The 18-105 is a great lens. It’s an older lens but still works great. A lot people don’t know but the 18-105 was a kit lens that came the sony FS5 cinema camera. It also makes for a perfect gimbal lens. And Being able to open your aperture from f/4.0 to f/2.8 is exactly one full stop of light when compared to the tamron. For me having the extra reach of the 18-105 and the internal zooming is great. Also is very well constructed with its metal construction as to compared to the cheap plastic feel of the tamron. Sounds like you’re on the right track using the 18-105 on the fx30 and 17-70 on the a6600 as that would be the best lens to compensate for the older sensor of the a6600. Oh and the the reason why the stabilization is so good with the 18-105 is because when using a sony lens that has IS it talks to the sony camera that has IBIS and they work together giving out the best stabilization
I have the 18-105 F4 and the F4 makes it hard to shoot in low light. And looking at going with the 17-70. I was going to get the 35-150 but folks said it's alot of lens for apsc.
This was the perfect video. I was debating on both and you helped clear so much up. I just subscribed too as I think your experience with everything is invaluable. I look forward to more videos!
Great video dude but I really gotta say that the 18-105 just falls apart so easily. And to be very frank in some scenarios it just looks like iPhone footage. Not only is it F4, it’s F4 on a CROP camera which really becomes a 5 ish. I think wedding videographers and gimbal operators will love it , I hope they make a V2 that is 2.8 at least. Because I agree, the internal zoom and form factor is super attractive
I hear you. It would be cool if they had a f2.8 version. It probably wouldn't have as wide of reach, but I would probably still prefer it due to the better image quality. Let's keep our fingers crossed 🤞
After 11 years on the market, this lens deserves a second version, I would like it to be 2.8, 18-120mm, with the sharpness of a 16-55 G, preserving the non-extendable motorized zoom, and the internal stabilization, with a Completely made of aluminum, adding a diaphragm ring, I think it would be the best-selling lens on Sony cameras for both photo and video.
I agree, but I don't think it would be possible to have a range that large with such a wide apurture. It would make the lens extremely heavy and very wide. At least, I think it would. If it is possible, it would be the greatest lens of all times.
I shot with the 18-105 for years. I had it paired with the a6300 then I upgraded to a7ii, then to the a7iii. The lens stayed on my camera, especially for video. It's perfect for the gimbal and it have ibs too! Then when I got my fs5 I didn't use it as much because of the f4. I got spoiled with the fs5 built in nd filters and other things. So I stopped using the a7iii and the 18-105 why? Because I needed more light because I do alot inside and late night filming. I got rid of it after years and trade a pawn shop for a 85mm 1.4 gm. Crazy right?! I've been looking at the tamron 17-70mm f2.8, now that I've been gifted 1, it's really all I need for my fs5. I'm going to try it on my a7iii tho for I can have that compact set up for when I'm on the road vlogging. Thx ya for the video.
I have a sigma 16mm and want something I can zoom in and with some sort of stabilization.. I’m kinda new to this, is this lense something you would recommend?
@@designer4292 the sigma 16mm is a prime. I've been wanting to get my hands on it as well. But I just didn't come across it soon enough. It's a really good lens and it definitely doesn't loses it value. Idk if you shoot on apsc or full frame. But a 24-70 would be good if you shoot full frame and a 17-70mm would good for apsc. If you dnt have the funds. Then I would recommend you get a 35-70 f3.5mm a vintage lens (which I have as well. Mannn it's definitely a good game changer) . I shoot manually because of the fs5 auto focus is terrible 😂. Idk if you shoot manually when filming but vintage lens will definitely save your pockets. It definitely saved mine 😂
18-105’s internal zoom resets everytime you turn off the camera, it makes it a really annoying lens for streaming or for any situation where you need to turn off camera for some reason, losing your composition
Imagine you've just bought a Sony FX30 and want a zoom lens. Also think that it is in the future plans to buy a full frame camera that delivers photos, to form the kit, since the FX30 doesn't deliver photos so well and has a cropped sensor... it could be a Sony A7IV or even an A7SIII (if my inbox full of jobs and I make a lot of money). So, in lens research for the FX30 you narrow down to two options: 1. the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 apsc lens (the Tamron 28-75mm and the Sigma 18-50mm were left out because they do not offer the range of this one, 17-70mm); 2. The Sigma Art 24-70mm f2.8 full frame lens, even with the FX30 sensor crop. So you reflect (here you are, man, get into character): should I go with the Tamron apsc ($699) or the Sigma full frame ($1,099)?? I think about now (an apsc camera) and save $400 for other equipment (for starting as an audiovisual production company is always necessary!) or I think about the future, when I have a full frame camera, and start with a fucking Sigma Art, which can be used on the A7IV? Not satisfied, you still wonder: does the Sigma Art look (which is beautiful!!!) make up for a difference of $400 for the Tamron lens, which does not have an incredible look, but will deliver a few mm more and is stabilized (the lens from Sigma is not)? These are my (our! hehe) questions. If you have any indications beyond these, let me know. I did a lot of research, but some may have gone unnoticed. Lenses like the Sony 18-105mm and 24-105mm were left out, as they are f4; and Sony GM line lenses for being a simple fortune. Thank you and success with the images!
