You forgot to mention about the autofocus speed (Sony's linear motor vs Tamron's stepping). I haven't tested the Tamron yet but have seen reviews showing a slower autofocus for Tamron which ends up with fewer keepers when burst shooting. Any opinion?
The Sony 70-300 is better in my view. OSS in lens paired with IBIS makes a difference, particularly with hand held shots at long focal lengths. The better close focusing will give better compression for macro style shots giving more versatility as well.
have you had some experience with it on fast-moving objects? if so, how does the AF perform? im looking at it for motorsports/cars on track with a A7III
Big thanks for your awesome and unique reviews. Your are the most reliable source for lens review for so many people. Still waiting for you to check out the fuji 70-300 :)
I have a methodology question: when you compare corner sharpness, do you also check more than the one corner you compare in the videos? As you know, decentering effects can be large, especially in zooms. Thanks, very informative!
I’ve just ordered one as I need a budget telephoto and can’t stretch to the Sony. With this focal length there are not many options but the Tamron seems to be great. Half the price, great pictures. No image stabilisation but then my camera does have it so it should be perfectly useable. I remember shooting at 300mm with nothing on either camera or lens to stabilise and the images were awful! This should be fun! But for £300 on the second hand market, can’t complain! :) great comparison! :)
First of all I love your videos. And as a retired pastor, I appreciate your other travel videos to the Holy Land as well. Wanted to throw in an odd ball suggestion for those who have extremely limited budgets and can't afford all the new lenses. My sole camera is a Sony a7rii still works well for me after several years of use. And I have adapted many fine old Canon lenses to my camera using an Sigma MC-11 adapter. My lenses made for the FE mount are the Sony 50mm f2.5g, Sony 85mm 1.8, and the cheap Tamron 20mm f2.8 lens. But my Canon arsenal is a truly wonderful old Canon 20-35mm F2.8L lens, The Canon 135 f2 lens, and a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 (built for EF). Now to my main point. The Tamron 70-300 is a great lens as is the 28-200 that I used briefly. But since I couldn't justify the cost since I would only use such a lens a few times a year, I went a different direction. I found an old Canon sleeper lens, the Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM Lens. I found it extremely sharp. Plus, it stops on the long end at 5.6 instead of 6.3. Also I noticed that I can go to about 130mm and still be at F4.5. I bought the MC-11 adapter last year, used for 100 dollars and the lens on eBay for 50 dollars. The Canon 100-300 was so-so on a 35mm camera, but it definitely has new life on a 42mp digital mirrorless camera. Just throwing that in for those on a budget and still want to take nice, sharp images. Even though I can't afford most of the lenses that you evaluate (being on a very tight fixed income), I still love each and every video, just because I like learning about the different lenses, and frankly, I just like your style, your approach, your voice and the way you edit your videos. I always look forward to each one. God bless!
Tamron zooms and Samyang AF primes are what put Sony on top of full frame mirrorless world for me. The price to performance ratio with these is amazing.
Thank you so much for such a wonderful and helpful video. I'm seriously considering buying the Tamron 70-300 to use on my Sony A7riv. However, I already own the Sony 70-350 for APSC. I understand that I can use the Sony 70-350 on the A7Riv in APSC mode, but that I would be limited to a max resolution of 24MP. Is it possible to use the Sony lens in FF mode and retain 61MP resolution but only for the center part of the image? What would be any other advantages or disadvantages of using the Sony lens instead of the Tamron? Should I sell the Sony lens and buy the Tamron?
Tamron lenses are fantastic. I have the full frame 28-75 and it is brilliant. I also recently purchased the 17-70 aps-c lens and it's great as well. Save your money and buy Tamron lenses for half the price.
at longer focal lengths ie. 300mm, stablization is very important, unless you want to lug around a tripod to go with the Tamron. the Sony IBIS is not that great and needs help from in camera stablization especially for longer focal lengths.
@@veritas932 That's arguably untrue. Stabilization is extremely helpful, but not necessary. With the correct settings you can nail 300mm handheld shots with the Tamron just fine. You also don't need a Tripod, you can opt for a Monopod instead. But using either dramatically helps. The Tamron is extremely useful and at an amazing value with CRAZY amounts of sharpness.
