There is some irony in the fact that many reviews of this lens are done on the A7RIV instead of the actually targeted camera bodies. Sony APS-C has so few lenses coming to market that the reviewers don't even keep such a body around.
I think this lens is a “must have” lens for Sony APSC users in the US. It is a killer lens for Sony1655 in the US, but not necessary in Canada. I bought my Sony 1655 for less than $900 US (I bought it in Canada in Nov. 2019, Black Friday sale) and the Tamron lens is on sale for 1,119.00 CAD ($887 US) now. I am a more wide angle lens person, so I will keep my Sony 1655. 24mm is very important to me. However, I do love to try this lens for its Vibration Compensation feature.
For me the optical stabilization of this lens has been the reason that made me chose it over the 1655 for my Sony APS-C(s). The 1655 would have been great with the A6500 or A6600 who have in-camera stabilization, but my Sony cameras don't have it so, since I like to "think" a while before thaking the shot, I always prefer some stabilization. Another reason is that I have the SEL 70350 too, that has OSS, it is a great tele lens, and it starts from 70mm, which is the point the Tamron ends.
Use and love the 18-135mm on my A6400 as an everyday lens. I have been heavily considering this lens for the f2.8 but the shorter reach has keep me from diving in
If you're looking for a full frame - get the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN Art Lens. Sure you miss out on some focal length but it excels in every department. I was between this and waiting for the Tamron but really glad I went with the Sigma.
this Tamron f/2.8 17-70 can be used indoors because of the f/2.8 aperture, unlike the Sony f/3.5-5.6 18-135 or the Sony f/4 18-105 or the Sony Zeiss f/4 16-70. and has optical stabilisation, unlike the Sony 16-55. when indoors, you need a f/2 lens so the f/2.8 is the closest available. and the optical stabilisation allows a slower shutter speed to also keep the ISO at lower values (f/2.8 lets in 2 stops (4x) more light than f/5.6). Sony f/3.5-5.6 18-135 is good only when going outside on a sunny day. if it gets cloudy, the f/5.6 will soon force you to go to high ISOs. this Tamron rocks \m/
In fact Sigma had 17-70/2.8-4.5 lens in 2006?.. and I bought it for my Pentax K20D in 2008 as my first lens ever :) And it still does well.. even on 24mpix K3
I own the 16-55 f/2.8 G and I like it a lot. This Tamron 17-70 must kill the sale of the 16-70 f/4 completely. I own that too, bought it in 2014 and haven't sold it yet.
If I owned a Sony crop.. I'd definitely get this 17-70mm 2.8.. Probably would be my only aps-c glass I'd have.. because I'd be gunning for a full frame sensor next
@@petrolpoodle Mostly because of the internal power zoom on the 18-105mm G. There's just no replacement for that with manual zooms, at least not with cheap ones made for stills photography. But if you don't use zooming in your footage, then it's pointless.
I have 18-105mm also, however pincushion distortion on longer focal lengths realy disturbing. Yes in camera corrections handle it but while making composition and taking the shot, it is there and especially on 105mm it is annoying me. Also F4 is not great for low light too.
It bugs me when reviewers say “this is a travelling lens” n I ask why just for travelling? Why can’t it be used for short commercial promo videos or short featured films or some more pro applications? Why limit the lens’ use cases right from the beginning?
I wish you guys had tested this on one of the A6xxx bodies.... def wanna know how it handles on those. 17 on the wide end is a dealbreaker for me... would gladly have traded 70mm at the long end to have 16 or even 14mm on the wide end. Then they could share this lens with M43 and Canon EF-M.
6:10 You did not mention the Sony 18-105 F4 which sits pretty comforatble balanced between price and quality, IMO. Great video nevertheless :) Edit: Also OMG I think we're going to get to 300K before V-day!
I know this is for the Sony, I am waiting for the Fujifilm to be released. It is supposed to be soon!! I have the 18-300mm lens for my Fuji X-T3 and the lens is awesome!! The glass is MUCH BETTER than the Tamron 18-400mm lens I had for my Canon!! I've been a Tamron fan for a long time. GREAT job Tamron!!!
@@mirrorlessny and if get followed by a 50-100 f2? Wow I'll be happy also if they combine both and bring out a 35-75 f2 but much lighter than the canon 28-70 f2.
Your comment is 1 year old, I am sure you are aware of this by now. Tamron is coming out with 3 new lenses for the X mount. The 17-70mm f2.8 is supposed to be coming out soon, the 11-20mm f2.8 is supposed to be out also, but no one has said when yet. They are supposed to be coming out with a telephoto zoom also, but haven't said anything about that lens yet. I used to have Canon cameras since film cameras, and went to the M50m2. I had the Tamron 18-200 M mount lens, but the M series seems to be a dying series. I don't know why, the M50m2 was a great camera!! Canon is going with the RF series and supposed to be coming out with an affordable cropped sensor RF camera this year. I went to Fujifilm and currently have the X-T3 I bought used with 279 clicks on it. I had kit lenses, but read about and found the Tamron 18-300mm lens. Great lens!!! The glass is better than the Tamron 18-400mm lens I had for my Canon 80D!! I am anxiously waiting for the new Tamron lenses to come out, I am retired now so money is a concern hehe the price should be around 799$ like the Sony lens, but we'll see what I can afford. ^_^ Oh, Sigma is coming out with X mount lenses also
Anyone with a non-IBIS Sony body in the aps-c range (a6400 here) has got to see this lens as the obvious choice. This camera range, bafflingly, has never had an excellent quality standard zoom with vr at a reasonable price. The Sony 16-55 2.8 is just not it, at it's shocking price it should have vr and/or go out to 70. A very slightly less pleasing bokeh and flare? Maybe it's just me, but I don't often shoot for bokeh against a background of a hundred tiny lights, so yeah, the slight onion rings I will probably never see would seem like an acceptable tradeoff, and (ahem) at just over half the price. And any other zoom at f/4 . . . sorry, just not enough bokeh on a crop sensor. This is the lens most of us have been waiting for. Sony should have and could have made this lens themselves 10 years ago. Of course then that might have meant fewer people buying the a6700 or even A7 series? Stop me before I get too cynical.
Nice review as usual, Chris. As for a camera suggestion for Jordan, I think any old twin lens reflex would be a challenge, especially if he has no experience. Have him do a sports shot since objects move in the opposite direction. I used one of these in high school-it was the only camera available at the time and the bball shots were a challenge!
This would be a killer lens for XF mount, where zooms are crazy expensive and/or slow apertures. Pop it on an X-S10 or X-T3 and you have an excellent solution for less than $2,000.
Here's an idea: It's Winter in Canada! (Yeah, right.) But it's cold, so we need gloves. What cameras can be used without taking off your gloves? Grab 3 or 4 and see how much function you can get out of them. I use gardening gloves in the winter because they are thin and meant to be worn while working. They are not really warm, but usually I can survive well enough with them.
At 1:16, there's a round dark spot in the blue sky? Can someone tell me if it's due to dirt in the cell or what? I have a similar spot on my Fuji X-T2 camera. Can it be removed by cleaning? Thanks in advance🙏
I have Sony 18-105 f4 and Sigma 16mm f1.4. Is it worth to add that Tamron 17-70 to my collection? I shoot commercial videos, travel videos, cinematic stuff. Also I'm thinking about Sigma 56mm f1.4.
Chris, Jordan, kinda curious as it would be a good comparison here... Is there a particular reason you guys never did a proper look at the G 16-55mm 2.8?
the minimum focus distance is 19 cm (7.5 in) vs 33 cm (13 in) for the Sony 16-55. kids tend to stick their faces in the camera and Sony will always back focus. the Tamron handles this much better.
is Tamron going to make this same lens 17-70 F2.8 VC for Canon EF-S mount too? I own a Canon C100 Mark II and a couple of 80Ds and THIS is the lens I have been waiting for!
@@RocZi yes, f2.8 makes a difference with cleaner iso & increased bokeh potential, but 18-105power zoom is great for videography so it really comes down to your specific needs
That's what I was thinking too. But when he said the $999 Zeiss 16-70 F4 was not much improved (over the $299 kit lens?), I figure the much less expensive ($600) 18-105f4 can't be better.
@M Tech not really, it is because Fujifilm didn’t open up the development for 3rd parties manufactures before, however they already announced in 2020. Sigma already announced developing lenses for Fuji X mount!
@M Tech Back in my Sony days, I am super happy with the Sigma APSC f/1.4 trio with my A6500. I think many Fuji users will be happy to see them with Fuji mount. I agreed the pricing is a bit more on the XT bodies being APSC but I like their ergonomics and color science. I switched from Sony FF and APSC, I never looked back. There are always pros and cons on each system. Just finding the right ones for my work.
I just wish this were an FE lens. The focal range would be perfect (OK, maybe 16-70 instead of 17-70) for people who have a full-frame body and an APS-C body as a backup. Either way, that 24-70mm focal length would be covered. My old Canon PowerShot S2 IS shot 480p video, so Jordan could shoot with that.
Lovely kid, you are blessed. Regarding 17 mm f2.8: In Jack Sloans review I noticed weak corners in the sample images. Can you check your samples to confirm this please?
Thanks! If you go to dpreview.com you can download the samples we took and check them out. Our sample seemed to perform in the corners to an average extent. Not what I would call amazing, but certainly not poor.
@@niccollsvideo Thanks. I did check and the scenes at 17mm f2.8 confirm that, although only the church side is suited for such an evaluation. A landscape scene would be interesting to have added :-)
why this tamron lens without SP ? sony image stabilization in the body. btw tamron lens also available for canon, nikon mount. VC feature require for canon, nikon body.
I'm curious if anyone has adapted this lens to MFT with a speedbooster? Something relatively light at 24-100 at f2 could be pretty nice lens if the AF-S could keep up.
Please make this for Fujifilm mount, shame no one really seems to make lenses for that mount considering they are ine of the main players in the apsc market.
Wow, definetley a great choise for the enthusiast apsc photographers! Reminds me how happy I was when my sigma 18-35 1.8 arrived. Was that a Canon 300 2.8 in your hands there Chris? 🤩
Heard the joke and liked already.
Kid jokes and Dad jokes welcome here. :)
I'd love that 17-70mm in Fuji, wouldn't you Omar? :P
@@LockeLeon It would be so ugly on Fuji camera... but so desirable.
i like Omar jokes better
@@LockeLeon I think Fujifilm is content with leaving the f2.8 zoom spot for their red-badge 16-55mm for now.
No check mark yet? You have 100k subscribers!
There is some irony in the fact that many reviews of this lens are done on the A7RIV instead of the actually targeted camera bodies. Sony APS-C has so few lenses coming to market that the reviewers don't even keep such a body around.
going point, I sold 3 apsc bodies while going into full frame, kept a6600 but mainly for comparison/testing purposes
YEs, and this review i believe is unfair. Because this lense is actually made for APSC bodies.
@@NISDAOfficial feels like that yea, lens should be reviewed/tested with a camera it is meant to be used on
I think this lens is a “must have” lens for Sony APSC users in the US.
It is a killer lens for Sony1655 in the US, but not necessary in Canada.
I bought my Sony 1655 for less than $900 US (I bought it in Canada in Nov. 2019, Black Friday sale) and the Tamron lens is on sale for 1,119.00 CAD ($887 US) now.
I am a more wide angle lens person, so I will keep my Sony 1655. 24mm is very important to me.
However, I do love to try this lens for its Vibration Compensation feature.
For me the optical stabilization of this lens has been the reason that made me chose it over the 1655 for my Sony APS-C(s). The 1655 would have been great with the A6500 or A6600 who have in-camera stabilization, but my Sony cameras don't have it so, since I like to "think" a while before thaking the shot, I always prefer some stabilization. Another reason is that I have the SEL 70350 too, that has OSS, it is a great tele lens, and it starts from 70mm, which is the point the Tamron ends.
Use and love the 18-135mm on my A6400 as an everyday lens. I have been heavily considering this lens for the f2.8 but the shorter reach has keep me from diving in
Same here. Love the 18-135 on my lowly a6000.
Me too. Although the Sony clear image zoom might be useful.
I'm selling m my 18-135 and g getting this 17-70
Though I'll lose the extra reach but that constant 2.8 low with low light capabilities is worth it
The intro is the best part of the video, it is too cute!
If you're looking for a full frame - get the Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN Art Lens. Sure you miss out on some focal length but it excels in every department. I was between this and waiting for the Tamron but really glad I went with the Sigma.
If dad jokes weren't funny they'd be known as single guy jokes.
Jordan for video ?
Jordan thinks the bok-uh is broke-uh; Chris thinks the bo-kay is okay
What I never get is how is this channel got so less subscribers, so underrated. Brilliant job guys everytime.
This lens definitely justifies a decision on A6400 with no IBIS.
true & many other Sony e-mount bodies without ibis
this Tamron f/2.8 17-70 can be used indoors because of the f/2.8 aperture, unlike the Sony f/3.5-5.6 18-135 or the Sony f/4 18-105 or the Sony Zeiss f/4 16-70.
and has optical stabilisation, unlike the Sony 16-55.
when indoors, you need a f/2 lens so the f/2.8 is the closest available.
and the optical stabilisation allows a slower shutter speed to also keep the ISO at lower values (f/2.8 lets in 2 stops (4x) more light than f/5.6).
Sony f/3.5-5.6 18-135 is good only when going outside on a sunny day.
if it gets cloudy, the f/5.6 will soon force you to go to high ISOs.
this Tamron rocks \m/
Fuji opened up their mount. C'mon Tamron, don't dissapoint.
We need a Sigma version of the exact same lens.
Just slap Sigma sticker on top of Tamron and you're good to go.
In fact Sigma had 17-70/2.8-4.5 lens in 2006?.. and I bought it for my Pentax K20D in 2008 as my first lens ever :)
And it still does well.. even on 24mpix K3
@@xmeda it’s not a weather resistant lens. Which was a massive bummer
I use Sigma 17-70mm Contemporary with Sigma MC11 adapter on mu A6500, works great, great combo.
@@marco7750 but you can buy it now for $200 in very nice condition and it still works well :D
It hardly makes sense to me testing this lens on an A7r IV FF body with 26 MP.
Same here
I own the 16-55 f/2.8 G and I like it a lot. This Tamron 17-70 must kill the sale of the 16-70 f/4 completely. I own that too, bought it in 2014 and haven't sold it yet.
yeah good point 16-70f4 makes no sense now unless going for some specific "Sony/Zeiss" color
That one is compact and light.
2years on this is still a great review, thank you
OMG the cuteness! And the expression as she told the joke 😂
She’s definitely been paying attention to someone lol
If I owned a Sony crop.. I'd definitely get this 17-70mm 2.8..
Probably would be my only aps-c glass I'd have.. because I'd be gunning for a full frame sensor next
when mentioning alternatives you forgot bout the low priced (420€) yet semi--decent 18-105 f4 PZ OSS from sony...
It's pretty decent, yeah, and a better fit for dedicated video shooters.
@@Ildskalli I shoot with the 18-105 currently and it's great. How come you'd say it's better than this Tamron for video? Should I save my money?
@@petrolpoodle
Mostly because of the internal power zoom on the 18-105mm G. There's just no replacement for that with manual zooms, at least not with cheap ones made for stills photography. But if you don't use zooming in your footage, then it's pointless.
I have 18-105mm also, however pincushion distortion on longer focal lengths realy disturbing. Yes in camera corrections handle it but while making composition and taking the shot, it is there and especially on 105mm it is annoying me. Also F4 is not great for low light too.
Oh, my god, my heart melted❤️
It bugs me when reviewers say “this is a travelling lens” n I ask why just for travelling? Why can’t it be used for short commercial promo videos or short featured films or some more pro applications? Why limit the lens’ use cases right from the beginning?
Being a dad of small ones myself, you know how to melt my heart to get that like: dad (kid) jokes and cute kids.
I wish you guys had tested this on one of the A6xxx bodies.... def wanna know how it handles on those. 17 on the wide end is a dealbreaker for me... would gladly have traded 70mm at the long end to have 16 or even 14mm on the wide end. Then they could share this lens with M43 and Canon EF-M.
Best intro ever.. your daughter is a princess.. Ma Sha Allah
6:10 You did not mention the Sony 18-105 F4 which sits pretty comforatble balanced between price and quality, IMO. Great video nevertheless :)
Edit: Also OMG I think we're going to get to 300K before V-day!
I know this is for the Sony, I am waiting for the Fujifilm to be released. It is supposed to be soon!! I have the 18-300mm lens for my Fuji X-T3 and the lens is awesome!! The glass is MUCH BETTER than the Tamron 18-400mm lens I had for my Canon!! I've been a Tamron fan for a long time. GREAT job Tamron!!!
I was testing out some puns on my wife the other day. I decided to tell her 10 and see how many made her laugh..... No pun in ten did....
I really missed a walking video test, to see if the VC helps there or not.
Chris do you have any idea when Tamron will come out with any Z mount lenses?
I remember that little girl when Chris used her as a subject to compare the different colors of camera brands
I thought this was a full-frame lens for a second and almost lost my shit
Lol how awesome would that be, but sadly its just a f4.2 25.5-105 which is just ok
@@CallMeRabbitzUSVI yeah, the thought of a 17-70 f2.8 for full-frame though... One can dream right?
@Tim Kuipers Imagine full frame 24-50mmf2 🙏
@@mirrorlessny and if get followed by a 50-100 f2? Wow
I'll be happy also if they combine both and bring out a 35-75 f2 but much lighter than the canon 28-70 f2.
I didn’t miss the joke. You can be a proud father!
Great job Tamron! Now, can they tweak it for EOS M, Nikon Z, and Fuji X mount... and not to forget a 12-ish to 50mm f2.8 for MFT too?
Your comment is 1 year old, I am sure you are aware of this by now. Tamron is coming out with 3 new lenses for the X mount. The 17-70mm f2.8 is supposed to be coming out soon, the 11-20mm f2.8 is supposed to be out also, but no one has said when yet. They are supposed to be coming out with a telephoto zoom also, but haven't said anything about that lens yet. I used to have Canon cameras since film cameras, and went to the M50m2. I had the Tamron 18-200 M mount lens, but the M series seems to be a dying series. I don't know why, the M50m2 was a great camera!! Canon is going with the RF series and supposed to be coming out with an affordable cropped sensor RF camera this year. I went to Fujifilm and currently have the X-T3 I bought used with 279 clicks on it. I had kit lenses, but read about and found the Tamron 18-300mm lens. Great lens!!! The glass is better than the Tamron 18-400mm lens I had for my Canon 80D!! I am anxiously waiting for the new Tamron lenses to come out, I am retired now so money is a concern hehe the price should be around 799$ like the Sony lens, but we'll see what I can afford. ^_^ Oh, Sigma is coming out with X mount lenses also
At last, you guys reviewed this lens. Thanks guys.
Have you tested the lens on the Fuji system? Does it hold up the same?
Anyone with a non-IBIS Sony body in the aps-c range (a6400 here) has got to see this lens as the obvious choice. This camera range, bafflingly, has never had an excellent quality standard zoom with vr at a reasonable price. The Sony 16-55 2.8 is just not it, at it's shocking price it should have vr and/or go out to 70. A very slightly less pleasing bokeh and flare? Maybe it's just me, but I don't often shoot for bokeh against a background of a hundred tiny lights, so yeah, the slight onion rings I will probably never see would seem like an acceptable tradeoff, and (ahem) at just over half the price. And any other zoom at f/4 . . . sorry, just not enough bokeh on a crop sensor. This is the lens most of us have been waiting for. Sony should have and could have made this lens themselves 10 years ago. Of course then that might have meant fewer people buying the a6700 or even A7 series? Stop me before I get too cynical.
will this be a good lens for low light, indoor sports, specifically High School Basketball
Adorable way to begin a review!
Thanks Erin!
Looks beautiful. What do you think? ¿a6300 +Tamron 17-70 is possible for the Webill-s?
Webill-S is build to handle heavy payloads - a6300+17-70 will be fine.
What is the coverage on 35mm? Typically, an apsc zoom should fill a 35mm sensor on the wide end?
"fill ratio/size" doesn't change unless switching between FF & crop modes.
Are there similar lenses like this one for Canon APS-C ?
can i use this lens on my lumix g85 that is micro 4/3?
Nice review as usual, Chris. As for a camera suggestion for Jordan, I think any old twin lens reflex would be a challenge, especially if he has no experience. Have him do a sports shot since objects move in the opposite direction. I used one of these in high school-it was the only camera available at the time and the bball shots were a challenge!
This would be a killer lens for XF mount, where zooms are crazy expensive and/or slow apertures. Pop it on an X-S10 or X-T3 and you have an excellent solution for less than $2,000.
Your dream came true
Is it good for Interior photography?
Review the EF 200mm f1.8.
Does anyone know if Tamron will be making this lens for the Fuji mount?
Here's an idea: It's Winter in
Canada! (Yeah, right.) But it's cold, so we need gloves. What cameras can be used without taking off your gloves? Grab 3 or 4 and see how much function you can get out of them. I use gardening gloves in the winter because they are thin and meant to be worn while working. They are not really warm, but usually I can survive well enough with them.
Would you say the loca is worse than on the 18 50 of Sigma?
At 1:16, there's a round dark spot in the blue sky? Can someone tell me if it's due to dirt in the cell or what? I have a similar spot on my Fuji X-T2 camera. Can it be removed by cleaning? Thanks in advance🙏
I have this lens for around 6 months. Mostly used the lens indoors but still lot of dust has collected under the front element. Is it normal?
Would you choose it over the 18-105mm sony g lens?
f2.8 is a big difference, plus Tamron got stabilization & 70mm is plenty
I have Sony 18-105 f4 and Sigma 16mm f1.4. Is it worth to add that Tamron 17-70 to my collection? I shoot commercial videos, travel videos, cinematic stuff. Also I'm thinking about Sigma 56mm f1.4.
I have the same lenses. I am thinking about this myself
@@greyspaniard I think it's a good replacement for 18-105f4 if you don't need power zoom.
What kind of gloves is Chris wearing in this video?! They look comfy and decent for shooting.
Wow, she's surprisingly good on camera for her age. :)
Also, hope this could make it to Fuji X mount. D:
Chris, Jordan, kinda curious as it would be a good comparison here... Is there a particular reason you guys never did a proper look at the G 16-55mm 2.8?
Chris do you perhaps know when they will bring out a Z frame version or versions?
the minimum focus distance is 19 cm (7.5 in) vs 33 cm (13 in) for the Sony 16-55.
kids tend to stick their faces in the camera and Sony will always back focus.
the Tamron handles this much better.
Hahaha she is natural Chris. Good one :D
Thanks Rhawi! I think she did a great job too.
is Tamron going to make this same lens 17-70 F2.8 VC for Canon EF-S mount too? I own a Canon C100 Mark II and a couple of 80Ds and THIS is the lens I have been waiting for!
Tamron has just made this available on the fujifilm x mount. PLEASE DO A REVIEW. I need to get your opinion on it.
How does this lens perform in video af
Hey Chris, do you know on spec if the VC on this lens will work in conjunction of the IBIS on camera bodies with IBIS (A6600, a6500)?
awesome video, very informative.
Does the vibration control add stabilization to cameras with IBIS?
Sony’s stabilization does not work this way, they are not like Panasonic with their dual I.S.
How does this compare with the Sony 18-105 F4 lens?
double the light is the main advantage, but 18-105 has power zoom which is a premium feature for videography & 105mm & internal zoom mechanism
@@mirrorlessny That is true. I'll just keep my 18-105 and just add the Tamron to my arsenal.
@@TheMichael408 Have you tried one of the Sigma's f1.4 apsc lenses?
Sir i want to ask some question. Is it worth to replacing my e 18-105 f4 and e 35mm f1.8 with this tamron? Need suggestion. Thanks
I think it's worth it, you get best all-in-one package & now can focus on your creativity, or work.
@@mirrorlessny ah thanks for the answer
@@mirrorlessny do you mean it is worth it to change the sony 18-105 to tamron 17-70 for videography or for photography?
@@RocZi yes, f2.8 makes a difference with cleaner iso & increased bokeh potential, but 18-105power zoom is great for videography so it really comes down to your specific needs
What if you mount it on an A6000: how do you eventually deactivate the vc?
it's in the menu somewhere, you can add it as a custom menu option for faster toggle.
@@turke6663 yea good to have it nearby, I add the "stabilization" to the Fn menu
@@turke6663 does it have the stabilization in the menu even if it has not IBIS?
Turn off OSS in the menu system or add it to a custom button
Adorable kid
Wow, Maddi has grown up so fast! I still remember the video when Chris had her on a baby carrier
You forgot the 18-105 f4 in the summary ;-)
That's what I was thinking too. But when he said the $999 Zeiss 16-70 F4 was not much improved (over the $299 kit lens?), I figure the much less expensive ($600) 18-105f4 can't be better.
@@3VAudioVideo You only pay extra for the Zeiss logo. Looking at reviews, it's not sharper than the 18-105.
Thanks for the review guys, I'd been waiting to hear your thoughts. One question, not lens-related.. what are the gloves Chris is wearing? THX - Brett
best intro yet!
Duuuuude, that joke was actually great.
Cute kid steals the show. What a delivery!
Can someone help me to answer my question. Can I use this Lens with Sony - Alpha 7 IV Full-frame Mirrorless Interchangeable Lens Camera??
Always a good choice testing APS-C lenses on FF bodies. Says alot about Sony APSC. (coming from a 6000 user)
thanks for a nice helpful review!
When is Tamron going to made lenses for Fuji?
@M Tech not really, it is because Fujifilm didn’t open up the development for 3rd parties manufactures before, however they already announced in 2020. Sigma already announced developing lenses for Fuji X mount!
@M Tech Back in my Sony days, I am super happy with the Sigma APSC f/1.4 trio with my A6500. I think many Fuji users will be happy to see them with Fuji mount. I agreed the pricing is a bit more on the XT bodies being APSC but I like their ergonomics and color science. I switched from Sony FF and APSC, I never looked back. There are always pros and cons on each system. Just finding the right ones for my work.
Love mine on the a6400.
Perfect fit.
The more I learn about mirrorless cameras, the more I love my SLRs. I'd rather use a bridge camera than burn my money on mirrorless.
Camera suggestion for Jordan - Fuji W3 - 720p in 3D natively. (You have to think quite a bit differently to make good video...)
I have a sony 18-105 F4. Love/Hate the len only hate is really the F4 so makes taking photos indoors a harder.
I wish I could have this focal length for full frame, or 17-50
An excellent review of a pretty useful looking lens.
Chris, are those winter gloves worth the price-tag?! I've admired them, but dang...that price tag is essentially the Noct of gloves.
Maddie, the Future Star.
I just wish this were an FE lens. The focal range would be perfect (OK, maybe 16-70 instead of 17-70) for people who have a full-frame body and an APS-C body as a backup. Either way, that 24-70mm focal length would be covered.
My old Canon PowerShot S2 IS shot 480p video, so Jordan could shoot with that.
Lovely kid, you are blessed.
Regarding 17 mm f2.8: In Jack Sloans review I noticed weak corners in the sample images. Can you check your samples to confirm this please?
Thanks! If you go to dpreview.com you can download the samples we took and check them out. Our sample seemed to perform in the corners to an average extent. Not what I would call amazing, but certainly not poor.
@@niccollsvideo Thanks. I did check and the scenes at 17mm f2.8 confirm that, although only the church side is suited for such an evaluation. A landscape scene would be interesting to have added :-)
This lens on the Sony FX30 and the Sony A74 in crop mode for filming
I would really like to run it for a round against the Fuji 16-80 f4, weight , bokeh , AF speed, video , OIS, etc.
I literally lol'd at her joke
why this tamron lens without SP ? sony image stabilization in the body. btw tamron lens also available for canon, nikon mount. VC feature require for canon, nikon body.
I'm curious if anyone has adapted this lens to MFT with a speedbooster? Something relatively light at 24-100 at f2 could be pretty nice lens if the AF-S could keep up.
Unfortunately, this is a mirrorless design so it is not compatible with speedboosters. Only lenses designed for longer DSLR flanges will work.
@@thatjordandrake ahhh, that's right. I forgot about that. Thanks Jordan.
Please make this for Fujifilm mount, shame no one really seems to make lenses for that mount considering they are ine of the main players in the apsc market.
Wow, definetley a great choise for the enthusiast apsc photographers! Reminds me how happy I was when my sigma 18-35 1.8 arrived.
Was that a Canon 300 2.8 in your hands there Chris? 🤩
I wish Tamron would make lens for the Fuji X-mount also.