overall though it's not as popular as 24, 35, & 50mm primes which the Sony lens happens to cover all three... Again, it's really awesome to have so many lenses options depending on your needs, budget, and creative requirements depending on your projects and/or goals... All the best, Jay
Undoubtedly 24mm is more popular than 20mm, and more versatile too. But that goes when you decide between primes. When comes to wide angle zooms, a focal length from 20 to 40 is more versatile than one starting from 24. You can replicate 50mm by cropping from 40. Although by the cost of 24-50 2.8 g, a Tamron 20-40 and a 50 or 85 1.8 can be bought, and that would be a wiser purchasing decisions imo. Great review by the way. I was looking for it.
what nd filter size should i get for the tamron 20-40? i've watched other videos and they said 67ring size creates vignetting. should i get 72 or 77 instead?
I would go with the wider lens if you are doing landscapes and don't need the faster f/2.8 aperture, otherwise I would go with the 20-40mm f/2.8 Lens...
For beginner, Tamron is more suitable and for pro, Sony is better as has better color rendering and pop IMHO. However, price difference is significant between the two lenses. Win win situation IMHO.
Thanks for the review… there are a few others out there that were not overly impressed with the Sony at this price point. I personally prefer 20mm and use that length often… I’d rather have the 20 than 50. Far more noticeable focal “space” available in the 20-24 than the 40-50 length difference. There also tends to be faster and more frequent FW updates on the Tammy’s… great to have great choices! Thanks again.
Oh I sure did and WOW!!! I used it for the close-up B-roll you might have seen in the Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens review, and I used it for some product shots so far. Talk about insane sharpness and killer creamy bokeh rendering! I have tons of more testing to do as I only used it for about 10min total so far. Surprised how long the focus throw is, and the build is top quality! The unit I got is MINT condition👊 Anything you can think of I should test first with this new beast? I'm currently working on the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G Lens review, because I have to send that back really soon... So next week I will be diving into the Voigtlander macro apo-lanthar 65mm f/2 lens, and I also have the TTArt 100mm f/2.8 Bubble lens, and the TTArt 500mm f/6.3 lens to tackle...
@@Jason_Hermann busy man! Glad you like it. It is King of product photos and close b roll. I'd do some portrait work with it as it is excellent there too where most people wouldn't think of it as a portrait lens at f2. It has super smooth fall off to give it that 3d pop. Most lenses the fall off is just BAM with no graduation within the out of focus areas. Makes bokeh look flat and lacking depth. Kinda hard to explain
Hey there, I showed that in the dedicated Review of the 24-50mm lens if you would like to see that here: th-cam.com/video/Ed0XkK3ET9E/w-d-xo.htmlsi=0noQIAVFf2FBHGfY&t=696 The Sony has worse distortion on the wide end for sure with no correction. This video was a comparison of both lenses in the Lab/ studio with the profile correction Enabled as stated in the video. I feel like that is how these lenses will be used by 95% of people in the real world... In camera lens correction seams to be becoming and integral part of the optical design more and more these days, and not just with Sony cameras! All the best, Jay
@Jason_Hermann of course, lens design in now days is more about size and weight of lenses and we can always correct the distortion in lightroom, but smaller and cheaper tamron lens has much better distortion control in all focal lengths, in my opinion for that price point sony can do little bit better job.
Totally fair point and I have seen significant distortion in the Sony lenses on the wide end without correction for a very long time going all the way back to the Sony E 18-105mm f/4 G OSS PZ Lens, which was really bad at 18mm. Also the 16-55mm f/2.8 Is really bad at 16mm and I did not recommend the lens because of that and the really high cost for a crop factor optic... However, in the real world the Sony lenses are auto corrected and it pretty much becomes a non issue for most people, so it just is what it is. Your point is totally valid though and I agree, but the lenses would most likely need to be larger and would certainly cost more as well. Always compromises, which is why it's fantastic we have so many awesome lens options available for the E-Mount system. Viltrox has ben crushing it with there new lenses as well👍
@Jason_Hermann I think it's more marketing decision from the sony side, if you want perfect lens just buy an expencive 24-70 gm II, and 24-50 it's smaller cheaper option with some compromises and issues, I still waiting for tamron 25-50 2.0, very exited to see reviews and comparison. And yes, viltrox completely rocks with last releases, now the turn of LAB versions of 24/35/50/135
I bought and returned the 20-70 f4, sharpness was great, very good IQ for landscape but it didn’t measure for subjects/objects/close focus, I didn’t like the rendering of the out of focus area , just not smooth transition both wide open or stopped down.
