Tamron 17-70 f2.8 review (for x-mount)
Вставка
- Опубліковано 4 лип 2024
- A detailed, hands-on review of the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 lens for Fujifilm x-mount cameras. Includes demonstrations and sample images.
#NOTSPONSORED
**********
I have not received compensation in exchange for posting this review.
If you would like to support me, members of this channel receive additional perks:
/ @maartenheilbron
Or support me directly via PayPal
www.paypal.me/maartech
While I do appreciate your support, no content will ever be behind a paywall.
FLICKR
**********
The images used in the video, (including EXIF) are available on flickr
CREDITS
**********
The Fujifilm X-T4 was on loan from Sonam Tashi.
ABOUT ME
**********
I do read and respond to all comments, which are moderated. If you leave a relevant question or civil comment without links (which are filtered by youtube) it will be posted, I will reply.
Spend more time with me:
WEBSITE/BLOG: maartech.com
CONTACT: maartendotheilbronatgmaildotcom
DISCLOSURE
**********
I am not sponsored or compensated by any manufacturer, I have not accepted payment to review this or any product. Even if a product was provided at no cost to me, I don’t allow the provider to review the script or video prior to posting. This lens was on loan from Tamron USA and has been returned.
I am compensated by Google Adwords, who place videos before and after my videos. I receive a small commission from B&H and Amazon if you purchase using the affiliate links.
Please do not allow this to influence your purchase decision. Should you wish to support me, please use the links above.
I encourage you to visit and support your local photo/video retailer. - Наука та технологія
A humble and honest review as always! Thank you for your dedication to consistent content. I have been researching Fuji lenses for video and this popped up - the VC, 2.8? Yes please!
Thanks for your kind words - and that sums it up nicely!
I picked one up a few weeks ago and I haven't been disappointed. Excellent photo quality in a reasonably small and light package. I'm finding it very useful for low light situations.
I thought so too, thanks for commenting.
Thanks for another candid and detail review on an alternate lens for the Fujifilm XF cameras.
Always nice to hear from viewers who appreciate my work, thanks!!
The way you described the lens slowly growing on you somehow feels like a more glowing review compared to "its all great, best lens ever, buy now".
It comes across as more genuine to have faults like the light weight and plasticy feel pointed out, giving your later compliments towards it more weight... We are lucky to have your reviews and non-sponsored take on things. Thanks Maarten. Have a great day
That's very kind of you, and an interesting perspective. Thanks for taking the time to comment.
I already have this lens. And I love it. It’s a faster lens then the 16-80mm by a stop. And has longer reach then the 16-55mm. It’s also cheaper then that lens as well. As much as I love having an aperture ring on my lens, this lens is worth the sacrifice of not having one for me. I can’t wait for tamron to make more lenses for the x-mount.
Glad to hear that you're happy with your selection. Thanks for commenting.
@@MaartenHeilbron thanks for the review. You’re the 2nd UA-camr I know who has done a review on this lens.
I just need the damn 35-150. The only Tamron lens I lust for.
Excellent video 😊!
Thank you very much!
Great as always, thank you!
My pleasure, always nice to know my work is appreciated.
Great review of the lens. You have covered some aspects that the majority of reviewers don’t cover. That the suitability of the lens for video. Topics like parfocal and linearity of focus, which most reviewers don’t cover.
I appreciate your kind words. I do my best to cover all the details.
Great review, thanks
Always my pleasure. Thanks for your kind words.
Well done Sir. Very informative.
Glad it was helpful! I appreciate your kind words.
Ohhh.. thanks... I was waiting for this
Thanks for waiting, and for your kind words.
nice review sir maarten.i have one in june 2022, it's versatile and par to use!. good lens in one. 🇵🇭👌
Nice 👍 thanks for your kind words.
I have just bought the Fuji 16-55 2.8 and I couldn’t be happier. It costs more but it gives you more under any aspects
Always nice to know that my viewers have a kit that pleases them. Thanks for commenting.
3:58 you can choose whether Aperture=front command dial or Aperture=rear dial, at least on xt2 and xt3. I always set aperture to the rear dial; and I like e.g. the 16-50 OIS and my adapted Canon 50mm/1.4, because you won't accidentally change aperture, as on lenses like fujinon 35mm/1.4; 55-200mm; 60mm.
I understand that's a customization option, but it doesn't change the issue. I find the aperture ring on the lens is less likely to be accidentally adjusted, so good that both options are available.
Just picked up this lens. It's a good unit. Excellent image quality, greater focal length range and lower price makes it more appealing to me than xf 16-55.
Thanks for sharing.
