Really impressed with the close focus. Love seeing third party lenses on X mount. I agree it would be great to see these lenses on a body with the new processor.
guys, how come you never took a look at Viltrox lenses for the Fuji X mount? The pricepoint is very good, the optical quality varies from pretty good to absolutely amazing, and some of themn have been available for litteral years ! The 85mm f/1.8 is my personal workhorse when doing events, pretty close to the performance of the 90mm f/2 which is saying something their first batch of 1.4 primes (23, 33 and 56mm) are all good values and pretty good optically (especially the 56mm) the 13mm f/1.4 is one of their best lenses, with no equivalent in the Fujifilm line and good pricepoint And we haven't even touched the super good stuff yet with the 75mm f/1.2 Pro that released early this year or the yet to be released 27mm f/1.2 Pro. Viltrox is 100% a brand to put on your list when looking at Fujifilm cameras, especially with Fujifilm lenses being so expensive sometimes. I really think you should at least give them a look, especially the 75mm f/1.2 which is a real tour-de-force from Viltrox
@@KNAPPAID yeah I mean those are good, but the Viltrox 33 f/1.4 is sharper than the Sigma 30mm. And the 56mm viltrox is sharp as a knife, to me it goes head to head with the Sigma 56 13mm is also quite different from the 16mm so imho they don't even compare. also, for people on a budget Viltrox lenses have been around for way longer, so the used market is much better for those lenses. was able to pick the 85mm for about 300€, and the 56mm for about 220€, Sigma lenses, even used, are nowhere near that pricepoint
I’ve got the 8-16 and the 3 big downsides are: cost, weight, and lack of front filter threads. This Tamron looks way smaller and lighter. And cheaper 😂
Something appears to have gone awry in the edit, sudden jump to talking about 20mm at 7:15 and then the audio is out of sync for the rest of the video.
Love the channel, just a suggestion, if you're going to coin the term "Petaphites" please make sure you emphasize the "t" in Peta. It has a whole other suggestion if you pronounce it "peda". Again, love the channel.
First of all, thank you for including the Fuji 10-24 in this Tamron review. IMHO, most people are not asking, "should I get this lens" (or camera or widget), but rather "should I get this one or that one." So a comparison is highly informative and appreciated. Second, I looked at your review of the Sigma 11-18 and using screen shots of your bank note resolution tests, I see that the differences for Tamron and Fuji were not that dramatic. But for the Sigma vs Tamron or Fuji, I see DRAMATIC difference in corner resolution in the wide angle, in favor of Sigma. (I paid special attention to the area behind the queen's head, In the Sigma, the verticle lines making up the background are clearly seen while for the Tamron and Fuji they are smeared. This was so different I thought they were different banknotes, but the serial numbers matched, so not different.) So it looks like I will go with the Sigma, but make sure not to get it wet. :-)
Greetings 🙏 Can check the performance on XT 5 or XH 2... I m eager to know on the higher MP bodies .. also if you can do review videos of 7artisans 7.5mm fish eye / 35mm f/0.95 on XT 5 or XH 2..
It appears the Tamron is a great versatile lens. While the 8-16 and the 10-24 are still the best for their specific use cases in my opinion, the Tamron seems to be the best option if you need something for both interiors and landscapes. I'm curious if Fuji will release a similar lens in the next few years themselves. It would be similar to how the 70-300 is, since that lens is a bit of a compromise between the 55-200 and the 100-400. And just like the 55-200, the 10-24 isn't on that 40 mp resolving lens list...
This went way too fast for me, so I might be wrong. But it seems to me that there were quite a few errors where you said Fuji when you probably meant Tamron.
Thanks for a nice review and especially the direct comparison with fuji 10-24 in controlled condition! As I'm using fuji 10-24wr I wonder how tamron 11-20 would work at landscape apertures like f8 ~ f11, as I found some lenses do fight well against diffraction at narrow apertures but some lenses don't. Fuji 10-24 in my experience is the former case so that's why I was happy with it albeit its f4 aperture.
This is great and all, but is there any chance, any at all, of a Voigtländer 23mm f1.2 review? Really been wanting a video review of that lens from a trusted source, i.e you guys.
