Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 FE - Full Review + RAW Files (Part 1 & 2)

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 31 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 154

  • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
    @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +22

    One thing I did forget to mention is it has pretty noticeable distortion at 17mm, easily corrected once there is a profile for Lightroom but worth mentioning

    • @theyasman
      @theyasman 5 років тому

      Was this filmed in HLG? Your colours are amazing!

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      SLOG2, I’m still learning colour grading haha it’s really not perfect but getting there

    • @sungkim465
      @sungkim465 5 років тому

      Chris Turner Photographer hey man
      Do you use sgamut 3 cine? And change any settings for that picture profile?

    • @SMOKEYoriginalHD
      @SMOKEYoriginalHD 5 років тому

      Oh, is the distortion same as on tamron 24-70 or worse?

  • @eduardovisuals
    @eduardovisuals 5 років тому +7

    Chris can’t emphasize how great of a UA-camr you are, thanks for the review and providing raw files! Your the best channel when it comes to Sony stuff!

  • @woodypaul_
    @woodypaul_ 5 років тому +5

    Love your style, man. The color profiles you choose, your soft-spoken but clear and concise voice, coupled with just a generally great opinion of topics make your reviews / vlogs really enjoyable to listen to / watch. I always look forward to your content - thanks for the review.

  • @joenicolette
    @joenicolette 5 років тому +2

    Massive fan of all of your videos, Chris. Falling more in love with the NZ scenery and the stories you tell in your images and less in love with gear. Thank you so much for that.

  • @vietmle
    @vietmle 5 років тому +4

    How about the sun star of this lens. I will be really appreciated if you can compare it with the Sony 16-35 F4 ZA

  • @TheCarts7
    @TheCarts7 4 роки тому

    Man I could sit there looking out all day brother. Epic.

  • @Giomamaearth91
    @Giomamaearth91 5 років тому +1

    Just picked up this lens at my local camera shop for my Sony a7iii. I'm super excited to use it for a milky way shoot tomorrow!

    • @Soldier828
      @Soldier828 5 років тому

      Pic or didn't happen (:

    • @sic04250f
      @sic04250f 5 років тому

      So keen to hear how it does with astro?

    • @Giomamaearth91
      @Giomamaearth91 5 років тому +1

      @@sic04250f works extremely well. It was a bit too humid and the light pollution was still present but the shots turned out real well

  • @Vikingdescendent
    @Vikingdescendent 5 років тому +1

    6:50 mark. I use a Sigma 16mm DC DC on a Sony 6500 to get similar results. The best portraits are those taken with the subjects i their environment.

  • @newlifeeveryday1821
    @newlifeeveryday1821 3 роки тому

    I am a newbie to fancy cameras and lenses. Can I please ask you a question ? If I want a lens to use to take videos while I am hiking down a trail is this a great lens to buy or does the slower autofocus compared to the Sony GMs make it a problem ? Thank you.

  • @Noealz
    @Noealz 5 років тому +3

    nice of you to provide the raw files

  • @robertadams3666
    @robertadams3666 5 років тому +1

    Dude I think this lens looks like its going to be awesome. Think I might pre-order it. Dope shots too man, awesome job.

  • @peterdekeles.
    @peterdekeles. 5 років тому +4

    Glad there's a time difference. Get to enjoy your videos with my my morning cupa. 17-28 & 28 to 75. Or do you just get the Sony 24-105?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому

      Hard one. The 24-105 is great too. If you feel like you won’t need F2.8 get the Sony.

    • @chuck90504
      @chuck90504 5 років тому

      are you a 2.8 person? I know I am, a good 90% of my shooting is indoors. I would take the 28-75 over the 24-105 straight up, never mind adding the 17-28, nobrainer.

    • @peterdekeles.
      @peterdekeles. 5 років тому

      @@chuck90504 I just started shooting a couple of years ago. Using a Canon Rebel. My lowest F is 5 with the kit lens. I shoot 95% outside . So anything I get is a step up. Thoughts?

    • @mowomedia4801
      @mowomedia4801 5 років тому

      Personally, at your stage I think a 24-105 should be a first high dollar lens...when you're in situations where lens changing isn't ideal you'll appreciate the range. Compliment it with the 17-28 later and by then there might be a slight price drop on this Tamron which would make it all that much sweeter to own.