I will probably purchase a copy of the Tamron, but will never part with my excellent, really excellent, Fuji 18-55, one of the best lenses out there and light, compact, IS, and all just like an old friend.
That's you and me both, except for the part where you buy the 17-70.
I feel light and plastic these days are things I welcome. Having moved to lighter mirrorless cameras I welcome lenses that aren't going to be heavy. And modern materials should mean a sturdy product even without being metal.
Interesting view - let me rethink that comment.
@@MaartenHeilbronespecially on the XH2s that can use electronic shutter, so no risk of shutter shock, a lighter lens will create a nice balance in handling.
I like the picture quality, and nice that Fuji gets competition for X lenses. Regarding the Aperture ring, yes I also don't like it, but since the "H2-PASM-Gate"...
PASM-gate? Tell me more? That wasn't the first Fujifilm model with PASM.
Excellent review 👌 like you I’ll stick with my 16-55 lens ❤️
Thanks, a pleasure to read your kind words.
Thanks for the review! Hoping they'll also make a Z mount version…
I can appreciate that would be popular
Great review, thanks! I just traded in my 16-55 for the 17-70. Why? Lighter for traveling, stabilized when used on my x-t30 (normally used on X-T4) and longer reach for travel and portrait. So far I don’t see any difference in image quality! And yes, I‘m also missing the aperture ring… But: I don’t want ti change back!
Always nice to hear from a photographer whose happy with their kit choices. Thanks for your kind words.
seeing you for the first time. loved your style of narration, it was like watching a discovery channel documentary, except on cameras! my question is, have you tried the sony version? is the autofocus better over there comoared to this version? Thanks!
I have not had the chance to use that lens, so can't say how the AF performs.
Thanks!
Very kind, thanks for your support.
The lens looks nice and - as you say - would likely be a good option if you had a PASM camera. The whole reason I finally settled on Fuji as my camera of choice was the analog controls so purchasing a lens without an aperture ring holds no attraction to me. I note the Fuji 16-55 f2.8 is currently on sale in Sydney. I wonder if this is to compete with the new Tamron or if, perhaps, a new model might be coming.
I have no predictions to offer on that. Thanks for commenting.
@@MaartenHeilbron Given it's the 10 year anniversary of the X-mount I think Fuji have been very quiet. I'm curious to see if there's a few more offerings before the end of the year. They've updated existing lenses in the past so I guess anything is possible.
Thank you my friend. Can you do full review on X-H2S Thank you.
I'm waiting for a production model to be available for loan from Fujifilm Canada.
@@MaartenHeilbron Thank you👋👋👋
Thank you so so much. I am in the middle of 16-80 and this 17-70. Manual Aperture is not an issue for me cause I am already using XC 50-230. Please help me decide which I should take. I am a landscape shooter. 16-80 has 2 stop wide and 10 stop zoom - light weight and constant f4 with corner sharpness issues while Tamrom 17-70 is bulkier starts with 2.8 and corners are sharp.
You've identified the issues, you need to make the decision.
I own the 16-80. If your viewer starts peeking at the corners, it’s because your picture is bad. That being said, I don’t have any sharpness issues on my unit. For landscape you won’t use apertures above 7.1 or 8. You will appreciate the aperture ring in cold weather, though. Paired with the 70-300, the 16-80 Is a perfect combo for your use case: a very light and powerful kit.
I wish I could like this video multiple times..
A pleasure to read your kind words, thanks!!
Hello, Marteen! Great review. Please, did you get this "fotógrafo" on your table in Portugal? :)
Greetings from Rio.
Thanks, yes, in Lisbon. Please say hello to my friends in Rio.
the lack of an aperture ring puts me off. otherwise I like Tamron lenses. I had a wonderful 24-70 f2.8 I used on my Nikon D700 back in the day. A fantastic lens :-)
Thanks for sharing your experience.
Thank you Maarten, will you do a comparison with the recently announced Sigma 18-50/2.8 X mount. Will be interesting to compare build characteristics as this one is very small and light but without the stabilization. How is the tamron vs the XF18-55/2.8-4 ?
Thank you. Excellent reviews as always.
Sigma has not offered me that lens for review. I much prefer (as I said in the review) the XF18-55.
As a Pentax user, trusting on IBIS only and strive for compact light lenses, is a philosophy I support. Curious about that 18-50!
Thank you for the review. It's a bummer that it wobbles during zoom.. I hoped it was better than XF 16-55 for video..
Right, I was disappointed too!
I gotta say if I didn't already own the 16-55 this would be a very compelling option. Outside of lacking weather sealing this doesn't have many downsides. I think if I was just getting started with Fuji or wanted an affordable upgrade this would be at the top of my list.