Interesting, I'm testing that lens now and finding it quite good overall, with better close-up photography with the .39x magnification @ 70mm= (MFD=9.8" / 25 cm)... @ 20mm you can't get as close as the new Sony 24-50mmm @24mm or the Tamron 20-40mm @ 20mm. I still need to do more testing though for a butter creaminess...
@@Jason_Hermann kids are amazing! Enjoy as much as you can! They are only young for a little while. ( mine just moved out today for the first time lol) Blessings!
I dont use lightroom, so to correct every 24mm shots with the sony is a pain in the jaw, for that price at least make it without distortion, and those who have older camera how they correct that distortion in video? tamron for me all the way
More fair points, thanks for sharing! Most of the photo editing software these days have the profile's built in, and the Tamron also has significant distortion without the profile applied at 20mm, but not as bad as the Sony lens @ 24mm to your point. Also to your point you do need a newer camera to take advantage of the advanced features the new Sony lenses offers and for video distortion correction in camera... All the best, Jay
I'm curious what you do use to process? Anything that competes with LR should also have a lens correction feature. If you are not processing, the Sony cameras correct in camera for JPEG. I mean you have to process RAWs somehow.
Yeah I agree, but I just did not have the time and they are literally so close optically quality wise I don't think there would have been much of a difference to show off other than the focal range which I tried to do in the studio as best I could...
@@Jason_Hermann I still think it makes sense to make side by side comparison in different situations. It seems to me the differences you may notice in two areas. First, the bokeh, which looks smoother from Sony. Second, I think there is some difference in color, which is common between native Sony and Tamron lenses, probably due to different coatings. Sony looks more neutral in color, while Tamron more yellowish/greenish. Nothing you can't fix in post though.
Yeah, that is why I said I agree, but just did not have the time.... If I had more than 5 days with the 24-50mm I would have done a lot more comparisons! Full time job plus kids, ect... I'm currently comparing the Tamron 20-40mm to the Sony 20-70mm f/4 G Lens and will do some outside work as well for sure!
Both can't keep up with keeping constant focus on the quarter so I don't think the huge gap between their AF performance is actually that meaningful. At least in this scenario. I can't help but wonder why you're testing these lenses in that way when they're clearly not meant to do macro and MFD video on quarters in some room somewhere. It still is valid purely as a comparison but pretty much useless in portraying how they would perform in the real world.
The results seamed crystal clear to me and the Sony was way more capable was the point of this specific test, and it did keep up with the quarter far better as you watch the bokeh balls smoothly change in size compared to the choppy harsh performance of the Tamron. Now where this would apply in the real world would be close-up photography and video such as flowers which move in the wind, bees flying around flowers which move quickly and very difficult to track. Also when tracking high speed sports subjects such as skate boarders or BMX rider at a jump park for example. These are all examples of where and how the Sony lens would have a significant advantage. In the real world the hit rate and accuracy in those scenarios would be far better. If you never do anything like that, then it is meaningless to you, but a lot of people looking at these lenses might be using them for those types of purposes. If your just taking landscapes and and regular photography, this most likely does not matter, but if you are recording video or trying to capture high speed subjects, especially at close range, it does matter.
@@Nasrallah-u2k I would recommend watching the review so you can see for yourself, but Yes extremely sharp with great image quality thru out in my opinion.
Thanks for the test. But it is not complete of course, I saw that the Sony has a "big cushion" that is distortion. When shooting video in RAW format it will be a big problem. And Tamron doesn't have such distortion. Besides you kept talking about linear drive of Sony and nothing about Tamron drive, which is also linear like VXD! I wonder what firmware version was installed on the Tamron lens?