    • @peterdekeles.
      @peterdekeles. 5 років тому

      @@mowomedia4801 thanks

  • @GoProMeetsAeon
    @GoProMeetsAeon 5 років тому +1

    Currently have the 16-35 GM for real estate but am debating on selling it for this plus the lawoa 10-18mm

  • @ayyotrav9293
    @ayyotrav9293 5 років тому

    I’m pumped to see you a hold of one! Can’t wait for part two.

  • @atillaers9078
    @atillaers9078 3 роки тому +1

    Hi cris, do you prefer tamron or Sony 20 1.8 for travel vlog? combine with a7c

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  3 роки тому +1

      Tamron for sure

    • @atillaers9078
      @atillaers9078 3 роки тому

      @@ChrisTurnerPhotographer thank you chris... which camera did u use for vlog shots? Is that A7r4?

  • @xuyong9719
    @xuyong9719 5 років тому +4

    Thank you so much for the raw files, that's legit!!

  • @dynax78
    @dynax78 5 років тому +1

    Thank you for Hosting the Files!

  • @Jawler1
    @Jawler1 5 років тому

    Awesome review! Big question: will you sell your 16-35 gm now? Or does this not quiet perform well enough to offload the gm

  • @webbkopse803
    @webbkopse803 5 років тому

    Hmm, have it on preorder since a couple of months at a local store. However the corner sharpness doesn't seem good enough to fit my needs. Probably have to let this one go and opt for two wide angle primes instead.

  • @martinpickard5818
    @martinpickard5818 5 років тому

    Struggling to find a decent lens for northern lights and general landscapes.This lens?Batis 18mm?Batis 25? or the 24mm G master at a push?Helllpppp thanks man.

  • @Whiskey_Hunter
    @Whiskey_Hunter 4 роки тому

    dude you give solid reviews. someone looking at some new lenses for my new sony this is very helpful

  • @andrewleejenkins
    @andrewleejenkins 5 років тому

    Do you feel like it would be better to go with this or the Sony 16-35 f4 with OSS. I do a lot of video and wasn't sure if I'd miss the extra stabilization from the 16-35

  • @NickGranville
    @NickGranville 5 років тому +1

    Oh man, Ive got the 28-75mm and have been looking for a wide angle zoom for a while now. I have a love hate relationship with the 28-75; It's good but I find just doesn't have any character and I'm not crazy about the colours from it. I guess it's a utility tool at the end of the day. I do use it a lot though cause its a handy range. Anyway, have you compared the tamron 17-28 to the Sony 16-35 F4? That Sony seems like a nice compact setup. The G master 16-35 would be a nice head to head comparison too. Thanks.

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +3

      Honestly I agree the GM primes have some crazy indescribable goodness. There’s just something about them that’s different.
      If it was between the Tamron and the Sony F4 I’d take the Tamron all day

    • @NickGranville
      @NickGranville 5 років тому

      @@ChrisTurnerPhotographer Thanks mate. Yeah, the Tamron makes sense. Currently traveling round Europe (from NZ though) so lighter makes sense. Cheers

  • @timroach5898
    @timroach5898 5 років тому

    Sounds like a great lens for the price. One thing I noticed you said about how the lens stays inside and you recommend a UV filter. When you put a UV filter on it will the metal ring of the UV filter show around the edges at widest angle?

  • @invertedproductions7577
    @invertedproductions7577 5 років тому

    Is there too much distortion for property videos at 17mm?

  • @lordofming
    @lordofming 5 років тому +2

    What about the astrophoto, worth a shot?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +3

      Yeah need some clear skies first haha. We will be touring the South Island at the end of this month for UA-cam, doing landscape and Astro photography videos along the way so I’m sure I’ll get a chance

    • @lordofming
      @lordofming 5 років тому +1

      @@ChrisTurnerPhotographer cool that would be great because ibwas thinking that could be an alternative to the 1635 GM for astro. Still wondering if i should invest in the tamron, the gm or the 24mm f1.4...

  • @vlottje
    @vlottje 5 років тому +1

    Can't pick between the zeiss 16-35 f4 or this lens

    • @shaolin95
      @shaolin95 4 роки тому

      The tamron any day . Much much sharper and better CA control as well. Plus of course faster.

