Amazing review! I am sick of those reviews with just lab test and charts or full on talking without showing anything in real life. Your review doesn't waste time and come to the real thing. Wonderful!
I've been looking for a good review of the Tamron and this is the best lens review in general I've seen by a landslide! Clear, fun, to the point and great comparison footage. Love your personality in these as well. Thank you!
What I love about both of these lenses are how affordable they are, so a videographer really could have both for the price of the Sony 24-105mm. I think the tamron 17-70mm is great for shoots where you'd need that extra reach and VC for handheld, whereas the sigma 18-50mm would be perfect for a lightweight setup to fly on a gimbal. I've made the decision to actually downgrade from Sony full frame because of how much you can accomplish with an FX30 with these two lenses. Great video Thomas!
If you plan to use Tamron 17-70 with IBIS bodies, then forget about it. Tamron will make stabilization glitches, because Tamrons and Sony bodies stabilization can't recognize each other and in the result you might get stabilization artifacts. Specially shooting handheld. That is why I refunded Tamron and got Sigma insted.
Well, apart from the faulty settings that I showed along with the examples along with samples with the correct settings. I haven't had any issues. During almost a year of frequent use. It's obviously no miracle worker that VC or any OIS for that matter. Some people put too much trust in those instead of using a gimbal when the shots calls for it.
The tamron has been tested a lot with IBIS bodies and no one found this issue. So either this is an user error. Or something broke along the way, maybe time to contact the repair center.
For the FX30 I’d go with the Sony 18-105 f/4 OSS. Internal zoom on a gimbal is awesome. IBIS works well if the camera is stationary but any movement causes IBIS to overcompensate and then become un-smooth.
I went for the Sigma 18-50mm for my Sony a6700, and I find it great for client work! I wish the lens was fully weather-sealed, though I can always cover the camera in a pinch. I've been aching to get my hands on the Tamron 17-70mm and see how it performs with my kit, though I'm happy with the decision!
Wow! What a review you made! Perfect! I have been researching both lenses and your video made it easier to understand the pros and cons, but since both are very good, I’m still in doubt 🧐 😊. Congratulations for the quality of your review. It’s very difficult to find similar quality around YT, lots of big audience channels publish reviews with too much talk and not enough examples, yours made the difference between the products quite clear. I must say that the example shots you made were really beautiful. Thank you! Cheers!
Got the Tamron! The Vibration Compensation and the extra range made the difference for me. I'm very happy with my choice! Perfect match with my sony @6000.
Sigma is the clear choice fot me. I'm still thinking at the 16-55mm f2.8 sony lens, considering it is weather sealed. I wonder if this lens could be balanced on a gimbal at any focal lenght as the sigma 18-50mm, that would be a big win for the sony. I'm shooting outdoor a lot and I am tempted to go with weather sealed lenses.
Nice! As you saw in the video, even the Weebill S handles the entire zoom range of the weather sealed Tamron without breaking a sweat. So the similar sized 16-55 would probably not be a problem on a gimbal either. p The 16-55 is an interesting option as it hits the 3rd price tier and rivals options like Sigmas full frame 24-70 (that also lacks stabilization) in price. I think that's why we hear and see so little about that lens, it's a tough sell on paper ;)
I used the Sony 16-55 mm f/2.8 G extensively, for the last 16 months. This lens is exactly as good as any fixed focal lens of its range in existence, facts proven by... dozens of tests (PetaPixel included). I used it on a Sony A7M4, with a little crop in post-production, just for the fun of it. I could not find any flaw in pictures, with a 300% zoom-in. And those were real-estate images, with lots of furniture, details, tiny objects, decorations, etc. I initially considered the Tamron 17-70, but noticed its soft corners... a no-go for interiors and architecture. And other usages too. Then, it did not feature any "assistance" on the barrel, which is a bit annoying nowadays. All reasons leading to go for the Sony 16-55. But Tamron know how to make great lenses (their 35-150 mm f/2-2.8 is a killer !), and I've owned some. Plus Sony owns shares of Tamron, explaining why they are so well paired with Sony cameras. I am eagerly waiting for the 2nd generation of this Tamron 17-70 mm f/2.8, because, lessons being learnt, it shall be way better optically and fitted with better assistance features. Before next year hopefully, as Tamron is currently renewing their whole range with major improvements along the way. And then, I may consider it... that 70 mm max focal length makes my mouth water.