I do not shoot raw quality for video nor do I know anybody that does on a mirrorless camera, but yeah that will be a problem with the distortion on the Sony at 24mm in particular if you do that. The lens profile correction is automatically applied when recording video normally like 95% of users which is what I was trying to cover in this video. If you watch my review of the Sony lenses I go over the raw quality distortion a bit more here: th-cam.com/video/Ed0XkK3ET9E/w-d-xo.htmlsi=0noQIAVFf2FBHGfY&t=696 In this video if you watch the section where I compare the AF in video in the lab you can see the difference between the dual linear drives motors vs the single... Tamron firmware at Version 2 Also, as I said in the video, the Tamron is a great option, they make awesome lenses, and it's pretty darn incredible that we have all these lenses to choose from depending on our budget, and specific needs, in your case shooting raw video... All the best, Jay
Canon EF 70-300MM F4-5.6 IS II USM compare to RF-S 18-45 mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Lens Will these fit canon eos r50 and which is better lens for wildlife photography
No the Canon EF lens will not fit unless you use the Canon EF to RF electronic adapter. Your camera has an RF-S Mount so you can take RF and RF lenses natively with no adapter.
FINALLY someone compared these two lenses! God bless you man!
Exactly my thought. Those are such obvious competitors I wonder why nobody was comparing them.
@@ElementaryWatson-123 views I suppose
@@ElementaryWatson-123 Tamron doesn't have the same marketing budget as Sony, which I think is a good thing to keep the cost down.
Clear dub for the Sony. As a tamron owner, I wish the Sony went as wide as 20mm and it would be a no brainer
I hear ya, and am now reviewing the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G Lens which is very similar to the 24-50mm, but significantly more zoom range including the wide view Tamron offers.... How much does the f/4 effect the show is what I am trying to figure out how to best illustrate for the review/ comparison..👊
@@Jason_Hermannyeah I tried the f4 today and it seemed to go down to 1000 iso in the well lit store room. I wonder what the iso is like in darker rooms like event lighting. Can just put my lenses on f4 and see for myself sometime lol. Not sure if the f4 is parfocal either
If you are a (non high frame rate) mostly stills shooter, the Tamron would probably do everything you need it to. The image quality is very high. But if you are shooting video, especially for weddings where you absolutely will be doing focus pulls and you don't want your footage to look like you just handed the camera to the bride's three-beers-into-it Uncle Bob, then it is the Sony.
The ability to use tamron lens utility software to change manual focus to linear is a severely underappreciated feature
Fantastic and detailed as usual, Jason!!
Thanks Mark👊
Wow man I gotta say I love the amount of effort/attention to detail you put into this! New subscriber 👍🏻
Much appreciated!
I already own the Tamron and am happy with it but I bought that to replace my Tamron 17-28 as I wanted a wide angle zoom that gave me a more "normal (40-50ish) long end so I didn't have to change lenses as much for walking around purposes. It strikes me that this new Sony lens , starting at 24, is more likely to compete with a standard zoom lens , the 24( or 28) to 70 ( or 75) lens. Then is starts to make sense to me rather than 'competing' with the 20-40..... Oh no, I may have to buy it after all, ha ha! Thanks Jay for getting this comparison video out so quickly!
for me, I can crop the Tamron just slightly to hit 50mm. But you can't make the Sony lens go any wider. Not to mention the price difference as well.
@@martin9410 Yes, that 20mm is what got me to buy it after being frustrated with the 17 -28 not giving me enough at the long end! The Tamron lens is a good fit on my a7C
I love this. Excellent job showing damn near everything people would be looking for in a comparison. I recently got an A7iv body but never knew there was a difference in lens type as far as APSC vs full frame so I expected my Sigma 16 and Sony 18-105 to work fine on the A7iv, little did I know lol. So now I need a full frame lens and have been looking into the 20-40 for a bit. It might be my first choice.
If anyone else has a better suggestion let me know please. I need the wide of the 20mm but also the ability to zoom a little would be great.
Would have bought Tamron in a heartbeat if it was compatible with active stabilisation and lens breathing compensation on new Sony bodies
The active stabilization does work, but after testing last night it doesn't appear to work as good as the Sony lens at the same focal length... It is an option though to enable though with the Tamron. Perhaps a new Tamron firmware update would help with that, as that is what Sony claims...