  • @desertbornproductions
    @desertbornproductions 4 роки тому

    Hey Chris thanks for this info. Just subscribed and have been watching your videos all night lol. I recently switched from Canon to Sony and am learning the entire new system. I probably shouldn't have done it on the job and have learnt the hard way with lots of out of focus images from a party. For weddings and events I'm thinking Sony 35mm 1.8 on one camera and Sigma 85mm 1.4 ART on the other. I would like something wider though that can focus in low light for dance floor pics especially, settings would be f2.8, shutter 250, iso 3200ish. My questions is would this do well for focus in those moments or would it be hunting do you think? Appreciate any advise. Cheers!!

  • @SMOKEYoriginalHD
    @SMOKEYoriginalHD 5 років тому

    Hello, thanks for the review. One question, would you consider using this lens for panorama photos?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому

      SMOKEYoriginalHD yeah sure why not? I’d probably shoot it at like 20-24mm for panos tho

  • @aroundfloridaandbeyond376
    @aroundfloridaandbeyond376 5 років тому

    Great video. Keep them coming. My next lens. Just got the 28-75. Question: what is your audio levels set at?

  •  5 років тому +1

    Great review! Were these photos edited with your presets? Loving the tones of them!

  • @PLAYFOOT2
    @PLAYFOOT2 5 років тому

    nice video, was this vlog shot in 1080p? or 4k?

  • @gh0stb0y75
    @gh0stb0y75 5 років тому +1

    Loved the beach shot portraits!

  • @pammikewilliams3026
    @pammikewilliams3026 5 років тому +1

    Thank you for your thoughts. I have been thinking about this lense since I first heard about it.

  • @floridaofiowaaerialsandpho1440
    @floridaofiowaaerialsandpho1440 5 років тому

    Really nice video and great selection of RAW files for us to play with at different F-stops and focus points! Thanks a bunch!

  • @SidneyDiongzon
    @SidneyDiongzon 5 років тому

    Great review man!

  • @jasonbourne2133
    @jasonbourne2133 5 років тому +1

    how's the video footage quality difference between the 16-35 G master and this lens ?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +2

      Hard to say with video. I think video is more forgiving. I think generally the GM would be a little better

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +12

      Also. You have the best fight scenes in Hollywood. Congrats

  • @franciscohernandezreyes5678
    @franciscohernandezreyes5678 5 років тому

    hello, sorry i never had a zoom wide lense , but in the Tamrom-5 photo, i se a rreally really soft picture, is normal in this zoom-angle lenses?

  • @TmacSuns
    @TmacSuns 5 років тому

    Great video and thanks for the samples.
    Does this lens hold the same size filters as the 28-75?

  • @blackbird8837
    @blackbird8837 5 років тому

    pretty heavy vignetting in my opinion.. almost looks like you've got an ND on. Would love to see what it looks like with an ND on top.. if that's even bearable.. or did you use one here?

  • @movieman2009
    @movieman2009 5 років тому

    Can you compare this to the Batis series at like apertures and focal lengths.

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      Simon Bear I don’t own the Batis anymore. But it’s far sharper than this. 100%

  • @gbee8888
    @gbee8888 5 років тому

    Nice review. Just looking at your Tamron -12 raw file. Seems to be a broad band of smearing down the right side of the image compared to the excellent sharpness of the rest of the frame.

  • @kobebryant7448
    @kobebryant7448 4 роки тому

    The color looks so good compared to any Sony native lense

  • @CherryandTrevor
    @CherryandTrevor 4 роки тому

    The lens looks shaaaap!👌

  • @mujihuz8433
    @mujihuz8433 5 років тому +1

    I have the 28-75 2.8 and use it alongside the 16-35 2.8 for events. I have to say in my experience the Tamron is way way sharper than the GM. I’ve been considering selling the 16-35 GM for the Tamron as I’m very excited about the sharpness of this lens for pics. Would you recommend the new Tamron over the GM?