Hi, the weight, size, price and full frame comparability of this lens make it a tempting option to accompany an APSC camera - but I can’t find a lot of information online about this. I would love to hear you views on how well the Tamron lens fares on an APSC camera such as the a6500 or a6600. Is the field curvature still an issue? How does it compare to the well reviewed but more expensive Sony 70-350? Also how much difference does the lack of stabilisation make if the camera it is used with has IBIS? Thanks
@They Caged Non how do you find it? I have a 55-250 on my old canon but now with fuji im looking at either the 55-200 or try to push further with 70-300, i have the 80mm 2.8 for fuji so the 70-300 would overlap better.
Would appreciate a comparison between the Tamron 70-300 to the Sony 70-350 instead of the Sony 70-300. Why? Because on UA-cam you do the best lens reviews.
In my opinion, a lens without image stabilization is alright for focal lengths below 100mm, but for telephoto lenses, the effect of IBIS is not great. Using a 300 mm lens without VR will require a high shutter speed like 1/350, 1/500. When combined with the Tamron lens's slow aperture, it may force ISO to 1000 on a cloudy day or in the shades. Nonetheless it should be OK under direct sunshine or in a studio.
With camera Ibis no problem at all (most Sony have it). Also it's useless to have a long shutter speed for moving subject, most of the time in dynamic scenario ibis helps only to stabilize the view, but the subject determine a fast shutter speed and stabilization become less necessary, you have to increase the Iso even with OIS in the lens. For landscape still better to mount it on a tripod for maximum sharpness, but ibis can be fine sometimes to help.
Shame the Tamron is not an f4.5-5.6, like the A-mount version is. The SP Tamron range also gave Sony a run for their money when it came to comparing the G and SP lenses.
We're talking about 1/3 stop difference .. Is it so important? It is more easy to miss the right exposure of an entire stop (user error) even with a 5.6 lens, so, it's not a real problem and a modern sensor can recover easily 1/3 lens aperture difference.
Well, it's a lot easier to not carry a tripod when the dusk seeps in. For when you do plan your trip and bring a tripod neither lens has a collar but the Tamron is a bit lighter and probably okay to hang off the mount of a camera mounted on a tripod.
I’ve used a 300mm Nikon lens without stabilization and it was a bit difficult, but just got to hold it steady. The Sony has built in stabilization so that should help a ton
The camera is Sony A6600, which focuses on humanistic photography. Please recommend Sony 70-300 or 70-350 or Tamron 70-180 70-300 and other lenses for future use when upgrading to full frame cameras. Thank you
Tamron always provides killer value for money! Infact they are one of the major reasons to go for the E-mount!
Samyang too
Glad to see that the Sony "canon" focus more closely. It sucks when it's nikon. ;D
You forgot to mention about the autofocus speed (Sony's linear motor vs Tamron's stepping). I haven't tested the Tamron yet but have seen reviews showing a slower autofocus for Tamron which ends up with fewer keepers when burst shooting. Any opinion?
The Sony 70-300 is better in my view. OSS in lens paired with IBIS makes a difference, particularly with hand held shots at long focal lengths. The better close focusing will give better compression for macro style shots giving more versatility as well.
I’ve been using the Tamron for a year now on my A7 III… no regrets
have you had some experience with it on fast-moving objects? if so, how does the AF perform? im looking at it for motorsports/cars on track with a A7III
I use Tamron 70-300mm....simply best value for your money.
Kindly review the Tamron 17-28 f2.8 to complete the Tamron 2.8 Trinity😎
Big thanks for your awesome and unique reviews. Your are the most reliable source for lens review for so many people. Still waiting for you to check out the fuji 70-300 :)
I have a methodology question: when you compare corner sharpness, do you also check more than the one corner you compare in the videos? As you know, decentering effects can be large, especially in zooms.
Thanks, very informative!
I’ve just ordered one as I need a budget telephoto and can’t stretch to the Sony. With this focal length there are not many options but the Tamron seems to be great. Half the price, great pictures. No image stabilisation but then my camera does have it so it should be perfectly useable. I remember shooting at 300mm with nothing on either camera or lens to stabilise and the images were awful! This should be fun! But for £300 on the second hand market, can’t complain! :) great comparison! :)
Amazing quality in the Tamron. Great comparison video!
First of all I love your videos. And as a retired pastor, I appreciate your other travel videos to the Holy Land as well. Wanted to throw in an odd ball suggestion for those who have extremely limited budgets and can't afford all the new lenses. My sole camera is a Sony a7rii still works well for me after several years of use. And I have adapted many fine old Canon lenses to my camera using an Sigma MC-11 adapter. My lenses made for the FE mount are the Sony 50mm f2.5g, Sony 85mm 1.8, and the cheap Tamron 20mm f2.8 lens. But my Canon arsenal is a truly wonderful old Canon 20-35mm F2.8L lens, The Canon 135 f2 lens, and a Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 (built for EF). Now to my main point. The Tamron 70-300 is a great lens as is the 28-200 that I used briefly. But since I couldn't justify the cost since I would only use such a lens a few times a year, I went a different direction. I found an old Canon sleeper lens, the Canon EF 100-300mm f/4.5-5.6 USM Lens. I found it extremely sharp. Plus, it stops on the long end at 5.6 instead of 6.3. Also I noticed that I can go to about 130mm and still be at F4.5. I bought the MC-11 adapter last year, used for 100 dollars and the lens on eBay for 50 dollars. The Canon 100-300 was so-so on a 35mm camera, but it definitely has new life on a 42mp digital mirrorless camera. Just throwing that in for those on a budget and still want to take nice, sharp images.
Even though I can't afford most of the lenses that you evaluate (being on a very tight fixed income), I still love each and every video, just because I like learning about the different lenses, and frankly, I just like your style, your approach, your voice and the way you edit your videos. I always look forward to each one. God bless!
5:04 Canon focus more closely Lol :D
Thank you for the great video.
I hope you will do more comparisons 😇
Tamron zooms and Samyang AF primes are what put Sony on top of full frame mirrorless world for me. The price to performance ratio with these is amazing.
I'm excited for the time Samyang start making zoom lenses. Their recent primes are simply awesome.
totally agree.
3rd party makers attract more and more people to sony camera!
sigma,tamrom,samyang is the reason I use sony
Yongnuo is starting their game too
Thank you so much for such a wonderful and helpful video.
I'm seriously considering buying the Tamron 70-300 to use on my Sony A7riv. However, I already own the Sony 70-350 for APSC.
I understand that I can use the Sony 70-350 on the A7Riv in APSC mode, but that I would be limited to a max resolution of 24MP. Is it possible to use the Sony lens in FF mode and retain 61MP resolution but only for the center part of the image?
What would be any other advantages or disadvantages of using the Sony lens instead of the Tamron?
Should I sell the Sony lens and buy the Tamron?
Tamron lenses are fantastic. I have the full frame 28-75 and it is brilliant. I also recently purchased the 17-70 aps-c lens and it's great as well. Save your money and buy Tamron lenses for half the price.
at longer focal lengths ie. 300mm, stablization is very important, unless you want to lug around a tripod to go with the Tamron. the Sony IBIS is not that great and needs help from in camera stablization especially for longer focal lengths.
@@veritas932 That's arguably untrue. Stabilization is extremely helpful, but not necessary. With the correct settings you can nail 300mm handheld shots with the Tamron just fine. You also don't need a Tripod, you can opt for a Monopod instead. But using either dramatically helps. The Tamron is extremely useful and at an amazing value with CRAZY amounts of sharpness.
Hi, the weight, size, price and full frame comparability of this lens make it a tempting option to accompany an APSC camera - but I can’t find a lot of information online about this.
I would love to hear you views on how well the Tamron lens fares on an APSC camera such as the a6500 or a6600. Is the field curvature still an issue? How does it compare to the well reviewed but more expensive Sony 70-350? Also how much difference does the lack of stabilisation make if the camera it is used with has IBIS? Thanks
Fantastic review! - I went for the Tamron as my ZV-E1 has dynamic active stabe :) - quick quesiton, where did you get that resolution chart?
... for more comparissions like that! To us to got a really perception about the originals and the similar lenses.
Have you tried the fuji 70-300 chris?
He really should. It looks like a steal for the prize.
Isn't Fuji APS-C? That makes it a very different lens (105-450mm f/6.0-8.4 full frame equivalent) compared to the ones in the video.
@They Caged Non how do you find it? I have a 55-250 on my old canon but now with fuji im looking at either the 55-200 or try to push further with 70-300, i have the 80mm 2.8 for fuji so the 70-300 would overlap better.
@They Caged Non thanks, i will have a look around next time im at the camera store.
@They Caged Non ok will do, thanks!
Canon focus more closely? Is that a pun?
Hi, Just wanted to know if you would review some Panasonic gear?
Waiting for this to be available on the z mount
Hi is Canon m50 suitable for tamron 70-300mm ? your replies are highly appreciated
Would appreciate a comparison between the Tamron 70-300 to the Sony 70-350 instead of the Sony 70-300. Why? Because on UA-cam you do the best lens reviews.
Sony 70 -350 isn't for apsc?
That Tamron is surprisingly sharp. The only downside is that lack of image stabilisation
Thank you for the great video.
Plzzzz do nikon 55 200/55 300 lens review,if they are good budget dslr lenses
lol I’m literally researching this yesterday!
this tamron, is a parfocal lens?
This video would be interesting if you put new tamron 17-50 and sony 20-70 f4
"Canon focus more closely" xD
In my opinion, a lens without image stabilization is alright for focal lengths below 100mm, but for telephoto lenses, the effect of IBIS is not great. Using a 300 mm lens without VR will require a high shutter speed like 1/350, 1/500. When combined with the Tamron lens's slow aperture, it may force ISO to 1000 on a cloudy day or in the shades. Nonetheless it should be OK under direct sunshine or in a studio.
With camera Ibis no problem at all (most Sony have it). Also it's useless to have a long shutter speed for moving subject, most of the time in dynamic scenario ibis helps only to stabilize the view, but the subject determine a fast shutter speed and stabilization become less necessary, you have to increase the Iso even with OIS in the lens. For landscape still better to mount it on a tripod for maximum sharpness, but ibis can be fine sometimes to help.
Will you be reviewing the sigma 70-200mm sport, would like to buy one but I’m waiting for your review, no pressure Chris 😁
Regards Al.
Thanks but i wish you had shown the contact points on the Tamron but you didn't.
Shame the Tamron is not an f4.5-5.6, like the A-mount version is. The SP Tamron range also gave Sony a run for their money when it came to comparing the G and SP lenses.
We're talking about 1/3 stop difference .. Is it so important? It is more easy to miss the right exposure of an entire stop (user error) even with a 5.6 lens, so, it's not a real problem and a modern sensor can recover easily 1/3 lens aperture difference.
It might be tough to use 300mm F6.3 with no Image Stabilization but with tripod, there's almost no reason to buy sony one.
Well, it's a lot easier to not carry a tripod when the dusk seeps in. For when you do plan your trip and bring a tripod neither lens has a collar but the Tamron is a bit lighter and probably okay to hang off the mount of a camera mounted on a tripod.
I’ve used a 300mm Nikon lens without stabilization and it was a bit difficult, but just got to hold it steady. The Sony has built in stabilization so that should help a ton
Price difference is not so great in UK.
As you say Sony need to bring down their UK lens prices. They’re ridiculous.
Nice work :)
The camera is Sony A6600, which focuses on humanistic photography. Please recommend Sony 70-300 or 70-350 or Tamron 70-180 70-300 and other lenses for future use when upgrading to full frame cameras. Thank you
In my opinion the Sony is the better lens, delivering much more balanced IQ and it’s a better build.
overpriced
Well, expected for the higher price tag. 👍🏻
A further example that "G" lenses are not necessarily superb.
Thx uuuuuuuuuuu
It's actually Sony vs "Sony minority share" lens.
Guess it's time to switch to Canon then if you're into macro😂
so many sony lenses are horribly overpriced. thank god tamron is there to save the day
Sony have minority share at Tamron 😁😁😁