“24 is more popular than 20”???!!!! Says who? You can’t make ANY lens WIDER but you can crop. I want a wide angle zoom that’s lightweight, small, sharp, and affordable. I travel, shoot stills, very little video, on an A7C. For me it’s this Tamron v Sony 20-70 f4 (which I’ve hired and loved but it’s bigger physically and is a major hit on my bank balance). Aside from some generalisations, it was useful to see these 2 compared. Looking forward to your comparison of the Tamron to the Sony 20-70.
Says the sales of 24mm primes vs 20mm primes ;) I hear ya though and again the Tamron 20-40mm is a great option! Working on the 20-70mm now and comparing to the Tamron a bit also...
Most smartphones are now 24mm or around, making them the most used focals nowadays.
And for wider... you can stitch 😉
(raise hand)
Curiously ask, regarding shape of sun-stars ; big differences between these two lenses ~ ? Regards and thank you for your time
A little different yes, due to the number of aperture blades... 11=Sony vs 9=Tamron so the sun-stars will have more or less rays.... Sorry I did not get an example of that, but I will for the 20-70mm lens I am testing now against the Tamron 20-40mm...
There is no question that the new Sony lens is quite good, however, I think the Tamron wins (at least for me). First, if I want 50mm, all I have to do is just crop a little and I have 50mm which still leaves me a lot of MP. Secondly, I can't make the Sony lens go any wider. I can't adjust it for 20mm, so I'm out of luck. Thirdly, there is a big price difference between the two. I think the Sony is just a bit overpriced. As far as sharpness, the Sony might be a tad sharper, but the Tamron is still very sharp. So in my book, the Tamron is just a much better deal.
Totally fair points Martin 👊
While the Tamron do have better value, you get a better build and faster focusing for your money on the Sony
I think as always, it comes back to how you're going to use it, your style, and needs.@@ZHethans
agree with you. I also use Tamron 20-40. Sony is doing a great job with the A7IV. Also small and light
@@ZHethans but bigger/heavier and more focus breathing.
Are tamron lenses durable? humidity, dust, rubber ring, lens coating etc
Newer ones are pretty good, but I'm not exactly sure on there weather sealed rating per say...
I sold my tamron 20-40 and pre-ordered the Sony 24-50
how is that going so far?
5 months in how is it going ?
I have a Sony 55mm f1.8, Tamron 50-400mm and a Viltrox 16mm F1.8. I got the telephoto for hiking, animals, zoo, etc. If i wanted to go vacation to a new city would it be worth getting a 20-40mm + 55mm + 50-400 or should i just keep the ones i have??
Yeah, it would be very nice to have the 20-40mm for travel in my opinion... It's always a challenge when traveling I find, because you want everything, but it comes at such a cost hauling it all around... I think you have it covered well enough though in all honesty. You have the 16mm for wide angle, the 55mm is awesome for street, food, family photos, and so much more, then you have the awesome telephoto option as well. The versatility of the 20-40mm would be nice for walking around though, don't get me wrong... All the best, Jay
usually i go with 16-35/4 + 55/1.8
@@budstran2121 I go them very often as well!
Is it true, that Sony-lenses have better active-stabilisation?
Active stabilization is a digital crop + sensor stabilization so if the lens itself has no stab it will behave the same as far as I know. Dynamic active stab is another level of digital stab that only some Sony cameras and lenses are compatible with...
Yes, it’s better on the Sony lenses
@@DavidStella Do you mind sharing the source for that information please?
@@Jason_Hermann Chris Brockhurst did a video on the topic sometime ago, but most recently, Jake Sloan also demonstrated how Sony lenses provide better image stabilization.
@@DavidStella Thanks for the reply and I will check that out as I have not noticed this myself.
Pretty good review. I am pleased with your work, sir. I liked and subbed. Love it!!
sigma 28-70 vs sony 24-50mm Please.