Help us to understand your review. So “When we take a look at corner sharpness we can see that Tamron is clearly sharper than Fujifilm when shooting wide open, even though Fuji is at f4”. Next sencence: “So Fuji doesn’t have good corner sharpness at 10 mm”. Next sentence, at 7:16: “The Fuji had better sharpness in the corners even wide open. At 10 mm Fuji is very consistent”. And you are truly professional:)
FYI, you said and showed that the Tamron is clearly sharper in the corners at f2.8 than the Fuji, then immediately after said the Fuji had better sharpness in the corners, even wide open, and at the 10mm range the Fuji is a very consistent performer. I personally ditched my non-WR XF10-24 because I found it lacking acuity unless stopped down to the 5.6-8 range. The Laowa 9mm best it out in sharpness testing (vignette be damned.) Just want to get a confirmation on which of the back-to-back statements is the correct one. (Or did you cut out a part that said you were talking about a different focal range than the widest, and the two lenses flip-flopped at that point?)
Not only that, but then they called the center sharpness equal at the long end even though the Tamron clearly looks sharper. More detail in the woman’s hair in the Tamron sample and the numbers on the Fuji sample are slightly blurry.
I would have liked to have seen the Tamron compared at F4 as well. (Ricci's way) I'll always prefer a stop or two faster over VR when I have IBIS. I don't push much beyond 1/30th handheld unless I'm really dragging the shutter. I also prefer zoom lenses to be at least 3X, or I'm more likely to use an f1.x prime.
Maybe Chris meant that the Fuji lens when in auto focus can go into manual when the focus ring is turned (if chosen/allowed within the settings), but perhaps that setting/option doesn't work with the Tamron (or 3rd party lenses). I dunno?
@@nightowlnzab And that's exactly why they don't make lenses with those. Some wide 1st gen Fuji primes had a focus clutch but it was abandoned as apparently it didn't work as well as expected.
Earlier Fuji zooms had af/mf switches but the latest lenses have one touch manual focus, just turn the focus ring while in af and you are instantly manual focusing
@@4Kandlez Nope, even the earliest Fuji zooms (18-55 and 55-200) don't have AF/MF switches. They have OIS on/off and auto aperture on/off switches. The one touch manual focus option comes from the bodies and not the lenses. I had that option even on my first Fuji, the X-T10.
The best ultrawide rectilinear APS-C is Sigma 8-16 as it is balance between picture quality, that 8mm ultra and yet is not as stupidly expensive as Fuji 8-16/2.8. Im not saying that F2.8 is not good, but Fuji should also have some more affordable option. Other than 10-24 because 8 and 10mm in APS-C is very significant difference on resulting image. And concerning aperture.. unless doing handheld low-light UWA shots, some F4/F4.5 lens is perfectly OK, because most pics are using some F6.3-F9 range anyway to gain some DOF.
The Sigma 8-16mm is an old lens (from 2010) for DSLRs. It is a shame Sigma never released a 8-16mm DC DN for mirorrless with better image and mordern built quality.
Thank you, nice review. The lens seems to be good at 11mm and at 20 mm. But what about in between? My experience with the Fuji 18-55 lens is that it is very sharp and have good contrast at 18 mm and 55 mm but it´s perfomance at for example 23 mm is much worse. When you review zooms please test the performance not only at the ends. For me this review has no value.
I also have found the 18-55 to work best on both ends of the zoom range, in the middle it's slightly worse but maybe not as much as on your copy. Still, 11-20 isn't such a vast range so I don't think quality will be that much different in the middle. And also, zoom lenses tend to be used the most at both ends of the range.
@Blue Collar not exclusively/always and the 8-16mm is a bit excessive. ETA: See the sigma 14-24mm 2.8 (for Sony) towards an example of mighty but not huge.
Chris, another great video. In light of your new review on the Sigma 10-18 F2.8, what are your thoughts when comparing the two. I have the Sigma 18-50 and is very satisfy with it. Looking for a wide angle zoom lens for vlog/landscape/event documentation. Any tips are highly appreciated.
You really need to be testing lenses on the 40 mp sensor cameras. While the lens may be good at 26mp, that may not be the case at 40. Higher resolution bodies can reveal flaws that you simply won't see at lower resolutions.
100%, and I’m willing to bet money that the tamron has noticeable CA on the 40mp sensor. The 40 megapixel needs to be the review standard, since if a lens is good on that sensor, it’ll be good on the 26mp sensor; can’t say the same for the other way around.
@@Indydi that’s another reason to have the 40mp as the review standard - it shows a lens’ IQ in it’s entirety and provides more information for review, while the 26 doesn’t.
Interestingly, this review contradicts the one by Damien Bernal on YT (in French) in two aspects: flare and chromatic aberration. The former isn't bad at all and the latter is worse than Chris said verbally here.
Seems like an editing oversight. The first statement regards the wide end, and the second regards the tight end. That whole section has some particularly weird cuts.
While I appreciate IS, being very old school, I can work without it when the camera and lens are good. All the more reason to put the Tamron on my XT20.
Just got the 10-24/4 WR today. I’d been mulling over the 16/2.8 WR, but there was a great deal on a used copy at the FLCS. I’d thought about the Tamron, but for a lens where I think I’d care about controlling the aperture, I wanted the control ring. I don’t necessarily mind on the 18-300 Tamron, where I care more about the shutter speed being manual. For an UWA like this, or a fast prime like the Samyang 75/1.8, I really don’t want to deal with the camera’s control ring.
Can someone finally please explain to me why they want sunstars in a photo ??? Its so silly .if in reality it doesn't look like a star. Just add it in photoshop later .I don't understand why sunstars = good lens
Hi chris and jordan, I have been able to get the fujifilm xt5 with the 18-55 for 1400€ or the fujifilm xt30ii with the same lens for 900 what do you recommend me? I am a beginer photografer and i dont know if the xt5 is to much for me regardless the low price. I hope you can help me, thanks.
I would pick the xt30ii. The XT-5 is a great camera, but needs the best of the best glass or it will run into issues with diffraction and colorfringing, as these are amplified by the high resolution sensor. The XT30ii and the 18-55 are a great match in terms of optics, as well as the lens IS compensating for none in the body.
Please never say "petaphytes" ever again 😂
Dangerously close to petaphiles lol
No but really this is not a joke please don’t say it
3 secs into the video and I had to stop it to either comment or like a comment about this.
Nah, say it again. I laughed.
Comedians get away with worse. 😂
Is petafiles better?
So glad that you and Jordan have a venue to continue serving the photographic community
Really impressed with the close focus. Love seeing third party lenses on X mount. I agree it would be great to see these lenses on a body with the new processor.
„Welcome back my fellow Petaphiles“
„Chis what did you just call our audience?“
"Pedophytes" sounds a little too close to "pedophile" IMO. Maybe try something else.
Yep, I thought I can't be the only one hearing this ;-)
The contrast looks better on the Tamron, at least on my screen. Great to see more options for the Fuji X
guys, how come you never took a look at Viltrox lenses for the Fuji X mount?
The pricepoint is very good, the optical quality varies from pretty good to absolutely amazing, and some of themn have been available for litteral years !
The 85mm f/1.8 is my personal workhorse when doing events, pretty close to the performance of the 90mm f/2 which is saying something
their first batch of 1.4 primes (23, 33 and 56mm) are all good values and pretty good optically (especially the 56mm)
the 13mm f/1.4 is one of their best lenses, with no equivalent in the Fujifilm line and good pricepoint
And we haven't even touched the super good stuff yet with the 75mm f/1.2 Pro that released early this year or the yet to be released 27mm f/1.2 Pro.
Viltrox is 100% a brand to put on your list when looking at Fujifilm cameras, especially with Fujifilm lenses being so expensive sometimes. I really think you should at least give them a look, especially the 75mm f/1.2 which is a real tour-de-force from Viltrox
It's strange indeed but I also have a feeling that they will get to them eventually.
It was due to sigma wiping the floor with the optical quality in the 16 30 and 56 mm equiv and the fuji equivalent on top of that
@@KNAPPAID yeah I mean those are good, but the Viltrox 33 f/1.4 is sharper than the Sigma 30mm. And the 56mm viltrox is sharp as a knife, to me it goes head to head with the Sigma 56
13mm is also quite different from the 16mm so imho they don't even compare.
also, for people on a budget Viltrox lenses have been around for way longer, so the used market is much better for those lenses.
was able to pick the 85mm for about 300€, and the 56mm for about 220€, Sigma lenses, even used, are nowhere near that pricepoint
I’d take a used Fujifilm 10-24 F/4. Certainly fast enough for this range, IMO, so I can live without 2.8 in my photography with type of lens.
@@danc3693 yeah but the f2.8 just makes or breaks some challenging situation
Like weddings or events indoor
One of the PetaPeeps here. Loving the new channel guys. So glad to see you all putting out more videos!!
I’ve got the 8-16 and the 3 big downsides are: cost, weight, and lack of front filter threads.
This Tamron looks way smaller and lighter. And cheaper 😂
Always fun to see stuff carry over to X. Better late than never.
7:02 Tamrons corners are sharper, 7:15 Fujis corners are sharper?
Right!? What happen?! 🤔
I was about to mention the same thing. I didn’t know if I was misunderstanding it.
Something appears to have gone awry in the edit, sudden jump to talking about 20mm at 7:15 and then the audio is out of sync for the rest of the video.
Think zooms on the wide end make the most sense. And this lens seems like the budget option that is capable much like the Sigma 18-50mm
I'm surprised you didn't try the lens on the X-T5 as well to see how well the lenses hold up on the 40mp sensor.
Great review as always though!
And that would make the video a lot more interesting given the fact we've known for a while how the lens performs on Sony 24mp.
00:00 Did you just call me a pedophile ?
What did u call me in the beginning of the video????😭please dont say that ever again 😂
Love the channel, just a suggestion, if you're going to coin the term "Petaphites" please make sure you emphasize the "t" in Peta. It has a whole other suggestion if you pronounce it "peda". Again, love the channel.
Also thought, “WTF Chris call me?!?”
It's very comfortable to be a Fuji Shooter right now. Many lens choices!
at 7:40 the audio completely loses sync. Also, can you do this all over with an X-T5 Great work overall guys!
It's good to see Fuji XF get some reasonable lenses. The insane price of their APSC zooms was always the platform's Achilles Heel.
And most of Fuji's lens price comes from materials
I'm getting nervous for the day Chris runs out of things to combine with "Peta" before he gets a video demonetized.
First of all, thank you for including the Fuji 10-24 in this Tamron review. IMHO, most people are not asking, "should I get this lens" (or camera or widget), but rather "should I get this one or that one." So a comparison is highly informative and appreciated.
Second, I looked at your review of the Sigma 11-18 and using screen shots of your bank note resolution tests, I see that the differences for Tamron and Fuji were not that dramatic. But for the Sigma vs Tamron or Fuji, I see DRAMATIC difference in corner resolution in the wide angle, in favor of Sigma. (I paid special attention to the area behind the queen's head, In the Sigma, the verticle lines making up the background are clearly seen while for the Tamron and Fuji they are smeared. This was so different I thought they were different banknotes, but the serial numbers matched, so not different.)
So it looks like I will go with the Sigma, but make sure not to get it wet. :-)
Greetings 🙏
Can check the performance on XT 5 or XH 2... I m eager to know on the higher MP bodies .. also if you can do review videos of 7artisans 7.5mm fish eye / 35mm f/0.95 on XT 5 or XH 2..
It appears the Tamron is a great versatile lens. While the 8-16 and the 10-24 are still the best for their specific use cases in my opinion, the Tamron seems to be the best option if you need something for both interiors and landscapes. I'm curious if Fuji will release a similar lens in the next few years themselves. It would be similar to how the 70-300 is, since that lens is a bit of a compromise between the 55-200 and the 100-400. And just like the 55-200, the 10-24 isn't on that 40 mp resolving lens list...
I was looking at this lens, but ended up getting a used 10-24mm mark 1 because of the lack of image stabilization.
should have used it on the XT5 to see how it resolves.
im still using the Canon EFS 10-18 on my infrared fuji xe2. Hopefully this lens does not have any hotspots
Petaphites, sounds dirty, I like it..
I think you need another name for your suscribers😂
No aperture ring is an immediate deal-breaker.
same
This went way too fast for me, so I might be wrong. But it seems to me that there were quite a few errors where you said Fuji when you probably meant Tamron.
Thanks for a nice review and especially the direct comparison with fuji 10-24 in controlled condition! As I'm using fuji 10-24wr I wonder how tamron 11-20 would work at landscape apertures like f8 ~ f11, as I found some lenses do fight well against diffraction at narrow apertures but some lenses don't. Fuji 10-24 in my experience is the former case so that's why I was happy with it albeit its f4 aperture.
This is great and all, but is there any chance, any at all, of a Voigtländer 23mm f1.2 review? Really been wanting a video review of that lens from a trusted source, i.e you guys.
How is it doing on the X-T5 and the 40MP since the Fujifilm 10-24 is not on the list for the 40MP?
Petaphile
Help us to understand your review. So “When we take a look at corner sharpness we can see that Tamron is clearly sharper than Fujifilm when shooting wide open, even though Fuji is at f4”.
Next sencence: “So Fuji doesn’t have good corner sharpness at 10 mm”.
Next sentence, at 7:16: “The Fuji had better sharpness in the corners even wide open. At 10 mm Fuji is very consistent”.
And you are truly professional:)
Peta-whats?!
FYI, you said and showed that the Tamron is clearly sharper in the corners at f2.8 than the Fuji, then immediately after said the Fuji had better sharpness in the corners, even wide open, and at the 10mm range the Fuji is a very consistent performer.
I personally ditched my non-WR XF10-24 because I found it lacking acuity unless stopped down to the 5.6-8 range. The Laowa 9mm best it out in sharpness testing (vignette be damned.)
Just want to get a confirmation on which of the back-to-back statements is the correct one. (Or did you cut out a part that said you were talking about a different focal range than the widest, and the two lenses flip-flopped at that point?)
Not only that, but then they called the center sharpness equal at the long end even though the Tamron clearly looks sharper. More detail in the woman’s hair in the Tamron sample and the numbers on the Fuji sample are slightly blurry.
I noticed that too. I wondered if I misheard or he misspoke.
I found that too.
Weird
Yeah, that was confusing, and toward the end it seemed like the audio and video weren't sync'd.
Really? Mine's tack sharp. Granted, I always stop it down. It's easily comparable to both copies of the 16-55 I've owned in the past.
Still went with the 10-24. I liked the build quality and internal zoom.
Thanks so much for sharing another wonderful video like always 👍🤗👏
I'm not sure petaphytes is a good descriptor especially when you read the autogenerated subtitles...
Man, I really thought you were going to say “petafiles” 😬
The similarity between Peta, and Pedo are going to cause some pun issues in the future.
20mm telephoto range... Once upon a time you got a lot more mm for your telephoto money, the inflations I guess ;)
I would have liked to have seen the Tamron compared at F4 as well. (Ricci's way) I'll always prefer a stop or two faster over VR when I have IBIS. I don't push much beyond 1/30th handheld unless I'm really dragging the shutter. I also prefer zoom lenses to be at least 3X, or I'm more likely to use an f1.x prime.
As a channel with lots of Ps also we’ve settled with PathLessPedalers. Maybe Petapixelers?
The more choice we get the better. However, Fuji lenses also don't have an A/M focus switch either.
An A/M focus switch on the lens would conflict with the physical focus switch on the front of a lot of their cameras, too.
Maybe Chris meant that the Fuji lens when in auto focus can go into manual when the focus ring is turned (if chosen/allowed within the settings), but perhaps that setting/option doesn't work with the Tamron (or 3rd party lenses). I dunno?
@@nightowlnzab And that's exactly why they don't make lenses with those. Some wide 1st gen Fuji primes had a focus clutch but it was abandoned as apparently it didn't work as well as expected.
Earlier Fuji zooms had af/mf switches but the latest lenses have one touch manual focus, just turn the focus ring while in af and you are instantly manual focusing
@@4Kandlez Nope, even the earliest Fuji zooms (18-55 and 55-200) don't have AF/MF switches. They have OIS on/off and auto aperture on/off switches. The one touch manual focus option comes from the bodies and not the lenses. I had that option even on my first Fuji, the X-T10.
The best ultrawide rectilinear APS-C is Sigma 8-16 as it is balance between picture quality, that 8mm ultra and yet is not as stupidly expensive as Fuji 8-16/2.8.
Im not saying that F2.8 is not good, but Fuji should also have some more affordable option. Other than 10-24 because 8 and 10mm in APS-C is very significant difference on resulting image. And concerning aperture.. unless doing handheld low-light UWA shots, some F4/F4.5 lens is perfectly OK, because most pics are using some F6.3-F9 range anyway to gain some DOF.
The Sigma 8-16mm is an old lens (from 2010) for DSLRs. It is a shame Sigma never released a 8-16mm DC DN for mirorrless with better image and mordern built quality.
Thank you, nice review. The lens seems to be good at 11mm and at 20 mm. But what about in between? My experience with the Fuji 18-55 lens is that it is very sharp and have good contrast at 18 mm and 55 mm but it´s perfomance at for example 23 mm is much worse. When you review zooms please test the performance not only at the ends. For me this review has no value.
I also have found the 18-55 to work best on both ends of the zoom range, in the middle it's slightly worse but maybe not as much as on your copy.
Still, 11-20 isn't such a vast range so I don't think quality will be that much different in the middle. And also, zoom lenses tend to be used the most at both ends of the range.
OK, so it's yesterday's news nevertheless, great to see our pet pals prospering 😉
is it just me - or does the last minute and half of the video have audio/video sync issues?
Petaphiles........ 😮
Every time he says Peta-phite I think of a different word.
Can we just shout out to Chris standing on a log, presenting brilliantly whilst keeping balance, what next? Juggling the lenses, perhaps some on fire?
Sorry Tamron, but no aperture ring, no inner zoom, no high built quality (metall) --> no buy.
I really want them to update their telephoto lenses.
Hopefully the pressure on the 8-16mm results in a slightly smaller mkII, need a wide red badge that isn't that soooo hefty.
What pressure? The difference between 8mm and 11mm is crazy.
@@muttishelfer9122 as lovely as 8mm is to have (and yup, world of difference to 11mm) I was referring to size and weight for a 2.8 wide angle.
I mean, if you want a top notch lens it's gonna be big and heavy
@Blue Collar not exclusively/always and the 8-16mm is a bit excessive.
ETA: See the sigma 14-24mm 2.8 (for Sony) towards an example of mighty but not huge.
@@PhotoTourBrugge That's 14-24 f2.8 not 8-16 f2.8, Fujifilm aren't making lenses unnecessarily big, it's physics
I dare you start calling us "Petaphyles"
Great video guys but since I already have the 10-24 I think I will stick with it
Ok, thanks for letting us know.
@@nikoolix 😂😂😂
Yeah, don’t really think the pet name is a good choice 😶
If it doesn't have an aperture ring, its a non-starter for me.
Chris, another great video. In light of your new review on the Sigma 10-18 F2.8, what are your thoughts when comparing the two. I have the Sigma 18-50 and is very satisfy with it. Looking for a wide angle zoom lens for vlog/landscape/event documentation. Any tips are highly appreciated.
Very good video! With which camera and which lens was the video recorded?
Thanks! This was shot on the Panasonic S5 IIX, with the Panasonic 24-70mm F2.8 Pro lens.
Chris can you do a CCD vs CMOS shootout please?
Time to sack Jordan. Lip sync at the was non existent.
Otherwise a great episode as always.
Tamron now your talking. Definitely on my short list.
Fuji finally came to compete. Opening the mount and giving you advanced features in their bodies. So it's not just a fanboy cult.
@@djstuc Get a grip. There were no autofocus lenses, and you don't need the mount to be open to make manual focus lenses. Stop BSing yourself.
I think "Petaphiles" would be better than "Petaphytes."
Get rid of the the Petapites naming Chris - it sounds quite bad :) otherwise a nice review.
Looking forward to your test of xs20...
Agree actually.
Otherwise great rewiew as always! Jordan and you are still my first look whenever gear is reviewed.
I won’t subscribe if you’re going to call us petaphytes
You really need to be testing lenses on the 40 mp sensor cameras. While the lens may be good at 26mp, that may not be the case at 40. Higher resolution bodies can reveal flaws that you simply won't see at lower resolutions.
100%, and I’m willing to bet money that the tamron has noticeable CA on the 40mp sensor. The 40 megapixel needs to be the review standard, since if a lens is good on that sensor, it’ll be good on the 26mp sensor; can’t say the same for the other way around.
They don't even get an access to xs20. Must be stressful reviewing something without the best tool when it was needed.
@@Eyeofkamau But if it's bad on the 40, it still might be good on the 26. And there are far more 26s around. They need to do both.
@@Indydi that’s another reason to have the 40mp as the review standard - it shows a lens’ IQ in it’s entirety and provides more information for review, while the 26 doesn’t.
Switched from Sony to Fuji recently for my APS-C and im super happy about this lens. It was one of my favorite on my Sony.
Is this where the DPReview guys are now??
At first I thought it read $380 and I got very excited. And then I saw it was $830. Disappointing.
Interestingly, this review contradicts the one by Damien Bernal on YT (in French) in two aspects: flare and chromatic aberration. The former isn't bad at all and the latter is worse than Chris said verbally here.
New name is a priority! 😢
Great stuff guys! Just FYI, Peta-phytes MAY be a bit too close to peta-phile. Just sayin'
Outdoor video shots in this review looks weird. Probably from dimming the brightness levels to manage the harsh daylight.
Watching this with folks going on about testing it on the X-T5, how does it resolve? so I can post my images on social media 😂
What did you call me???
Captain Morgan! You're better off with captain Rum. Nice review.
Nice
10 - 24 is better than 11 - 20. F4 für wide angel enough. No aperture ring 🤷♂️. No matter to change from my 10-24.
Softer at 10mm though. The 10-24 WR was a disappointing upgrade. If only they sharpened up the lens.
@@professionalpotato4764 The 10-24 WR is a great lens and i would never give up this 1mm an the low end in an ultra wide lens.
@@muttishelfer9122 It's decent but could have been better. Fuji missed an opportunity to update the optics and did a lazy body upgrade instead.
Hi Chris! How come 7:06 is saying that Tamron has better corner sharpness and 7:17 totally opposite?
Seems like an editing oversight. The first statement regards the wide end, and the second regards the tight end. That whole section has some particularly weird cuts.
While I appreciate IS, being very old school, I can work without it when the camera and lens are good. All the more reason to put the Tamron on my XT20.
I really like it :) Nice & Thanks :)
Man Chris.... really like the temporal offset ability you have for your voice! ;-)
I was starting to think it was just me. Guess most people aren't watching to the end?
@@jesbek Several people commented on it up there, including myself.
"Nice new name for you guys next week"
Let me guess... petaphile?
Nope, lens like those made for landscape . So F5.6 or F8 or 11 will be in fokus. But nice review
Just got the 10-24/4 WR today. I’d been mulling over the 16/2.8 WR, but there was a great deal on a used copy at the FLCS. I’d thought about the Tamron, but for a lens where I think I’d care about controlling the aperture, I wanted the control ring. I don’t necessarily mind on the 18-300 Tamron, where I care more about the shutter speed being manual. For an UWA like this, or a fast prime like the Samyang 75/1.8, I really don’t want to deal with the camera’s control ring.
Petapixel! Glad to see you again! Where js your buddy?
Can someone finally please explain to me why they want sunstars in a photo ??? Its so silly .if in reality it doesn't look like a star. Just add it in photoshop later .I don't understand why sunstars = good lens
Then you want it baked in the photo ? Something wasn't Really there in reality. I've never seen more dumb and stubborn people than photographers
I have the Sony full frame equivalent version
20-40mm 2.8 and it my favorite lens!
Yo what's up, where have yall been, happy Saturday & Fathers day weekend
Hi chris and jordan, I have been able to get the fujifilm xt5 with the 18-55 for 1400€ or the fujifilm xt30ii with the same lens for 900 what do you recommend me? I am a beginer photografer and i dont know if the xt5 is to much for me regardless the low price. I hope you can help me, thanks.
I would pick the xt30ii. The XT-5 is a great camera, but needs the best of the best glass or it will run into issues with diffraction and colorfringing, as these are amplified by the high resolution sensor. The XT30ii and the 18-55 are a great match in terms of optics, as well as the lens IS compensating for none in the body.
Take xs20 as starting point
A good complement to the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 lens
And the Sony 70-350 to complete the trio!
You should of compared the sharpness at F8, or some kind of stopped down aperture.
Canon get your act together, I want a wadie angle 2.8 for my R10.
My fuji 10-24 4.= work flawless. But nice to have some more 3rd part lenses to fuji.
Normalize Petaphilia
Why no Test with the 40 MP Sensor?😢