I returned Tamron 17-70mm ( Fuji x mount) the next day because it had very bad back focus issues at 70mm. Also at 17mm not very convincing. Got the Fuji 16-55mm f2.8 and was much happier. So back focus on a mirroless system. Yes it excists for sure😮
Thanks for the review! Sigma released this lens when I already had a Tamron 17-70. I didn't like the blur in Tamron, it wasn't stable :( On the Sony a6400, I did not notice the stabilizer working, especially on the video, the shaking at 70mm was stronger than at 105 on the Sony 18-105mm. The only advantage of the Tamron in front of Sigma is 70 mm. It's big, heavy, without a normal stabilizer and with a nervous background blur.
Sounds like you might have gotten a lemon or maybe the a6400 wasn't able to properly communicate with the lens due to age? But then again like I mentioned in the video - different type of shooters will favor one over the other ;)
@@thomasfransson um... Sony a6400 is a relatively new camera, that's A 6300 it was worse. But there 18-105 were stable so much that I got used to such a view, and 17-70 I did not get it. The second time I would not buy :(
As it works fine on the FX30 that was just an assumption that the older a6400 (released in spring 2019) might have something to do with it. As for the comparison with the 18-105 it's possible that the stabilization would work better as it's a Sony lens, a longer lens and thus possibly offer more stops of stabilization. The f2.8 aperture on the Tamron might also be a limiting factor when it comes to this what type of stabilization is possible to implement along with decisions on size, price and so forth. As I've never looked into why Tamron refers to their lens stabilization as Vibration compensation (I'm thinking micro jitters) rather than gimbal smoothness but that is another aspect to consider. After all these are photography lenses and both ibis and ois will certainly work better for stills than video. And while we're at it I think a lot of newer less experienced shooters might have their expectations set to high when it comes to stabilization whether it's in camera, lens or a combination of both. Let's also put into perspective the vast difference in shooting styles, shooting scenarios, people in general as well as technique. Personally I have rather shaky hands and even with Ibis it's hard for me to shoot steady once I approach 35mm on an aps-c camera. 23mm or wider is where I feel the most comfortable. Some people might have their cutoff at a wider focal length while others might be quite comfortable at 50mm for short takes. I can obviously shoot at 50 or 70mm but that will result in some jerks, no matter what setup I'm using as my hands are quite twitchy. Anyway - It looks like we have different experiences using this lens on our respective cameras and for what ever we've used it for. Personally I think it's a great lens for the right type of shooter and types of shoot. And as you've made quite clear, you're not overly enthusiastic about it based on your experience and shooting preferences.
@@thomasfransson you're right, everyone's styles are different, but I'm so outraged because I never expected to see shaking at Tamron's minimum focal lengths when I got used to a stable 18-105 picture at the same focal lengths. In any case, even the built-in Sony camera stabilizer is not such that you can shoot video, for a photo it is normal. thank you :)
I purchased the tamron and used it for an hour.. As far as I was concerned the lens was far too heavy for the a6400, it felt uncomfortable and out of balance, not at all pleasant to use, I just couldn't keep it. The sigma doesn't have stabilisation so that was not in the running. All the many reviews that I have seen show the sony 18 135 to match either of these for sharpness, which is my criteria, it also has stabilisation so it's the sony for me.
Thanks a lot for this excellent comparison. I was looking for such a review so I can choose a video lens for my xt4 because Fuji isn't apparently keen to renew that old 16-55 2.8. I'm not a fan of Tamron for having tested some lenses in the past but this one seems to be a very good one in a pretty affordable package. The image quality and the construction quality isn't on par with the Fuji lens (I need that aperture ring) but for half the price the discussion seems over. I'm almost sold on the Tamron.
I already put in RMA request for my Sigma 18-50. Somehow, no one has noticed that at f2.8 this lens is underexposing the image a lot. At least with my A6600. For example on Aperture priority and Auto ISO, if I go from F4 to F2.8, the image darkens a lot. I took some photos of my kid outside at 5.30pm under light shade of trees and they came out as if I shot them at dusk. The sun was still up high and the day was still bright. Indoors with the low light situation , F2.8 at 50mm just plain sucked. But F4 and F8 actually got better images (noisy but usable). Tamron was almost same price 'used like new' when I bought the sigma. I am sad that I let it go. I now have to buy the Tamron at full price as there aren't any discounts right now. :( Also the vignetting at 18mm is so noticeable. Like APS-C and you get vignetting? Come on Sigma, have you seen your own other lenses? I wish I had seen your review before buying it. I would have definitely chosen the Tamron. You made it all so unbiased compared to others I watched. Thanks!!!
That sounds odd. I didn't notice any major differences in my side by sides, but I shot those in manual mode. Have you checked if you have any exposure compensation or exposure preview function activated on your camera? Sadly I'm not too familiar with the photo side of Sony but I know there's usually some sort of exposure preview on most cameras. If that's active the screen or image will look much brighter when you half press the shutter as the camera can override auto settings and open the Aputure or change other settings to give you a better view for framing and to grab focus. But the image will be darker than what you see on your screen when you lock focus. Just thinking out loud here if you still have the lens at hand you could try the lens in manual mode vs auto mode to see if there’s a camera that might be the problem. If not, the Tamron isn’t a bad lens either;)
I'm using the Tamron and I got disappointed immediately because of the focus issue. It always goes out of focus when I zoom, even when I turn the zoom ring very slowly
Both work fine as can be seen in the gimbal test at 10:22 so unless it's specifically for gimbal use I would look at what lens ticks the most boxes apart from that. But you could also revisit "The Picking" at 14:03 to hear my thoughts on what lens works best for what situation.
Should be similar to the FX30 and the examples you see in the video. The a6700 uses the same sensor and therefore probably the same ibis system as the FX30 That said, no stabilization will replace a gimbal, but it will take out those micro shakes and that sort of stuff.
Wow this answered everything. I have a Weebill S. Looking to build a FX30 platform cause I need autofocus for events and weddings. Currently a BMPCC4k shooter.
I don't think so. The Sony sits in the same price range as the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 (full frame and even if price isn't a factor in this scenario, it can serve as a yardstick when comparing the pros and cons of these lenses. Performance wise the Sony isn't significantly better than the Sigma or Tamron. The focus breathing on the Sony 16-55 f2.8 seems well controlled. From what I recall it's not supported by the Focus Breathing Compensation anyway, so this wouldn't be a deciding factor. The AF performance of the Sigma and Tamron are both quite excellent, but we can assume the 16-55 would be slightly better. Compared to the Sigma you're getting a little extra width and reach along with better dust and moisture resistance. Probably better LOCA performance too on the Sony Compared to the Tamron you get slightly better performance when it comes to CA, but I wouldn't say the Tamron suffers from any major CA issues. The Sony have an AF/MF switch on the lens barrel and a smaller size. But you're missing out on the extra reach, image stabilization and weather sealing. So even if price isn't a deciding factor, it's hard to say what the Sony does that much better than any of the other options in my opinion. It is a nice zoom range and slightly more versatile than the Sigma but not so compared to the Tamron. And if you're going to get into Sony's full frame cameras later on, I'd rather grab the Sigma 24-70 and a fast wide prime for now. Or the apsc Tamron or Sigma f2.8 lenses. So in my opinion (and everyone can disagree if they want) apart from super small improvements in AF and optically on some points. It's hard to say what makes the Sony a much better option unless - one really wants native glass or that 16-55 and size happens to be more ideal than the smaller sigma or the larger but extended reach of the Tamron. Sorry that was rather long, but that's how I look at these three lenses.
@@thomasfranssonThanks a lot for the extensive analysis, it is much appreciated and it really helps to put things into perspective. I will take a look as well to the Sigma 24-70, cheers!.
Glad if I'm able to help. Keep in mind that 24mm might not be quite wide enough for everything (even if I shoot a lot on a 23mm f1.4 myself) sometimes it can be a good idea to have a wider faster prime.
thx for the review! Last year i startet with photography. I bought a used sony a6000, and chose the tamron because it has stabilization and a wider range. sry for my english im german :)
Ah got you! The Tamron is definitely sharp, almost too sharp for my liking ;) But I like vintage lenses and other weird lenses. Still, my go to for a lot of things.
isn't the stabilization on the tamron in conflict with the ibis of the camera? the only lenses where ibis and OSS work together are some specific sony lenses on their FF bodies
Works just fine on the FX30 as you can see in this video. I've shot hours with this setup as I bought the lens with my FX30 over a year ago. Maybe they're using active steady shot or have their steady shot set to manual - Or think the IBIS/Steady Shot and VC can replace a gimbal. The ibis on the FX30 isn't great to begin with and who knows, maybe the VC and Active mode gets to sticky if used together. Not sure though why one would use Active steady and VC - But maybe some of them use none stabilized lenses and didn't change the ibis mode when trying the Tamron... As you could see in the video even I messed this up at first and had to go back and re-shoot some test shots ;)
I can imagine, basically a tripod mode. Well, as I've used this lens quite extensively and cover the VC/OIS with examples in the video I don't think I have much more to add.
Amazing review! I am sick of those reviews with just lab test and charts or full on talking without showing anything in real life. Your review doesn't waste time and come to the real thing. Wonderful!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed
I've been looking for a good review of the Tamron and this is the best lens review in general I've seen by a landslide! Clear, fun, to the point and great comparison footage. Love your personality in these as well. Thank you!
Glad it was helpful!
And thank you so much for the kind words and taking the time.
Just discover your channel!
I've never seen a better lenses comparison than yourse before!
Thank you, it helps a lot!
Welcome!
And thank you, that's great to hear
The best review of this lenses. I really searched that info about shake oss on fx30 and now I’m felling more confident to buy the tamron
Thank you Glad to hear it was helpful!
What I love about both of these lenses are how affordable they are, so a videographer really could have both for the price of the Sony 24-105mm. I think the tamron 17-70mm is great for shoots where you'd need that extra reach and VC for handheld, whereas the sigma 18-50mm would be perfect for a lightweight setup to fly on a gimbal. I've made the decision to actually downgrade from Sony full frame because of how much you can accomplish with an FX30 with these two lenses. Great video Thomas!
Totally agree!
The real, best review. I'm choosing the tamron really soon and I can't wait to get it!
Sweet! I'm sure you'll enjoy it!
I use my ZV-E10 with my Tamron and the combo is just perfect for professional use.👌
Great combo
If you plan to use Tamron 17-70 with IBIS bodies, then forget about it. Tamron will make stabilization glitches, because Tamrons and Sony bodies stabilization can't recognize each other and in the result you might get stabilization artifacts. Specially shooting handheld. That is why I refunded Tamron and got Sigma insted.
Well, lets agree to disagree there, I think my examples in this video supports my stand quite well ;)
Have a great day!
@@thomasfransson Same thought I had same thoughts for first few months. Until some artifacts got so bad that no software could fix it.
Well, apart from the faulty settings that I showed along with the examples along with samples with the correct settings. I haven't had any issues. During almost a year of frequent use. It's obviously no miracle worker that VC or any OIS for that matter. Some people put too much trust in those instead of using a gimbal when the shots calls for it.
Still just choose which you like better
The tamron is still the objectively better lens
It depends just on which is in your budget
The tamron has been tested a lot with IBIS bodies and no one found this issue. So either this is an user error. Or something broke along the way, maybe time to contact the repair center.
For the FX30 I’d go with the Sony 18-105 f/4 OSS. Internal zoom on a gimbal is awesome. IBIS works well if the camera is stationary but any movement causes IBIS to overcompensate and then become un-smooth.
Glad that lens gets you what you need.
Thanks for watching
I went for the Sigma 18-50mm for my Sony a6700, and I find it great for client work! I wish the lens was fully weather-sealed, though I can always cover the camera in a pinch. I've been aching to get my hands on the Tamron 17-70mm and see how it performs with my kit, though I'm happy with the decision!
Good choice!
They're both great options both the Sigma and the Tamron. Hard to go wrong with any of them.
Thank you. Information about the aperture range. Been looking all over the internet for this information
My pleasure!
According to B&H website (it's been a minute) Sigma f2.8-22
Tamron f2.8-16
Great video! Thanks!
Thanks man!
Wow! What a review you made! Perfect! I have been researching both lenses and your video made it easier to understand the pros and cons, but since both are very good, I’m still in doubt 🧐 😊. Congratulations for the quality of your review. It’s very difficult to find similar quality around YT, lots of big audience channels publish reviews with too much talk and not enough examples, yours made the difference between the products quite clear. I must say that the example shots you made were really beautiful. Thank you!
Cheers!
Thank you so much for the kind words. It makes me happy to hear all this. Let me know if you have any questions.
I already have one of these two. Had I found it before I bought mine I might have the other one! What a good review! Thanks for that!
Can't go too wrong with either one.
Thanks
Thank you for such a deep review! It was helpful to me since I’m choosing the proper lenses in small budget!
Glad it was helpful!
Got the Tamron!
The Vibration Compensation and the extra range made the difference for me.
I'm very happy with my choice! Perfect match with my sony @6000.
Nice!
Same here. And the weather sealing ;)
It's my work horse
Sigma is the clear choice fot me. I'm still thinking at the 16-55mm f2.8 sony lens, considering it is weather sealed. I wonder if this lens could be balanced on a gimbal at any focal lenght as the sigma 18-50mm, that would be a big win for the sony. I'm shooting outdoor a lot and I am tempted to go with weather sealed lenses.
Nice!
As you saw in the video, even the Weebill S handles the entire zoom range of the weather sealed Tamron without breaking a sweat. So the similar sized 16-55 would probably not be a problem on a gimbal either.
p
The 16-55 is an interesting option as it hits the 3rd price tier and rivals options like Sigmas full frame 24-70 (that also lacks stabilization) in price. I think that's why we hear and see so little about that lens, it's a tough sell on paper ;)
16-55 is best, I love it.
I used the Sony 16-55 mm f/2.8 G extensively, for the last 16 months.
This lens is exactly as good as any fixed focal lens of its range in existence, facts proven by... dozens of tests (PetaPixel included).
I used it on a Sony A7M4, with a little crop in post-production, just for the fun of it. I could not find any flaw in pictures, with a 300% zoom-in.
And those were real-estate images, with lots of furniture, details, tiny objects, decorations, etc.
I initially considered the Tamron 17-70, but noticed its soft corners... a no-go for interiors and architecture. And other usages too.
Then, it did not feature any "assistance" on the barrel, which is a bit annoying nowadays.
All reasons leading to go for the Sony 16-55.
But Tamron know how to make great lenses (their 35-150 mm f/2-2.8 is a killer !), and I've owned some.
Plus Sony owns shares of Tamron, explaining why they are so well paired with Sony cameras.
I am eagerly waiting for the 2nd generation of this Tamron 17-70 mm f/2.8, because, lessons being learnt, it shall be way better optically and fitted with better assistance features. Before next year hopefully, as Tamron is currently renewing their whole range with major improvements along the way.
And then, I may consider it... that 70 mm max focal length makes my mouth water.
Absolutely great review, with test procedures very well thought out !
Thank you for bring some more water to the mill...
Thank you!
I returned Tamron 17-70mm ( Fuji x mount) the next day because it had very bad back focus issues at 70mm. Also at 17mm not very convincing. Got the Fuji 16-55mm f2.8 and was much happier.
So back focus on a mirroless system. Yes it excists for sure😮
Interesting - Bad copy or bad adaptation to the X-mount...
Thank you so much for your professional review
Both are great lenses in their own right, however, I chose the Sigma because of two things when it comes to travel………size and weight.
It's the perfect travel lens for sure
Thanks for the review!
Sigma released this lens when I already had a Tamron 17-70. I didn't like the blur in Tamron, it wasn't stable :(
On the Sony a6400, I did not notice the stabilizer working, especially on the video, the shaking at 70mm was stronger than at 105 on the Sony 18-105mm.
The only advantage of the Tamron in front of Sigma is 70 mm. It's big, heavy, without a normal stabilizer and with a nervous background blur.
Sounds like you might have gotten a lemon or maybe the a6400 wasn't able to properly communicate with the lens due to age?
But then again like I mentioned in the video - different type of shooters will favor one over the other ;)
@@thomasfransson um... Sony a6400 is a relatively new camera, that's A 6300 it was worse. But there 18-105 were stable so much that I got used to such a view, and 17-70 I did not get it. The second time I would not buy :(
As it works fine on the FX30 that was just an assumption that the older a6400 (released in spring 2019) might have something to do with it.
As for the comparison with the 18-105 it's possible that the stabilization would work better as it's a Sony lens, a longer lens and thus possibly offer more stops of stabilization. The f2.8 aperture on the Tamron might also be a limiting factor when it comes to this what type of stabilization is possible to implement along with decisions on size, price and so forth.
As I've never looked into why Tamron refers to their lens stabilization as Vibration compensation (I'm thinking micro jitters) rather than gimbal smoothness but that is another aspect to consider. After all these are photography lenses and both ibis and ois will certainly work better for stills than video.
And while we're at it I think a lot of newer less experienced shooters might have their expectations set to high when it comes to stabilization whether it's in camera, lens or a combination of both. Let's also put into perspective the vast difference in shooting styles, shooting scenarios, people in general as well as technique.
Personally I have rather shaky hands and even with Ibis it's hard for me to shoot steady once I approach 35mm on an aps-c camera. 23mm or wider is where I feel the most comfortable. Some people might have their cutoff at a wider focal length while others might be quite comfortable at 50mm for short takes. I can obviously shoot at 50 or 70mm but that will result in some jerks, no matter what setup I'm using as my hands are quite twitchy.
Anyway - It looks like we have different experiences using this lens on our respective cameras and for what ever we've used it for. Personally I think it's a great lens for the right type of shooter and types of shoot. And as you've made quite clear, you're not overly enthusiastic about it based on your experience and shooting preferences.
@@thomasfransson you're right, everyone's styles are different, but I'm so outraged because I never expected to see shaking at Tamron's minimum focal lengths when I got used to a stable 18-105 picture at the same focal lengths. In any case, even the built-in Sony camera stabilizer is not such that you can shoot video, for a photo it is normal.
thank you :)
your video is the best comparing in all the other video i watch. Keep it up bro
Thanks a ton, will do
Amazing review, thank you
My pleasure!
Subscribed to your channel after finding your Canon user preset videos. Hopefully we get something similar to the Classic Chrome soon ✌🏼
Thanks for the sub! Have you tried the Filmic Base yet?
I purchased the tamron and used it for an hour.. As far as I was concerned the lens was far too heavy for the a6400, it felt uncomfortable and out of balance, not at all pleasant to use, I just couldn't keep it. The sigma doesn't have stabilisation so that was not in the running. All the many reviews that I have seen show the sony 18 135 to match either of these for sharpness, which is my criteria, it also has stabilisation so it's the sony for me.
Glad you found the lens for you
Really awesome and helpful video, will definitely be watching out for your channel for future reviews, thanks!
Awesome, thank you!
i have this superb versatile lens , tamron 17-70 and i love it
It's a great lens for sure
Thanks a lot for this excellent comparison. I was looking for such a review so I can choose a video lens for my xt4 because Fuji isn't apparently keen to renew that old 16-55 2.8.
I'm not a fan of Tamron for having tested some lenses in the past but this one seems to be a very good one in a pretty affordable package.
The image quality and the construction quality isn't on par with the Fuji lens (I need that aperture ring) but for half the price the discussion seems over. I'm almost sold on the Tamron.
Glad it was helpful!
I already put in RMA request for my Sigma 18-50. Somehow, no one has noticed that at f2.8 this lens is underexposing the image a lot. At least with my A6600. For example on Aperture priority and Auto ISO, if I go from F4 to F2.8, the image darkens a lot. I took some photos of my kid outside at 5.30pm under light shade of trees and they came out as if I shot them at dusk. The sun was still up high and the day was still bright. Indoors with the low light situation , F2.8 at 50mm just plain sucked. But F4 and F8 actually got better images (noisy but usable).
Tamron was almost same price 'used like new' when I bought the sigma. I am sad that I let it go. I now have to buy the Tamron at full price as there aren't any discounts right now. :(
Also the vignetting at 18mm is so noticeable. Like APS-C and you get vignetting? Come on Sigma, have you seen your own other lenses?
I wish I had seen your review before buying it. I would have definitely chosen the Tamron. You made it all so unbiased compared to others I watched. Thanks!!!
That sounds odd. I didn't notice any major differences in my side by sides, but I shot those in manual mode.
Have you checked if you have any exposure compensation or exposure preview function activated on your camera?
Sadly I'm not too familiar with the photo side of Sony but I know there's usually some sort of exposure preview on most cameras. If that's active the screen or image will look much brighter when you half press the shutter as the camera can override auto settings and open the Aputure or change other settings to give you a better view for framing and to grab focus. But the image will be darker than what you see on your screen when you lock focus.
Just thinking out loud here if you still have the lens at hand you could try the lens in manual mode vs auto mode to see if there’s a camera that might be the problem.
If not, the Tamron isn’t a bad lens either;)
you got a new sub.. great content
Thank you so much! Welcome aboard!
Talking about quality content! Kudos!
Thank you so much my friend!
Thanks for sharing, Thomas! Have a comment for the algo gods.
Thank you Gabriel - I appreciate it very much!
Fantastic content! Suscribed!
Awesome, thank you and welcome aboard
Great comparison ! I ❤ Malmo !
Thanks for watching!
The Tamron 17-70 F 2.8 is more up my ally.
It's a great lens, I use mine a lot.
Light is one motivation to let me carry my apsc out
Definitely a great motivator
I'm using the Tamron and I got disappointed immediately because of the focus issue.
It always goes out of focus when I zoom, even when I turn the zoom ring very slowly
That's too bad, i find it works ok with the FX30 as I demonstrated in the video. What camera are you shooting on?
With a6700 is ok
Thank you, from Russia!
Always happy to be of use ;)
Btw
Thr tamron uses their OLD technology RXD not their newer VXD autofocus tech
Yep, works great on aps-c lenes
hey hello, I ask you for advice on using it on an electronic gimbal, Tamron or Sigma?
Both work fine as can be seen in the gimbal test at 10:22 so unless it's specifically for gimbal use I would look at what lens ticks the most boxes apart from that.
But you could also revisit "The Picking" at 14:03 to hear my thoughts on what lens works best for what situation.
Hi, great video! Is the manual focus linear on the tamron?
Yes, it is.
Thanks
@@thomasfransson Ok, so the focus is not changing differently depending on how fast you turn the focus ring?
Feels pretty linear to me.
Hi i thinking of getting this lens but i unsure with the imagine stablization, is it good with a a6700?
Should be similar to the FX30 and the examples you see in the video.
The a6700 uses the same sensor and therefore probably the same ibis system as the FX30
That said, no stabilization will replace a gimbal, but it will take out those micro shakes and that sort of stuff.
@@thomasfransson ok I think I might get the eony 18 105 f4 cause of the oss
OK, hope it works great for what you have in mind
Wow this answered everything. I have a Weebill S. Looking to build a FX30 platform cause I need autofocus for events and weddings. Currently a BMPCC4k shooter.
That's gonna be a great setup for that. Have shot some events just like this.
Removing price from the equation. Would you pick the Sony 16-55 F2.8 above any of this two? Cheers.
I don't think so.
The Sony sits in the same price range as the Sigma 24-70 f2.8 (full frame and even if price isn't a factor in this scenario, it can serve as a yardstick when comparing the pros and cons of these lenses. Performance wise the Sony isn't significantly better than the Sigma or Tamron.
The focus breathing on the Sony 16-55 f2.8 seems well controlled. From what I recall it's not supported by the Focus Breathing Compensation anyway, so this wouldn't be a deciding factor.
The AF performance of the Sigma and Tamron are both quite excellent, but we can assume the 16-55 would be slightly better.
Compared to the Sigma you're getting a little extra width and reach along with better dust and moisture resistance. Probably better LOCA performance too on the Sony
Compared to the Tamron you get slightly better performance when it comes to CA, but I wouldn't say the Tamron suffers from any major CA issues. The Sony have an AF/MF switch on the lens barrel and a smaller size. But you're missing out on the extra reach, image stabilization and weather sealing.
So even if price isn't a deciding factor, it's hard to say what the Sony does that much better than any of the other options in my opinion. It is a nice zoom range and slightly more versatile than the Sigma but not so compared to the Tamron.
And if you're going to get into Sony's full frame cameras later on, I'd rather grab the Sigma 24-70 and a fast wide prime for now. Or the apsc Tamron or Sigma f2.8 lenses. So in my opinion (and everyone can disagree if they want) apart from super small improvements in AF and optically on some points. It's hard to say what makes the Sony a much better option unless - one really wants native glass or that 16-55 and size happens to be more ideal than the smaller sigma or the larger but extended reach of the Tamron.
Sorry that was rather long, but that's how I look at these three lenses.
@@thomasfranssonThanks a lot for the extensive analysis, it is much appreciated and it really helps to put things into perspective. I will take a look as well to the Sigma 24-70, cheers!.
Glad if I'm able to help.
Keep in mind that 24mm might not be quite wide enough for everything (even if I shoot a lot on a 23mm f1.4 myself) sometimes it can be a good idea to have a wider faster prime.
talk about barrel distortion, using frame with lots of vertical lines. Thomas know his thing! ill go subs to your channel man.. great content..
Thank you I appreciate it 🙏
Sigma is about half the size!
Where are you? In Malmö?
It the size of an aps-c prime pretty much.
Great if you want small, bad if you need something to hold onto 😅
You guessed it, im in Malmö.
Even if i really like tamron. I use both and finally i sell my tamron cause the size is too big for apsc. It defeat the purpose of apsc
I'm glad you found what's right for you.
I don't see STEADYSHOT NORMAL option in a6700, there is Active/Standard/Off, which one should I keep for stable footage?
Standard would be just the sensor stabilization and active sensor stabilization plus digital stabilization.
thx for the review! Last year i startet with photography. I bought a used sony a6000, and chose the tamron because it has stabilization and a wider range. sry for my english im german :)
Sounds like a great combo for photography!
Easy but without sharpness and crazy distortion
Not sure I understand what you mean. But anyway, glad you stopped by to check out the video on these specific lenses.
@@thomasfransson this sigma lens is low sharpness and big distortion.
Ah got you!
The Tamron is definitely sharp, almost too sharp for my liking ;) But I like vintage lenses and other weird lenses. Still, my go to for a lot of things.
isn't the stabilization on the tamron in conflict with the ibis of the camera? the only lenses where ibis and OSS work together are some specific sony lenses on their FF bodies
Nope
@@thomasfransson i just watched a few other reviews and they all confirm that the VC of the lens fights against the ibis of the camera
Works just fine on the FX30 as you can see in this video. I've shot hours with this setup as I bought the lens with my FX30 over a year ago.
Maybe they're using active steady shot or have their steady shot set to manual - Or think the IBIS/Steady Shot and VC can replace a gimbal.
The ibis on the FX30 isn't great to begin with and who knows, maybe the VC and Active mode gets to sticky if used together. Not sure though why one would use Active steady and VC - But maybe some of them use none stabilized lenses and didn't change the ibis mode when trying the Tamron... As you could see in the video even I messed this up at first and had to go back and re-shoot some test shots ;)
@@thomasfransson yes it when using active mode it gets worse
I can imagine, basically a tripod mode. Well, as I've used this lens quite extensively and cover the VC/OIS with examples in the video I don't think I have much more to add.