    • @afrank3029
      @afrank3029 5 років тому

      Well I have both the tamy and the gm 24-70, the gm outperforms in almost anyway.. specially the result looks more pro, the tamy is at least tha same sharp or feels sharper in the middle but the overall picture doesnt stacks up with my gm, now the 16- 35 is on another level, sorry but are you really owning one...!?? :))

    • @mujihuz8433
      @mujihuz8433 5 років тому

      @@afrank3029 I don't know what you mean by "results look more pro"? For me sharpness comes first, as for any other factor I can fix and change in post. I do have the GM it is a recent purchase and used it in one event, but except for some shots in tight spaces, I was almost always with the Tamron especially when trying to get those candid shots. I'm not sure if GM is sharper or Tamron in that focal range, but I'm sure Tamron is pretty so damn sharp and I don't need any more shaprness! But with the 16-35 GM I wasn't really impressed as much as I was expecting especially for the price.

    • @afrank3029
      @afrank3029 5 років тому

      Well the picture genraly doesnt look that perfect like it does with the GM and Im just comparing with my Sigma 1.4 lens family wich are my "standards" and besides the GM is 2.8 comes really close to the results of the 1.4 Sigmas which I love... The Tamron is good indeed just for casual shooting! It os definetly between the kit lens and the GM in terms of overall quality and image quality nothing more ( just a bit of a special bokeh with character, warm and contrasty...)

  • @Pasha_Shin
    @Pasha_Shin 5 років тому +3

    Awesome review, Chris. Just subscribed.

  • @camgraves4219
    @camgraves4219 5 років тому

    Awesome review mate, off to go grab myself this lens now too. Can I please ask you bro, what audio setup are you rocking for this? So crisp 👍

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому

      Thanks mate. Just a Rode Video Micro haha. At home I’ll usually use the new Rode wireless lapels

  • @zoeromeo
    @zoeromeo 5 років тому

    What PP did you film in? Looks really good!

  • @DavidOastler
    @DavidOastler 5 років тому +1

    Great review mate.

  • @camicees
    @camicees 5 років тому

    Thanks for the review!

  • @hansdevrys5912
    @hansdevrys5912 5 років тому

    Great review mr. Turner. Since the Tamron is in the same price range (and within my budget) I'm still in doubt getting the 16-35F4 or maybe pre-order the Tamron. Any advice on an ultra wide zoom lens? Would a used 12-24mm Sony be better?
    And by the way, wanting to get that ultra wide lens because I'm traveling to NZ this fall! (spring time there I suppose :))

    • @azvisuals
      @azvisuals 5 років тому

      Hey, i'm not Chris but wanted to reply since I both the 12-24 and 17-28 and used to own the 16-35 f4. For me, the Tamron is better than the 16-35 f4 because I f2.8 is much more useful to me than 35mm. The 12-24 is really in its own league but very few scenarios calls for something as wide as 12mm. It is also much more expensive than the Tamron. Hope this helps!

  • @outspokentimes320
    @outspokentimes320 5 років тому +1

    I am new here. Love your grading! Awesome review! Definitely subbing

  • @Beezzzzy_
    @Beezzzzy_ 5 років тому

    Is the vignetting wide open still noticeable wide open like the 28-75mm wide open?

  • @joenguyenps
    @joenguyenps 5 років тому

    really nice review man. What gimbal were you using?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      No gimbal, all hand held. I try avoid using gimbals at all cost lol

    • @joenguyenps
      @joenguyenps 5 років тому

      @@ChrisTurnerPhotographer wow.. I must have a very shaky hands then.. couldn't tell you were hand holding the whole time. Excellent job mate!

  • @chrismorenomccarthy8487
    @chrismorenomccarthy8487 5 років тому

    Where you shooting on the a7iii? Also did you ad vignetting in post? or the camera does it by itself?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому

      That was the R3 I think, and no no added vignette its the lens

    • @chrismorenomccarthy8487
      @chrismorenomccarthy8487 5 років тому

      @@ChrisTurnerPhotographer nice! have you tried it with the ibis on the a7iii. I love to see if it vignettes.

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому

      Christian Moreno it’s the same it won’t make any difference to the vignette that’s all in the lens

  • @HeyyyJaneDO
    @HeyyyJaneDO 5 років тому

    What picture profile did you shoot in for the video?

  • @marcoandreas185
    @marcoandreas185 5 років тому

    This Lens is a beast👍🏻

  • @boywonderhia
    @boywonderhia 5 років тому

    Hey Chris! Thank you for the review. Have one question. I have the Zeiss 16-35 f4. Do you think it's worth the switch. The Zeiss is crazy sharp, but shooting destination wedding work, sometimes I feel I need the 2.8 for low light. What do you recommend?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      Really hard to say eh. If you really need 2.8 then maybe otherwise the Zeiss is fine. For weddings I only really use the wide angle for dance floor and the odd random shot so if I already had the F4 I prob wouldn’t be too concerned. IF that was the only reason. If I was planning on doing Astro, or using it for my UA-cam channel etc for vlogging I’d rather have the 2.8 cause the bokeh for videos

    • @boywonderhia
      @boywonderhia 5 років тому +1

      @@ChrisTurnerPhotographer I have it pre-ordered. My guess will be just to try it out and see how I feel about it. Based on your review and other's I've read, I have a feeling I'm going to enjoy it. I'm not gonna miss the 16mm end. 17 is enough for environmental portraits, the 2.8 is just one extra stop if I need it.

  • @ayyotrav9293
    @ayyotrav9293 5 років тому

    Realistically how likely would you be to use this lens in your daily work flow? I want to preorder but I’m worried it’s going to be a get what you pay for and regret it.

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому

      Me personally for weddings or what? If your talking just weddings and portraits hardly ever.

    • @ayyotrav9293
      @ayyotrav9293 5 років тому

      Chris Turner Photographer sorry I should’ve specified. I’d say 90% landscapes but the occasional wedding.
      Is there a better option anywhere near the price range? Like the 16-35 f4?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      Travis Arnold oh then I’d totally use it all the time haha. I don’t think the Zeiss f4 is a better option tbh it’s not the sharpest on the edges I think it’s worse than the Tamron but it’s been a year since I’ve used it. The Batis 18mm is amazing for landscape but more money.

    • @ayyotrav9293
      @ayyotrav9293 5 років тому

      Chris Turner Photographer the Tamron is also so small Which is great for me as well. I think I’ll be ordering one here shortly. Thanks for your time!

  • @bmkq2007
    @bmkq2007 5 років тому

    Thank you Chris for the review and the sample files, much appreciate it mate. It seems to be awesome for vlogging with a better price point than Sony's G-master one. Again Thanks

  • @rexxxxxxxxx
    @rexxxxxxxxx 5 років тому

    Do you have batis18 to compare with?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому

      Rex Xiong not anymore I owned it for a year when it came out. It’s very good and optically definitely better than this

  • @handy21
    @handy21 5 років тому

    Thanks chris for the review, wondering while you were vlogging, did you use auto WB? And which nd Variable filter did you use?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      I don’t bother using variable NDs ever. I’m one of those crazy people that just lets the shutter do whatever haha I know it’s bad but I don’t think you can see a massive difference. And yeah auto white balance

    • @handy21
      @handy21 5 років тому

      So by that mean , you just used auto shutter?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      Handy chandra yeah AV, sometimes I’ll use manual like in my house or whatever but the light changes to much outside and tbh I just don’t care I’m more concerned with telling the story easily, it’s already hard enough to make UA-cam videos every other day when I’ve got 4 kids to deal with haha

    • @handy21
      @handy21 5 років тому

      Hahahaha i got you 😂

  • @DavidKanis
    @DavidKanis 5 років тому

    great video! I am a small creator and I am considering to get this lens for my vlogs, thanks

  • @nowitsokgaming5130
    @nowitsokgaming5130 5 років тому

    Photos seem very good, but the video while walking it quite shaky. I see that B&H Photo have it for $899 US
    Video when you are panning like the beach was smooth though. Unsure at this point, but one has to LOVE the price.

  • @사라-t9g
    @사라-t9g 5 років тому +1

    I WANT THIS AND 28-75 😍

  • @johnpaulcafugauan3975
    @johnpaulcafugauan3975 4 роки тому

    are you underexposing your shot you took out of this photos?

  • @jcrayback
    @jcrayback 5 років тому

    would you prefer Sony Vario-Tesser 16-35 F4 over this? would you say it is worth the $500? thank you :) love your videos.

    • @pulp1405
      @pulp1405 5 років тому +2

      From the reviews that I am seeing the tamron is the way to go unless you want that metal weighty feel and bigger focal length range . It's mostly as sharp as the GM 16-35 2.8 being cheaper than the f4... I mean cmon. That's a steal. I'm buying it next week as my vlogging lens. I have been waiting for something like this :D

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      Yeah I’d buy the Tamron over the F4 100%

    • @jcrayback
      @jcrayback 5 років тому

      @@pulp1405 thanks, much appreciate it

  • @SynysterNick
    @SynysterNick 5 років тому

    So... you can wear a regular t-shirt in New Zealand winter?!

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому

      Haha. Well it depends where. We are in Auckland and it doesn’t really get that cold here. Like it’s been cold this week in the mornings and it’s around roughly 5c during the day your looking like 15c, South Island it gets very cold.

  • @palentier1
    @palentier1 5 років тому

    Thanks Chris! Love your videos

  • @sichiChannel
    @sichiChannel 5 років тому

    Thank you RAW files !! ;-)

  • @EscapeSquad
    @EscapeSquad 5 років тому

    Τhanks for the raw photos!!! Awesome video

  • @thomaskong5
    @thomaskong5 5 років тому

    was this handheld filmed?

  • @dj4mc
    @dj4mc 5 років тому

    Very nice. Thank you! I have this on preorder

  • @maxmalmberg4755
    @maxmalmberg4755 5 років тому

    will this lens come to ef mount

    • @DraculaNosferatu123
      @DraculaNosferatu123 5 років тому

      Is a mirrorless design is imposible to make with EF mount but is posible with RF mount

  • @filmfreek35
    @filmfreek35 5 років тому

    thank you for the RAW files :-)

  • @rlnucup
    @rlnucup 5 років тому

    What's the music?

  • @MrSnooooze
    @MrSnooooze 5 років тому

    Epic wintery NZ so kool...oh yeah nice lens

  • @seken2nun
    @seken2nun 5 років тому

    Good stuff 👍🏽

  • @jerryzou1516
    @jerryzou1516 5 років тому

    Tamron needs to make a 70-200mm f2.8 for Sony. I'm not gonna spend 2600 on the Gmaster

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      I’m sure they will

    • @jerryzou1516
      @jerryzou1516 5 років тому

      @@ChrisTurnerPhotographer how much do you think it will be?

    • @ChrisTurnerPhotographer
      @ChrisTurnerPhotographer  5 років тому +1

      @@jerryzou1516 Couldnt say, but if it was around the other versions maybe $1800-$2000 NZD? But that's just a guess

    • @jerryzou1516
      @jerryzou1516 5 років тому

      @@ChrisTurnerPhotographer Thank you for replying. My guess happens to be around the same as yours.

  • @pattyorr3205
    @pattyorr3205 4 роки тому

    Tamron lens make your skin soft

  • @JB_Hobbies
    @JB_Hobbies 5 років тому

    I’m thinking I’ll wait to see what Bigma have up their sleeves. I wish this lens were wider by even just a hair. If Sigma can come out with a wider lens that focuses as well as my Tamron 28-75, I may have to go with them.

    • @poelogan
      @poelogan 5 років тому

      i’m unsure if Sigma plans to release anymore zooms tbh

    • @JB_Hobbies
      @JB_Hobbies 5 років тому

      @@poelogan SAR says that Sigma is going to announce a new 14-24mm f/2.8 lens designed for Sony FE and other mirrorless platforms. This announcement is coming July 11. Other Sigma FE mount lenses will be also be announced, but this will be the only zoom.

  • @johannesbgonzalez
    @johannesbgonzalez 5 років тому +3

    The New Zealand Jurgen Klopp

  • @DilliWalaRider
    @DilliWalaRider 5 років тому

    Seems to be a great lens for Vlogging.. 🙌

  • @nurbsenvi
    @nurbsenvi 5 років тому

    What’s with all the vignetting

  • @newlifeeveryday1821
    @newlifeeveryday1821 3 роки тому

    I am a newbie to fancy cameras and lenses. Can I please ask you a question ? If I want a lens to use to take videos while I am hiking down a trail is this a great lens to buy or does the slower autofocus compared to the Sony GMs make it a problem ? Thank you.