Most reasonably cautious photographers don't need weather sealing - but thanks for your thoughts.
The tamron does have weather sealing though
Does it though? The description sounds pretty weasely.
Tamron 17 70mm f 2.8
Good ❤️
Thanks!
I"m using this lens on my X-T4. I like the optical performance of this lens, but I am encountering a problem with the ISO chosen by the camera in aperture priority or full automatic. In these modes, an ISO less than 640 is never chosen. The Fuji XF 70-300 looking at the same bright outdoor scene with similar parameters (e.g. f/4, 70mm), chooses a lower ISO and a faster shutter speed. Of course, the ISO can be set successfully to any value using the knob on top when using the Tamron lens. The minimum ISO set for the Auto ISO 1 range is 160, and the minimum shutter speed is set to AUTO, so that is not the problem. What do you think might be going on here?
The reason relates to your dynamic range settings, as they require higher ISOs. If you turn them off, autoISO will use lower settings.
@@MaartenHeilbron Yes, that fixed it! thanks
I wish Tamron would make aps-c counterpart to 35-150. Experiment a bit. A 20-120 f2.8-4 would be great.
Great suggestions, I hope someone’s listening.
Today I received the new Tamron 17-70mm F2.8 for Fuji and so far I have mixed feelings. Image quality is great and the IS (VC) is great too and the handling is way better than expected. But - though the lens is known to have silent AF - my copy seems to be a noisy one. There is a very noticeable chattering sound when the camera is being powered on, when switching from viewing images to normal camera operations and when focusing. Plus, from time to time the focus is a little insecure too and switching from reviewing images back to normal camera operations takes a lot of time.
I never heard of these issues before: Is this normal for this lens? Do I have a faulty copy? Is it a firmware issue?
I'm shooting on an XT3 with Firmware 4.3 for the body and 1.0 for the Lens.
Thanks in advance!
I was using the X-T4 and only observed one of those issues - the chattering while powering up. Focussing was quiet and secure. I assume you're using the latest firmware for the camera?
@@MaartenHeilbron Yes, I do. Thank you for the quick reply! After some consultation I believe the chatter comes from the readjusting aperture blades. The 16-55 has the same Issue but the noise is much more quiet - barely noticeable. Did you test the lens indoors or on a cloudy day. I noticed that focusing with the Tamron is very quite as long as there is flat light. Get out in the sun and the chattering starts...
That's a result I'd expect. The lens opens wide to focus, then adjusts if light levels are high.
Hi Maarten. I've done a couple of outings with you in the past. You're a great person to be around to exchange information.
I currently own the 16-80 Fuji lens, but not very happy with it. I have been considering an upgrade to the 16-55. Like you, I have the X-H1, so lack of stabilization is not an issue.
Now comes the Tamron 17-70, and it throws me for a loop.
My only consideration is optical performance. Can you comment on the difference between the 16-55 and the 17-70.
Thanks for your kind words, I'm kind of missing the photo walks put on my the various manufacturers. I did not do a side by side, but for pure stills quality, they're fairly equal. The 16-55 is better for stills.
Jeff, having tried both the Fuji 16-55 and Tamron 17-70 it's my experience that there is little difference in the image quality, in fact on the copies I had I'd actually say the Tamron was slightly better.
Tamron is better as there is no separation or bokeh is weak on 16-55 even at 55mm.
if you would decide between a used 16-55 and a new 17-70 at about the same price, what would you get? I have both an xt3 and 4, and currently have a 18-55 and 16-80. It will probably replace the 16-80 and someday I hope to get the fuji 50-140. I do mostly video but do photo occasionally as well.
Thanks for sharing your experience and observations.
nice review. so which one is better for portrait Tamron 17-70mm or fuji 16-55 mm ?
Toss up. Probably the Tamron, particularly if you can keep your subjects at the 50-70mm range.
I use the 16-55 all the time for (amateur but paid) portrait assignments, and it’s a beast. Construction is the best I have ever seen, it has aperture ring markings, it’s extremely sharp all across the focal range, right from 2.8, and focussing is super fast and accurate; you never miss a shot, which is important in portrait shoots of course. I’d take the 16-55 any old day of the week 😀.
I have the 16-80 and its the ideal range for me, but i like the IQ of the XF16-55. I ask me if this could be the perfect compromise.
Owning both is most definitely the best compromise - otherwise you must select which aspect is most important to you.
@@MaartenHeilbron I think i have already to many lenses 😊 I 'll keep my 16-80 for now.
How's the image quality compared to 16-55? Is it a noticeable difference? Thank you!
About the same, thanks for your kind words.
In the 18-55 range, