I’m searching for a new lens and literally every time I look for a review one of your videos pops up and they’re so good! Thanks for answering every question I had!
This video was indeed both entertaining and informative. Thanks for spending the time creating an excellent presentation. I have the Sigma 28-70mm contemporary and very pleased with it. Based on your review and brand-choice, I’ll purchase the Sigma! Thanks again and please keep these excellent videos coming!
Really interesting comparison! After watching your Sigma review, I thought it was going to be noticeably sharper but that Tamron holds up really well. I had no idea the Tamron was also an internal zoom, not sure how I always missed that detail haha! I really hope they skip the G2 version and just make a 15-30 instead. Now that would REALLY be everyone's top choice!
@@JohnDennery they are making a 20-50mm f2.8 and a 25-50mm f2 to complement the new 50-400mm. They have a new design that allows the production of smaller zooms, but with such a big zoom range it is probably not going to be compact.
Great review from a pro photographer, not just a UA-camr. Your sample photos look awesome. I prefer Sigma for the wide end to 16mm and higher contrast. Tamron 17-28 seems a bit too narrow Zoom range and might prefer a prime such as Sony 20G.
You guys (UA-camrs) made me buy this lens today (in January 2023). Too much positive reviews and all the comparisons with the Tamron 17-28 made me want it more ! I'm happy that end-of-year price reductions are still existing even if we already are in half of January. I really love the sharpness of the Sigma lenses for the price. I prefer Tamron more for the accent on blue and orange colors for my landscape photography. But I prefer Sigma for my portrait photography. I can't wait to see how this one performs in terms of colors and sharpness for landscape photography compared to my Tamron 20mm f/2.8 thank you for the review !
Mr. Pav, I am rally impressed with the comparison. There were many thoughts, actually, I was confused choosing between Tamron and Sigma. Your review really helped me to choose one. Since, I have Tamron 28-75mm / f2.8. I have decided to go with Tamron 17-28mm f2.8. Many Thanks again!
Dustin Abbot seem to see significantlly more vignetting and distortion at the Sigma. And a shorter 28 on the tamron. So I'd say significant less range on the tamron. I belief Abbott found the Tamron's bokeh better and sharpness too (and price and better weather sealing).
I've heard some reports of vignetting on Sigma but I couldn't see any with the 3 lenses that I have used (L-mount and 2 x Sony-E). Maybe there was inconsistency with pre-production copies. Tamron is weather sealed, that's a plus but Sigma is much, much sharper, or should I say the sharpness is much easier to nail with it. Just my opinion
@@PavSZ It should not remain a matter of opinion wich lens is sharper (and outside of copy-variation 'tolerances'). 'Easier acquiring of focus" : That concept of yours deserves your own video dedicated to it' as prerequisite to such communication about that that (any) lens. MY 'opinion'
@@AR-vf7vg I had tamron for over a year and I never had focusing issues with it and I never thought that it is not sharp enough. That only popped up when I started shooting the same photos, with the same settings with both Tamron and Sigma side by side. Sigma was giving me great results 99% of time when Tamron only 80% Also, coming back to vignetting. It shows a little on the photos when the lens profile is not applied in Lightroom. There is no lens profile available for Sony-E version but Lumix cameras apply it to the Raw files to the L-mount version. That's why I never been concerned about it. Superficial
Amazing and very informative review ! The darker edges, vignette like effect on the Sigma is the reason that let me pick the Tamron even tho it's a 1mm less wider. Keep up the good work 🔥
both really good lenses. The vignetting from Sigma (and bulging) are fixed now by lens profile in Lightroom. It was not available at the time of making this video. Thank you for watching
thanks for this - i mostly paid attention to the sigma parts cuz i'm thinking about that lens night and day and wondering if i should get it to travel with.
Great review - much needed. The other possible decision factor is that Sony has a investment stake in Tamron and that shows up for users in protocol implementation. While the protocols are open, we have seen Tamron operating better (e.g. AF) a bit better than the competition on some of lenses. But fortunately you really can't go wrong here with either.
I've been very indecisive about wich lense I should buy for real state, specially in a budget, and this video is helping me to go for the tamron... hmm interesting indeed.. cool comparison :)
Amaaazing review and examples mate, I love the way you expose your concepts with such big enthusiasm! I didn't know you and I am now subscribing to your channel :) Looking forward to watch other videos of yours!
Same for me. I think the Tamron beat the Sigma on nearly on parameter, price, focusing distance, warranty, weather sealing. The only thing missing in the Tamron is a button configurable like on Sony lens or the Sigma, for autocus/manual focus and one button to set apsc35 mode for example, that would be perfect for somebody that have a Sony a7c with less buttons. With buttons the Tamron would be the absolute perfection, but right now it still the best to my opinion.
Tamron is only lens that I have ever owned and not reviewed here on my channel. I'ver sold it eventually and replaced it with this Sigma. Far superior lens optically. Very unusual for Tamron
Thank you for a great comparison! I think I l’ll get the Tamron. I really like your photo edits. They have a pleasant look, kind of faded, but at the same time punchy. Would really love to see a photo editing tutorial from you!
@@PavSZ there is no such info of G2. The Tamron is lighter (30g less) cheaper, very well weather resistant and dust resistant, 6 years warranty, great photo and video. Focusing distance is better (6 cm more closer). Tamron is the winner for me. I have it for nearly two years, and i really really love it. It is my lens to go for nearly all the time. The rest of time for wildlife, and landscape and telephoto/portrait i use the Tamron 70-300 f4.5-6.3 rxd which is very sharp and nice color, no aberration and only 545g with same quality that the 17-28 and very well weather resistant, same 67mm for the ND filter and same 6 years warranty.
Marginally liking and preferring the Sigma in terms of specs, but since I already have the tamrons with 67mm filter threads I like to stay in that ecosystem
The Tamron 20-40 f2.8 is interesting. Compared to 17-28 range, it gives the 35mm and 40mm that are good for video and photo with less distortions that a regular wide angle limited to 28mm. I think i would have still chose the 17-28 but the 20-40 would be very tempting as i mostly use my tamron 17-28 in the 20-28mm range. With super35 mode it would even give a 50 and 60mm range. And at f2.8
Such a beautiful place... How do you get such vibrant colors? Great review! Thanks! I too got a Tamron, and now thinking if I should keep it or switch to Sigma... I already have the other 2 of the holy trinity, so a different filter size and focus behaviour would be kind of a bummer to me... :((
thanks man! discovering this channel was a big surprise! good luck \m/ one thing i dont understand is i found different names for the tamron lens, RDX and VDX G2. I have no idea if are the same lans or a sort of update, do you have any idea about it?
Thank you! I'm not sure what the difference is for sure but I think it is a different focusing motor. Older VXD (Voice-coil eXtreme-torque Drive) and newer RXD (Rapid eXtra-silent stepping Drive)
3:24 worried me though 😲 the very center (the statue column) proves that the exposure is properly identical, but already when only slightly off the center, the Sigma becomes noticeably darker (which implies: noisier after de-vignetting), and regarding color reproduction, it literally hates (and eats) foliage green? These greens compare literally like night versus day. This way, the Sigma probably wouldn't become a landscape photographer's best friend, would it?
the thing is that Tamron lens profile has been applied in Lightroom to all of the photos, Sigma profile is not available yet. I think I am going to go with Sigma .... I don't know yet
@@PavSZ Let's hope it is a profile thing then, at least with regards to the 'vignetting'. Do you know if lens profiles are also designed to be able to tweak color reproduction? I thought this is only a sensor thing (i.e. only available in camera profiles), but am not 100% sure right now, need to do some investigation. But please do a re-test and share your findings, whenever Adobe will have released a lens profile 🙂 I'm sure they will do promptly, because this will become a popular lens, because for many / for most users, sharpness nuances are the thing which rules out everything else 😉 (also simply because one can tweak light and colors in post, but sharpness only to a very limited extent)
@@tubularificationed the profile will correct chromatic abberation, vignetting and bulging/pincushion. I have tested this lens on Sony (in this video) and also on Lumix S5. Lumix cameras apply lens profile to the RAW files in camera. Vignetting was not an issue then
Idk man that sharpness difference was huge to me in that flower example. Sigma looked like professional photography and Tamron looked like a smartphone. IMO
I have shot with both extensively side by side. Tamron is OK, when you don't push it too hard. Sigma is waaaaay better overall. In the end I have sold my Tamron.
@@PavSZ I may just suck it up and get Sony. People say there’s not much difference but I see a big difference. Thing is though, Tamron has better min focus distance which is great for what I do. Wish I could just try em out and see but that includes rental fees or restocking fees on returns ugh
thank you for your effort!! how do you think about distortion? sigma is not good? (based on software adjustment 'on') did you turn on software distortion adjustment in camera?
it is very good. Camera corrects it very well. I am still using Sigma on a7IV and a7sIII. Also lens profile in Lightroom sorts it out completely now (when shooting photos)
now that there is Adobe Lightroom lens profile correction, they are about the same. I have sold my Tamron for the Sigma personally. Better lens overall in my opinion
@@PavSZ And now, which one would you choose between the two lenses? I currently have the tamron 28-75mm F2.8, but I'm thinking of switching to a sigma 24-70mm F2.8. I don't know if it is complementary in color and quality with this sigma 16-28mm
@@PavSZ Thank you very much for answering, sorry for asking so many questions. One more please. At times of low light, how noise and autofocus behave. I do wedding video at night and I have that fear.
great review, Im in the market for a wide angle zoom lens for my sony, things hat are importanyt is the focal lenthgh , at least 16mm on the wide end and ideally with inbody stabilization ?, any thoughts
@@PavSZ i saw this astro video with 1628 , but it’s in japanese ua-cam.com/video/mwN-mbthSNs/v-deo.html… i’m leaning towards the sigma… what’s your opinion between the 16-28 and sigma 14-24…
@@daaddyo1249 i was thinking about that the weight too. I have the 24-70 sigma. Something light for a change will be nice if the quality is similar. But i guess they are very similar.
My testing gave me very different results. Tamron is optically better, sharper all over the frame, focusing fast. Sigma has strong distortions and vignetting, AF is slow and hunting at times, and produces warmer tones at AWB.
I have tested Sigma on Lumix S5 and Sony a7IV. Lumix embeds lens profile into the RAW files and that completely removes vignetting and distortion - we have to wait for Lightroom update to bring lens profile for Sony shooters. I've managed to get sharp results with Tamron shooting side by side but I had to fight it every single time when Sigma worked better overall for me. Never had issues with AF speed on Sigma - I have actually bought it now as well and using it
“With minimum focus distance Tamron wins since you can get 19cm and Sigma is 25cm. Both equally good at getting close to the subject” Confused me on that one… 🤔
Hej, dzisiaj stoję przed wyborem pomiędzy tymi szkłami. Głównie planuję nim vlogować. Z perspektywy czasu co byś wybrał? Za Sigmą przemawia 16mm, za Tamronem waga i uszczelnienie. Z góry dzięki za podpowiedź :) P.S. Film widziałem 3 razy... :P
no - I was just at the different distance from the guy. These shots were taken at different times. You can see the difference between 16 and 17mm on the photos at 3:49
in this case, Tamron is way better, why? G2 version is coming and will be push and beat the Sigma in every aspect, main weakness on Sigma is the non weather sealed body (only mount)... Similar situation with Tamron and Sigma 28-70,75 models, G2 is way better
It'll be interesting to see how the G2 will perform. But I think the Sigma is the better option compared to this version of the Tamron. One thing to note when it comes to sealing is that the Sigma is a fully internal zoom while the Tamron has a moving inner barrel.
I have never seen distortion as bad as on the sigma 16-28 in any lens. While I was positively suprised by the handling, it is simply not usable in any setting where people are anywhere in the frame. Even trees start to look weird. I compared it to sonys 20mm and 24 mm, and the difference in distortion is astonishing.
this is totally corrected by the lens profile correction in Lightroom. There is no les profile available for Sony version but Lumix cameras add it to the RAW files in the camera. Did you compare the Sigma at 20mm and 24mm to the Sony lenses? I have replaced my Tamron with the Sigma now.
@@PavSZ Lightroom offered a lens profile, which did very little to lessen the effect. Okay, I just tested the probably worst shot, and at 200% applied lens correction LR makes the worst pictures look merely very bad, not ridiculously bad. This worst shot was taken at 22mm. I tried to replicate the problem with both the 24 and the 20 mm, but i could not bring either lens to look as bad, even when I tried hard.
@@PavSZ I just tried one of the comparision shots I took, and the 24mm does not need the LR lens correction to look better than the 16-28 corrected at 200%. If I overcorrect the 24 the same way, it blows the 16-28 out of the water again. And the 20mm is in my opinion even better than the 24mm when it comes to distortion. Thanks for answering, by the way! I do very much enjoy your videos!
Considering the sigma over the 20mmf1.8 due to the active stabilization crop of the a7siii I'm using, that would make it more like a 22mm I'd assume. While the f1.8 is nice, I don't think it would be wide enough for me.
I’m searching for a new lens and literally every time I look for a review one of your videos pops up and they’re so good! Thanks for answering every question I had!
Glad you like them! Happy to help! Thank you
Did you end up going with either one of these lenses, Tom?
@@keysncoffee7733 I still have both but I don't use the Tamron anymore
This video was indeed both entertaining and informative. Thanks for spending the time creating an excellent presentation. I have the Sigma 28-70mm contemporary and very pleased with it. Based on your review and brand-choice, I’ll purchase the Sigma! Thanks again and please keep these excellent videos coming!
Thank you very much!
Can I just say. Damn! That town is so photogenic 🥲
Really interesting comparison! After watching your Sigma review, I thought it was going to be noticeably sharper but that Tamron holds up really well. I had no idea the Tamron was also an internal zoom, not sure how I always missed that detail haha! I really hope they skip the G2 version and just make a 15-30 instead. Now that would REALLY be everyone's top choice!
I'm with you on that! Fuck the update, make the small and light 15-30mm instead!!!
@@PavSZ It would be the most exciting lens announcement in a long time!
@@JohnDennery they are making a 20-50mm f2.8 and a 25-50mm f2 to complement the new 50-400mm. They have a new design that allows the production of smaller zooms, but with such a big zoom range it is probably not going to be compact.
@@vincenzodellama7158 20-50 would be amazing! One and done lens for almost everything. I sure hope you’re right!
@@JohnDennery it's just a matter of time, they published the designs last year
Great review from a pro photographer, not just a UA-camr. Your sample photos look awesome. I prefer Sigma for the wide end to 16mm and higher contrast. Tamron 17-28 seems a bit too narrow Zoom range and might prefer a prime such as Sony 20G.
Thank you very much!
I feel the same
You guys (UA-camrs) made me buy this lens today (in January 2023). Too much positive reviews and all the comparisons with the Tamron 17-28 made me want it more ! I'm happy that end-of-year price reductions are still existing even if we already are in half of January.
I really love the sharpness of the Sigma lenses for the price.
I prefer Tamron more for the accent on blue and orange colors for my landscape photography.
But I prefer Sigma for my portrait photography.
I can't wait to see how this one performs in terms of colors and sharpness for landscape photography compared to my Tamron 20mm f/2.8
thank you for the review !
Dude, what about the 20 mm for video? Do you recommend it? Im not getting this(review lens) for the price :/ thanks
Absolutely delighted with my Tamron --on my camera a lot , on the A7C the colours are almost as seen ... great vid BTW
Great to hear! Thank you for watching
Mr. Pav, I am rally impressed with the comparison. There were many thoughts, actually, I was confused choosing between Tamron and Sigma. Your review really helped me to choose one. Since, I have Tamron 28-75mm / f2.8. I have decided to go with Tamron 17-28mm f2.8. Many Thanks again!
thank you very much for watching and I'm glad that I could help with your decision
Hi Pav. I recently purchased the Sigma 16-28 based on your reviews. Very much appreciated, thank you 👏
Great to hear! I got one after my own review too!
Thank you for watching !
Dude, how does it focus in low light conditions, and if it sounds a lot maybe?
Based on your photos, that 1 mm looks rather significant to me. Thanks for this great review!
it is!
Thank you for watching
Dustin Abbot seem to see significantlly more vignetting and distortion at the Sigma. And a shorter 28 on the tamron. So I'd say significant less range on the tamron. I belief Abbott found the Tamron's bokeh better and sharpness too (and price and better weather sealing).
I've heard some reports of vignetting on Sigma but I couldn't see any with the 3 lenses that I have used (L-mount and 2 x Sony-E). Maybe there was inconsistency with pre-production copies.
Tamron is weather sealed, that's a plus but Sigma is much, much sharper, or should I say the sharpness is much easier to nail with it. Just my opinion
@@PavSZ It should not remain a matter of opinion wich lens is sharper (and outside of copy-variation 'tolerances').
'Easier acquiring of focus" : That concept of yours deserves your own video dedicated to it' as prerequisite to such communication about that that (any) lens. MY 'opinion'
@@AR-vf7vg I had tamron for over a year and I never had focusing issues with it and I never thought that it is not sharp enough. That only popped up when I started shooting the same photos, with the same settings with both Tamron and Sigma side by side. Sigma was giving me great results 99% of time when Tamron only 80%
Also, coming back to vignetting. It shows a little on the photos when the lens profile is not applied in Lightroom. There is no lens profile available for Sony-E version but Lumix cameras apply it to the Raw files to the L-mount version. That's why I never been concerned about it. Superficial
Amazing and very informative review ! The darker edges, vignette like effect on the Sigma is the reason that let me pick the Tamron even tho it's a 1mm less wider. Keep up the good work 🔥
both really good lenses.
The vignetting from Sigma (and bulging) are fixed now by lens profile in Lightroom. It was not available at the time of making this video.
Thank you for watching
@@PavSZ alright that's good to know, does it appear only on 16mm ?
@@Minorock93 as far as I know
@@PavSZ again thank you very much sir, you've been a great help !
Dude love the comparison! Great video bro
Jak zawsze świetna robota! :) Baaaaardzo fajnie ogląda się Twoje recenzje :)
Dzieki!!
thanks for this - i mostly paid attention to the sigma parts cuz i'm thinking about that lens night and day and wondering if i should get it to travel with.
Thank Caleb!
I have done review of it: ua-cam.com/video/0bynRQ6Gw80/v-deo.html
I do own it now and it is my favourite wide angle zoom
@@PavSZ this is good to know - i think i might take the dive
Great review - much needed. The other possible decision factor is that Sony has a investment stake in Tamron and that shows up for users in protocol implementation. While the protocols are open, we have seen Tamron operating better (e.g. AF) a bit better than the competition on some of lenses. But fortunately you really can't go wrong here with either.
yes but in this case Sigma is better. I have sold my Tamron
I've been very indecisive about wich lense I should buy for real state, specially in a budget, and this video is helping me to go for the tamron... hmm interesting indeed.. cool comparison :)
interesting. Sigma is a better lens overall in my opinion
Really good comparison. Thank you.
Thanks!
As per usual, a great video. Thanks Pav. Those are two lenses I am thinking of getting, just one though.
I think I'm going to swap my Tamron for Sigma
Amaaazing review and examples mate, I love the way you expose your concepts with such big enthusiasm! I didn't know you and I am now subscribing to your channel :) Looking forward to watch other videos of yours!
Thank you very much!
Which one is best sir
16-28 Sigma or 17-28 temron??
this is very strange question under the video which answers that question 😉
Nice review. I'm really happy with my tamron lens. No need to buy sigma.
maybe no need but .... I really want it 😉
Same for me. I think the Tamron beat the Sigma on nearly on parameter, price, focusing distance, warranty, weather sealing. The only thing missing in the Tamron is a button configurable like on Sony lens or the Sigma, for autocus/manual focus and one button to set apsc35 mode for example, that would be perfect for somebody that have a Sony a7c with less buttons.
With buttons the Tamron would be the absolute perfection, but right now it still the best to my opinion.
Here in Aus the tamron is much easier to get second hand so I’ll be getting that😊
Tamron is only lens that I have ever owned and not reviewed here on my channel. I'ver sold it eventually and replaced it with this Sigma. Far superior lens optically. Very unusual for Tamron
Thank you for a great comparison! I think I l’ll get the Tamron. I really like your photo edits. They have a pleasant look, kind of faded, but at the same time punchy. Would really love to see a photo editing tutorial from you!
I'd wait to see if the new G2 version of the Tamron lens is coming soon before investing in it now
@@PavSZ there is no such info of G2. The Tamron is lighter (30g less) cheaper, very well weather resistant and dust resistant, 6 years warranty, great photo and video. Focusing distance is better (6 cm more closer). Tamron is the winner for me. I have it for nearly two years, and i really really love it. It is my lens to go for nearly all the time. The rest of time for wildlife, and landscape and telephoto/portrait i use the Tamron 70-300 f4.5-6.3 rxd which is very sharp and nice color, no aberration and only 545g with same quality that the 17-28 and very well weather resistant, same 67mm for the ND filter and same 6 years warranty.
Good. Hermano, from Brazil.
Thanks!
Marginally liking and preferring the Sigma in terms of specs, but since I already have the tamrons with 67mm filter threads I like to stay in that ecosystem
I've sold the Tamron as Sigma was out performing it too much. Still love it but the new Viltrox 16mm beats them both (at wide angle)
Only if there is a cheap version of the 16-35 f2.8 (not the 28mm end), I am holding my Tamron 17-28 f2.8.
maybe one day, there will be one
The Tamron 20-40 f2.8 is interesting. Compared to 17-28 range, it gives the 35mm and 40mm that are good for video and photo with less distortions that a regular wide angle limited to 28mm. I think i would have still chose the 17-28 but the 20-40 would be very tempting as i mostly use my tamron 17-28 in the 20-28mm range. With super35 mode it would even give a 50 and 60mm range. And at f2.8
😊ov😊pp😊pp00😊
Pav! Thank you! Yeah!
Thank you!
Such a beautiful place... How do you get such vibrant colors?
Great review! Thanks! I too got a Tamron, and now thinking if I should keep it or switch to Sigma... I already have the other 2 of the holy trinity, so a different filter size and focus behaviour would be kind of a bummer to me... :((
don't change it if you are happy with it. In the end of the day, it is just a tool
how you pronounce "in fact", anyway i watching your review, i decide to keep tamron because of ability to get closer! thank you Pav,
I've kept the Sigma for so much more sharpness and better overal optical quality
Got a chance to test the Sigma with the S5/Lumix? How’s it performing?
yes, my main review of the Sigma lens - all samples in that video were shot with S5
ua-cam.com/video/0bynRQ6Gw80/v-deo.html
thanks man! discovering this channel was a big surprise! good luck \m/
one thing i dont understand is i found different names for the tamron lens, RDX and VDX G2. I have no idea if are the same lans or a sort of update, do you have any idea about it?
Thank you!
I'm not sure what the difference is for sure but I think it is a different focusing motor.
Older VXD (Voice-coil eXtreme-torque Drive) and newer RXD (Rapid eXtra-silent stepping Drive)
@@PavSZ O_O thanks man! cheers \m/
is the contemporary lens not an APSC lens ? I'm confused
Contemporary lenses are full frame and APS-C.
Sigmas DG DN are full frame and DC DN are APS-C
what about the tone i heard that sigma has a bit warm tone and tamron has kind of a pink tone on both video and pictures
this is true.
Overall, Sigma is a better lens
3:24 worried me though 😲 the very center (the statue column) proves that the exposure is properly identical, but already when only slightly off the center, the Sigma becomes noticeably darker (which implies: noisier after de-vignetting), and regarding color reproduction, it literally hates (and eats) foliage green? These greens compare literally like night versus day. This way, the Sigma probably wouldn't become a landscape photographer's best friend, would it?
the thing is that Tamron lens profile has been applied in Lightroom to all of the photos, Sigma profile is not available yet. I think I am going to go with Sigma .... I don't know yet
@@PavSZ Let's hope it is a profile thing then, at least with regards to the 'vignetting'. Do you know if lens profiles are also designed to be able to tweak color reproduction? I thought this is only a sensor thing (i.e. only available in camera profiles), but am not 100% sure right now, need to do some investigation. But please do a re-test and share your findings, whenever Adobe will have released a lens profile 🙂
I'm sure they will do promptly, because this will become a popular lens, because for many / for most users, sharpness nuances are the thing which rules out everything else 😉
(also simply because one can tweak light and colors in post, but sharpness only to a very limited extent)
@@tubularificationed the profile will correct chromatic abberation, vignetting and bulging/pincushion. I have tested this lens on Sony (in this video) and also on Lumix S5. Lumix cameras apply lens profile to the RAW files in camera. Vignetting was not an issue then
Idk man that sharpness difference was huge to me in that flower example. Sigma looked like professional photography and Tamron looked like a smartphone. IMO
I saw another review that made Sigma seem like the colors were off and it wasn’t as good. But your review is making the Sigma look much better.
I have shot with both extensively side by side. Tamron is OK, when you don't push it too hard. Sigma is waaaaay better overall. In the end I have sold my Tamron.
@@PavSZ I may just suck it up and get Sony. People say there’s not much difference but I see a big difference. Thing is though, Tamron has better min focus distance which is great for what I do. Wish I could just try em out and see but that includes rental fees or restocking fees on returns ugh
thank you for your effort!! how do you think about distortion? sigma is not good? (based on software adjustment 'on')
did you turn on software distortion adjustment in camera?
it is very good. Camera corrects it very well. I am still using Sigma on a7IV and a7sIII. Also lens profile in Lightroom sorts it out completely now (when shooting photos)
Always trust PAV!
Who?
Still no version 2 of this lens.
no
What about distortion? Or maybe I missed that part.
now that there is Adobe Lightroom lens profile correction, they are about the same.
I have sold my Tamron for the Sigma personally. Better lens overall in my opinion
Looking forward to the L mount version.
Thanks for great video
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it
As of today, have the LR corrections for the sigma lens on a sony camera come out? Can distortion and vignetting be corrected in video?
yes and yes.
When shooting jpeg and video the distortion and vignetting can be corrected by the camera. This needs to be switched on in the menus
@@PavSZ And now, which one would you choose between the two lenses? I currently have the tamron 28-75mm F2.8, but I'm thinking of switching to a sigma 24-70mm F2.8. I don't know if it is complementary in color and quality with this sigma 16-28mm
@@mijhaelvi5921 I have chosen Sigma and sold my Tamron. Much better lens overall
@@PavSZ Thank you very much for answering, sorry for asking so many questions. One more please.
At times of low light, how noise and autofocus behave. I do wedding video at night and I have that fear.
great review, Im in the market for a wide angle zoom lens for my sony, things hat are importanyt is the focal lenthgh , at least 16mm on the wide end and ideally with inbody stabilization ?, any thoughts
Google is your friend - I'm not sure if 16-35mm GM lens is stabilised - other wise this Sigma could be it (not stabilised)
Amazing how many people reply without any real answers,,,, the Sony 16-35 F4 ($1200) has stabilization but the GM 2.8 version ($2200) DOES NOT.
UPDATE : I was referring to the Vario-Tessar T* FE 16-35mm f/4 not the NEWEST Sony 16-35 FE PZ F4, I apologize for my mistake.
Good review my friend. Will you recommend both for asthro or night photography.
Thank you!
I guess they would do ok. I don't do astro photography but they both should do OK
@@PavSZ appreciate the feedback.
@@PavSZ i saw this astro video with 1628 , but it’s in japanese ua-cam.com/video/mwN-mbthSNs/v-deo.html… i’m leaning towards the sigma… what’s your opinion between the 16-28 and sigma 14-24…
@@richdandasan4843 sigma 14-24 is massive and doesn't accept front screw filters
@@daaddyo1249 i was thinking about that the weight too. I have the 24-70 sigma. Something light for a change will be nice if the quality is similar. But i guess they are very similar.
I am so glad Nikon chose to rebadge the Tamron 17-28mm. Can't stand the zoom ring opposite direction. Now waiting for the 70-180mm rebadged Nikon.
rebadge?
My testing gave me very different results. Tamron is optically better, sharper all over the frame, focusing fast. Sigma has strong distortions and vignetting, AF is slow and hunting at times, and produces warmer tones at AWB.
I have tested Sigma on Lumix S5 and Sony a7IV. Lumix embeds lens profile into the RAW files and that completely removes vignetting and distortion - we have to wait for Lightroom update to bring lens profile for Sony shooters.
I've managed to get sharp results with Tamron shooting side by side but I had to fight it every single time when Sigma worked better overall for me. Never had issues with AF speed on Sigma - I have actually bought it now as well and using it
@@PavSZ Dude, how does it focus in low light conditions, and if it sounds a lot maybe? with the sigma
Which is better? Hmmm... my Sigma 18-50mm 2.8 DC DN 😅.
but is it? 😉
“With minimum focus distance Tamron wins since you can get 19cm and Sigma is 25cm. Both equally good at getting close to the subject”
Confused me on that one… 🤔
I don't know about it. In real world Sigma seems to focus a little bit closer than Tamron
You forgot to mention there is 6 years warranty on the Tamron here in Canada. I don’t know for Sigma.
I have no idea about any country specific deals or offers. That's why only you can decide which one is right for you. Both great lenses
Hej, dzisiaj stoję przed wyborem pomiędzy tymi szkłami. Głównie planuję nim vlogować. Z perspektywy czasu co byś wybrał? Za Sigmą przemawia 16mm, za Tamronem waga i uszczelnienie. Z góry dzięki za podpowiedź :) P.S. Film widziałem 3 razy... :P
ja juz wybralem - dla mnie Sigma
@@PavSZ Dzięki :)
Ill buy the sigma, I love my other sigma lens, but I do hate the reverse zoom ring, I don't understand why they do this
Canon lenses turn this way too
Coming from a Canon user to Sony, I like the Sigma Lenses :) it depends on what you are used to!
tamron for me i trust dustin abbott he rules lol
I sold my tamron in the end. It was great until I have compared it to this Sigma side by side
Is it a Side by Side comparision?? 😮 Not a single photo here is side by side.
I love that you made an effort to comment but you didn't watch the video in full.
Thank you
Thanks for the video! At 0:20 is that the difference between 16 and 17mm? Damn thats more than i thought it would be if it is.
no - I was just at the different distance from the guy. These shots were taken at different times.
You can see the difference between 16 and 17mm on the photos at 3:49
@@PavSZ oh okay. Thought was a comparison too. Thanks!
in this case, Tamron is way better, why? G2 version is coming and will be push and beat the Sigma in every aspect, main weakness on Sigma is the non weather sealed body (only mount)... Similar situation with Tamron and Sigma 28-70,75 models, G2 is way better
there is no G2 version of this lens yet but when it comes - you'll be probably right
@@PavSZ is on development, it comes at the end of 2022
It'll be interesting to see how the G2 will perform. But I think the Sigma is the better option compared to this version of the Tamron. One thing to note when it comes to sealing is that the Sigma is a fully internal zoom while the Tamron has a moving inner barrel.
@@ProfJM_UNICA where did you get the information? i could not find it anywhere
@@ProfJM_UNICA any news on this? I can’t find anything but willing to wait to find out!
Would nice if the sigma made 11 to 28 f2
it would but it would probably be MASSIVE!
Can you please wear a wig for your next review?
for you anything
Sigma is way better dude!
it is, that's what I said
I have never seen distortion as bad as on the sigma 16-28 in any lens. While I was positively suprised by the handling, it is simply not usable in any setting where people are anywhere in the frame. Even trees start to look weird.
I compared it to sonys 20mm and 24 mm, and the difference in distortion is astonishing.
this is totally corrected by the lens profile correction in Lightroom. There is no les profile available for Sony version but Lumix cameras add it to the RAW files in the camera.
Did you compare the Sigma at 20mm and 24mm to the Sony lenses?
I have replaced my Tamron with the Sigma now.
@@PavSZ Lightroom offered a lens profile, which did very little to lessen the effect.
Okay, I just tested the probably worst shot, and at 200% applied lens correction LR makes the worst pictures look merely very bad, not ridiculously bad.
This worst shot was taken at 22mm. I tried to replicate the problem with both the 24 and the 20 mm, but i could not bring either lens to look as bad, even when I tried hard.
@@PavSZ I just tried one of the comparision shots I took, and the 24mm does not need the LR lens correction to look better than the 16-28 corrected at 200%.
If I overcorrect the 24 the same way, it blows the 16-28 out of the water again.
And the 20mm is in my opinion even better than the 24mm when it comes to distortion.
Thanks for answering, by the way! I do very much enjoy your videos!
Sigma has been consistently losing all these showdowns on every youtube channel lol. They need to re-examine their approach i think
I don't know about it - image quality is better from Sigma in my opinion
i bet you're gonna say Tamron
how much are you gonna bet?
20mm f1.8 is better :)
does it go any wider than 20mm?
@@PavSZ walk backwards
@@JAY-wl6qq old school
Considering the sigma over the 20mmf1.8 due to the active stabilization crop of the a7siii I'm using, that would make it more like a 22mm I'd assume. While the f1.8 is nice, I don't think it would be wide enough for me.