For me I would rather have the wider 24mm if I was forced to pick between these two options but it would be a hard decisions, because the extra reach is also really nice to have for portraits and stuff like that. So it would really depend on what else I have in my camera bag?? The extra reach is really nice on the Sigma but 28mm can be tight is "some" situations depending on what your style is and so on. Really tuff call here...
24mm is more popular than 20mm ??? Tamron has 24mm!!! and 20-24mm is extra!!!
I personally think 20-40mm range is better, more useful than 24-50mm range
Yeah I totally hear ya and you are not alone. There is no doubt it is a great range to have on a lens and depending on your needs it is better than the 24-50mm range.... And yes to be clear 24mm is a more popular focal length than 20mm as used by photographers in general.... If you look a prime lenses you will notice 24mm, 35mm, 50mm to be in general the most popular prime lenses that sell the most. Now, that does not mean 20mm is not still very popular also as I have the 20mm f/1.8 G Lens myself, so I agree ;) Overall though it's not as popular as 24, 35, & 50mm primes which the Sony lens happens to cover all three... Again, it's really awesome to have so many lenses options depending on your needs, budget, and creative requirements depending on your projects and/or goals... All the best, Jay
Undoubtedly 24mm is more popular than 20mm, and more versatile too. But that goes when you decide between primes.
When comes to wide angle zooms, a focal length from 20 to 40 is more versatile than one starting from 24. You can replicate 50mm by cropping from 40.
Although by the cost of 24-50 2.8 g, a Tamron 20-40 and a 50 or 85 1.8 can be bought, and that would be a wiser purchasing decisions imo.
Great review by the way. I was looking for it.
@@PhotographerSen Very fair points and thank you for sharing the comments!
what nd filter size should i get for the tamron 20-40? i've watched other videos and they said 67ring size creates vignetting. should i get 72 or 77 instead?
Yeah, that will help if you go a bit larger and I like the Nisi: geni.us/YpAu2ZP
@@Jason_Hermann is 72mm enough or should i buy the 77?
I am considering buying a wide-angle zoom lens at a reasonable price. Would you recommend Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8 or Tamron 17-50mm f/4?
I would go with the wider lens if you are doing landscapes and don't need the faster f/2.8 aperture, otherwise I would go with the 20-40mm f/2.8 Lens...
For beginner, Tamron is more suitable and for pro, Sony is better as has better color rendering and pop IMHO. However, price difference is significant between the two lenses. Win win situation IMHO.
💯👍
Thanks for the review… there are a few others out there that were not overly impressed with the Sony at this price point. I personally prefer 20mm and use that length often… I’d rather have the 20 than 50. Far more noticeable focal “space” available in the 20-24 than the 40-50 length difference. There also tends to be faster and more frequent FW updates on the Tammy’s… great to have great choices! Thanks again.
Fair points and I totally agree it is awesome to have so many great options available today 👍
Actually I know of two pros that use the Tamron lens and it has worked very well for them. Color rendering can be handled in post.
@@Jason_Hermann I do tend to enjoy the Sony glass colors depending on the lens. Cooler vs. Warmer cast.
Он по качеству как 17-28 ? Tamron ?
Did you get your voigtlander yet?
Oh I sure did and WOW!!! I used it for the close-up B-roll you might have seen in the Sony FE 24-50mm f/2.8 G Lens review, and I used it for some product shots so far. Talk about insane sharpness and killer creamy bokeh rendering! I have tons of more testing to do as I only used it for about 10min total so far. Surprised how long the focus throw is, and the build is top quality! The unit I got is MINT condition👊 Anything you can think of I should test first with this new beast? I'm currently working on the Sony FE 20-70mm f/4 G Lens review, because I have to send that back really soon... So next week I will be diving into the Voigtlander macro apo-lanthar 65mm f/2 lens, and I also have the TTArt 100mm f/2.8 Bubble lens, and the TTArt 500mm f/6.3 lens to tackle...
@@Jason_Hermann busy man! Glad you like it. It is King of product photos and close b roll. I'd do some portrait work with it as it is excellent there too where most people wouldn't think of it as a portrait lens at f2. It has super smooth fall off to give it that 3d pop. Most lenses the fall off is just BAM with no graduation within the out of focus areas. Makes bokeh look flat and lacking depth. Kinda hard to explain
Thanks for the info Nic and I will certainly try some portraits with the kids using various backgrounds @ various distances...👊
Thanks for review, but you didn't show us big difference in wide angle distortion, the distortion is crazy on sony lens specifically on 24mm
Hey there, I showed that in the dedicated Review of the 24-50mm lens if you would like to see that here: th-cam.com/video/Ed0XkK3ET9E/w-d-xo.htmlsi=0noQIAVFf2FBHGfY&t=696 The Sony has worse distortion on the wide end for sure with no correction. This video was a comparison of both lenses in the Lab/ studio with the profile correction Enabled as stated in the video. I feel like that is how these lenses will be used by 95% of people in the real world... In camera lens correction seams to be becoming and integral part of the optical design more and more these days, and not just with Sony cameras! All the best, Jay
@Jason_Hermann of course, lens design in now days is more about size and weight of lenses and we can always correct the distortion in lightroom, but smaller and cheaper tamron lens has much better distortion control in all focal lengths, in my opinion for that price point sony can do little bit better job.
Totally fair point and I have seen significant distortion in the Sony lenses on the wide end without correction for a very long time going all the way back to the Sony E 18-105mm f/4 G OSS PZ Lens, which was really bad at 18mm. Also the 16-55mm f/2.8 Is really bad at 16mm and I did not recommend the lens because of that and the really high cost for a crop factor optic... However, in the real world the Sony lenses are auto corrected and it pretty much becomes a non issue for most people, so it just is what it is. Your point is totally valid though and I agree, but the lenses would most likely need to be larger and would certainly cost more as well. Always compromises, which is why it's fantastic we have so many awesome lens options available for the E-Mount system. Viltrox has ben crushing it with there new lenses as well👍
@Jason_Hermann I think it's more marketing decision from the sony side, if you want perfect lens just buy an expencive 24-70 gm II, and 24-50 it's smaller cheaper option with some compromises and issues, I still waiting for tamron 25-50 2.0, very exited to see reviews and comparison. And yes, viltrox completely rocks with last releases, now the turn of LAB versions of 24/35/50/135
@@Romanbala More good points and we really do live in crazy exciting times!
I bought and returned the 20-70 f4, sharpness was great, very good IQ for landscape but it didn’t measure for subjects/objects/close focus, I didn’t like the rendering of the out of focus area , just not smooth transition both wide open or stopped down.
Interesting, I'm testing that lens now and finding it quite good overall, with better close-up photography with the .39x magnification @ 70mm= (MFD=9.8" / 25 cm)... @ 20mm you can't get as close as the new Sony 24-50mmm @24mm or the Tamron 20-40mm @ 20mm. I still need to do more testing though for a butter creaminess...
If somebody plans to own wide zoom lens such as 16-25 f2.8, then Sony 24-50 would be a more useful lens.
lol I love the kid Ninja crawling through the bokeh in the back ground 🎉
😂 My son Jase....
@@Jason_Hermann kids are amazing! Enjoy as much as you can! They are only young for a little while. ( mine just moved out today for the first time lol) Blessings!
thanks u so so much
I dont use lightroom, so to correct every 24mm shots with the sony is a pain in the jaw, for that price at least make it without distortion, and those who have older camera how they correct that distortion in video? tamron for me all the way
More fair points, thanks for sharing! Most of the photo editing software these days have the profile's built in, and the Tamron also has significant distortion without the profile applied at 20mm, but not as bad as the Sony lens @ 24mm to your point. Also to your point you do need a newer camera to take advantage of the advanced features the new Sony lenses offers and for video distortion correction in camera... All the best, Jay
I'm curious what you do use to process? Anything that competes with LR should also have a lens correction feature. If you are not processing, the Sony cameras correct in camera for JPEG. I mean you have to process RAWs somehow.
@@pennycarlson1943 i never used lightroom..only ps with camera raw before, i dont do weddings
excellent review. pity you didn't take real life pics too with those lenses.
Yeah I agree, but I just did not have the time and they are literally so close optically quality wise I don't think there would have been much of a difference to show off other than the focal range which I tried to do in the studio as best I could...
@@Jason_Hermann I still think it makes sense to make side by side comparison in different situations. It seems to me the differences you may notice in two areas. First, the bokeh, which looks smoother from Sony. Second, I think there is some difference in color, which is common between native Sony and Tamron lenses, probably due to different coatings. Sony looks more neutral in color, while Tamron more yellowish/greenish. Nothing you can't fix in post though.
Yeah, that is why I said I agree, but just did not have the time.... If I had more than 5 days with the 24-50mm I would have done a lot more comparisons! Full time job plus kids, ect... I'm currently comparing the Tamron 20-40mm to the Sony 20-70mm f/4 G Lens and will do some outside work as well for sure!
Both can't keep up with keeping constant focus on the quarter so I don't think the huge gap between their AF performance is actually that meaningful. At least in this scenario.
I can't help but wonder why you're testing these lenses in that way when they're clearly not meant to do macro and MFD video on quarters in some room somewhere. It still is valid purely as a comparison but pretty much useless in portraying how they would perform in the real world.
The results seamed crystal clear to me and the Sony was way more capable was the point of this specific test, and it did keep up with the quarter far better as you watch the bokeh balls smoothly change in size compared to the choppy harsh performance of the Tamron. Now where this would apply in the real world would be close-up photography and video such as flowers which move in the wind, bees flying around flowers which move quickly and very difficult to track. Also when tracking high speed sports subjects such as skate boarders or BMX rider at a jump park for example. These are all examples of where and how the Sony lens would have a significant advantage. In the real world the hit rate and accuracy in those scenarios would be far better. If you never do anything like that, then it is meaningless to you, but a lot of people looking at these lenses might be using them for those types of purposes. If your just taking landscapes and and regular photography, this most likely does not matter, but if you are recording video or trying to capture high speed subjects, especially at close range, it does matter.
Tamron 20-40 is good for wedding photography with a7m4?
I think it's a bit wide angle overall for weddings, but for very large group shots and wide angle inside churches and stuff it would work great.
@@Jason_Hermann ....how is picture quality and sharpness sir?
@@Nasrallah-u2k I would recommend watching the review so you can see for yourself, but Yes extremely sharp with great image quality thru out in my opinion.
@@Jason_Hermann .Tank u sir
Thanks for the test. But it is not complete of course, I saw that the Sony has a "big cushion" that is distortion. When shooting video in RAW format it will be a big problem. And Tamron doesn't have such distortion. Besides you kept talking about linear drive of Sony and nothing about Tamron drive, which is also linear like VXD!
I wonder what firmware version was installed on the Tamron lens?
I do not shoot raw quality for video nor do I know anybody that does on a mirrorless camera, but yeah that will be a problem with the distortion on the Sony at 24mm in particular if you do that. The lens profile correction is automatically applied when recording video normally like 95% of users which is what I was trying to cover in this video. If you watch my review of the Sony lenses I go over the raw quality distortion a bit more here: th-cam.com/video/Ed0XkK3ET9E/w-d-xo.htmlsi=0noQIAVFf2FBHGfY&t=696 In this video if you watch the section where I compare the AF in video in the lab you can see the difference between the dual linear drives motors vs the single... Tamron firmware at Version 2
Also, as I said in the video, the Tamron is a great option, they make awesome lenses, and it's pretty darn incredible that we have all these lenses to choose from depending on our budget, and specific needs, in your case shooting raw video...
All the best, Jay
@@Jason_Hermann 👌 Ok.
Don’t expect Tamron to update firmware because they haven’t updated the lens since release of 2022
Canon EF 70-300MM F4-5.6 IS II USM compare to RF-S 18-45 mm f/4.5-6.3 IS STM Lens
Will these fit canon eos r50 and which is better lens for wildlife photography
No the Canon EF lens will not fit unless you use the Canon EF to RF electronic adapter. Your camera has an RF-S Mount so you can take RF and RF lenses natively with no adapter.
2:50 im not ready for sudden sight, then i realize im not in the horror vids 😂
haha, my son Jase creeping around in the back ;)
Tampon 20-40 is far more useful focal length
Not if you are a birder :)
100%
Да 24 50 намного круче