It depends on the type of work. I lean more towards lighter lenses because I'm carrying stuff all day by myself and mostly shoot on a gimbal or monopod. If I was working off a tripod and having the added range of the Tamron didn't matter as much, I might go with the Sigma especially if I was more of a hybrid shooter
Come one, yes its need basis but this comparison is not at all correct. These 2 lenses are not even in the same league. Tamron is comparable to Sigma Primes when it comes to sharpness along with the lower F stop. Its a no brainer that if one has to chose a lens of the 2 which one it will be. 18-105 is simply pathetic in indoor conditions when its not perfectly lit and even otherwise, its lots softer than the Tamron. BTW, i have both.
@@Silvestian without doubt, go for tamron. There tolerances with gimbal you can play around on with external zoom lens so if gimbal is your only criteria then Sony is fine but it no match for tamron, quality and low light performance wise.
I use the 17-70 tamron for photography (and some run and gun sporadic vertical video) and my Sony 18-105 for Video (studio or specific video gigs) 👌
For daylight videography - 18-105, for low light photography and videography - 17-70
F2.8 is for low-light
The 18-105 is a great lens. It’s an older lens but still works great. A lot people don’t know but the 18-105 was a kit lens that came the sony FS5 cinema camera. It also makes for a perfect gimbal lens. And Being able to open your aperture from f/4.0 to f/2.8 is exactly one full stop of light when compared to the tamron. For me having the extra reach of the 18-105 and the internal zooming is great.
Also is very well constructed with its metal construction as to compared to the cheap plastic feel of the tamron. Sounds like you’re on the right track using the 18-105 on the fx30 and 17-70 on the a6600 as that would be the best lens to compensate for the older sensor of the a6600. Oh and the the reason why the stabilization is so good with the 18-105 is because when using a sony lens that has IS it talks to the sony camera that has IBIS and they work together giving out the best stabilization
Thanks for your comment. I love having it with my gimbal. It works extremely well.
I have the 18-105 F4 and the F4 makes it hard to shoot in low light. And looking at going with the 17-70. I was going to get the 35-150 but folks said it's alot of lens for apsc.
This was the perfect video. I was debating on both and you helped clear so much up. I just subscribed too as I think your experience with everything is invaluable. I look forward to more videos!
I'm very glad to hear that. Thanks so much for watching!
This video makes me miss my 18-105. It's was my first expensive lens 😂. I might have to get another one 😭🤣🤣
Great video dude but I really gotta say that the 18-105 just falls apart so easily. And to be very frank in some scenarios it just looks like iPhone footage. Not only is it F4, it’s F4 on a CROP camera which really becomes a 5 ish.
I think wedding videographers and gimbal operators will love it , I hope they make a V2 that is 2.8 at least. Because I agree, the internal zoom and form factor is super attractive
I hear you. It would be cool if they had a f2.8 version. It probably wouldn't have as wide of reach, but I would probably still prefer it due to the better image quality. Let's keep our fingers crossed 🤞
cool video. interested in the gimbal waist holder would be good for my rs3 and canon r6ii.
I have the Sony 6300 for photos and the Sony FX30 for video, I have the Tamron for low light, I also have the Sony 18-105.
I love my 18-105. The Sony vlog handle works well as a remote control and gives me that multi speed zoom control. 😎
Oh I also just picked up the Tamron. I like the manual zoom better for stills and 2.8 makes a big difference.
Thinking of a6700 for vacation, sports, documentaries and maybe a 23 1.8 sigma. Thoughts?
Seems like a great camera for anything. I wouldn't only buy a prime lens though. You will want to zoom for most things
@@MichaelWTurner good point? 18-105?
After 11 years on the market, this lens deserves a second version, I would like it to be 2.8, 18-120mm, with the sharpness of a 16-55 G, preserving the non-extendable motorized zoom, and the internal stabilization, with a Completely made of aluminum, adding a diaphragm ring, I think it would be the best-selling lens on Sony cameras for both photo and video.
I agree, but I don't think it would be possible to have a range that large with such a wide apurture. It would make the lens extremely heavy and very wide. At least, I think it would. If it is possible, it would be the greatest lens of all times.
I shot with the 18-105 for years. I had it paired with the a6300 then I upgraded to a7ii, then to the a7iii. The lens stayed on my camera, especially for video. It's perfect for the gimbal and it have ibs too! Then when I got my fs5 I didn't use it as much because of the f4. I got spoiled with the fs5 built in nd filters and other things. So I stopped using the a7iii and the 18-105 why? Because I needed more light because I do alot inside and late night filming. I got rid of it after years and trade a pawn shop for a 85mm 1.4 gm. Crazy right?! I've been looking at the tamron 17-70mm f2.8, now that I've been gifted 1, it's really all I need for my fs5. I'm going to try it on my a7iii tho for I can have that compact set up for when I'm on the road vlogging. Thx ya for the video.
I have a sigma 16mm and want something I can zoom in and with some sort of stabilization.. I’m kinda new to this, is this lense something you would recommend?
@@designer4292 the sigma 16mm is a prime. I've been wanting to get my hands on it as well. But I just didn't come across it soon enough. It's a really good lens and it definitely doesn't loses it value. Idk if you shoot on apsc or full frame. But a 24-70 would be good if you shoot full frame and a 17-70mm would good for apsc. If you dnt have the funds. Then I would recommend you get a 35-70 f3.5mm a vintage lens (which I have as well. Mannn it's definitely a good game changer) . I shoot manually because of the fs5 auto focus is terrible 😂. Idk if you shoot manually when filming but vintage lens will definitely save your pockets. It definitely saved mine 😂
Same exact combo, tamron 17-28 and 85 1.4. But also a 35mm 1.4 cine lens, 28 is a bit wide sometimes.
@@fredriksvard2603 how is the 35mm cine lens? I definitely want a 35mm prime cine lens. 17 and 24 are starting to feel to wide for me. Lol
@@summaof96 i love it. But it has some character, takes some adjustments when you want to match it with more "clinical" lenses.
Michael - Thanks for your vids. Do you have a recommendation for the best adapter for Tamron 17-70 2.8 to Canon M50?? Thanks in advance. :)
Unfortunately, that is not possible. There is no sony e- mount to canon m-mount adapter
18-105’s internal zoom resets everytime you turn off the camera, it makes it a really annoying lens for streaming or for any situation where you need to turn off camera for some reason, losing your composition
Could you use the Ronin RS 3 with the Tamron while pulling focus on the camera?
Yes
These lenses on the Sony A74 in crop mode would be great
your gimbal can't do PZ controls? nm, you mentioned it later in the video.
It can, but it isn't smooth as using the thumb toggle. Could just be my gimbal though. Maybe other ones are better
Imagine you've just bought a Sony FX30 and want a zoom lens. Also think that it is in the future plans to buy a full frame camera that delivers photos, to form the kit, since the FX30 doesn't deliver photos so well and has a cropped sensor... it could be a Sony A7IV or even an A7SIII (if my inbox full of jobs and I make a lot of money). So, in lens research for the FX30 you narrow down to two options:
1. the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 apsc lens (the Tamron 28-75mm and the Sigma 18-50mm were left out because they do not offer the range of this one, 17-70mm);
2. The Sigma Art 24-70mm f2.8 full frame lens, even with the FX30 sensor crop.
So you reflect (here you are, man, get into character): should I go with the Tamron apsc ($699) or the Sigma full frame ($1,099)?? I think about now (an apsc camera) and save $400 for other equipment (for starting as an audiovisual production company is always necessary!) or I think about the future, when I have a full frame camera, and start with a fucking Sigma Art, which can be used on the A7IV?
Not satisfied, you still wonder: does the Sigma Art look (which is beautiful!!!) make up for a difference of $400 for the Tamron lens, which does not have an incredible look, but will deliver a few mm more and is stabilized (the lens from Sigma is not)?
These are my (our! hehe) questions. If you have any indications beyond these, let me know. I did a lot of research, but some may have gone unnoticed. Lenses like the Sony 18-105mm and 24-105mm were left out, as they are f4; and Sony GM line lenses for being a simple fortune.
Thank you and success with the images!
It depends on the type of work. I lean more towards lighter lenses because I'm carrying stuff all day by myself and mostly shoot on a gimbal or monopod. If I was working off a tripod and having the added range of the Tamron didn't matter as much, I might go with the Sigma especially if I was more of a hybrid shooter
Come one, yes its need basis but this comparison is not at all correct. These 2 lenses are not even in the same league. Tamron is comparable to Sigma Primes when it comes to sharpness along with the lower F stop. Its a no brainer that if one has to chose a lens of the 2 which one it will be. 18-105 is simply pathetic in indoor conditions when its not perfectly lit and even otherwise, its lots softer than the Tamron. BTW, i have both.
If you need to chose one, it would bw Tamron? With Tamron do you have problems on gimbal??? :-)
@@Silvestian without doubt, go for tamron. There tolerances with gimbal you can play around on with external zoom lens so if gimbal is your only criteria then Sony is fine but it no match for tamron, quality and low light performance wise.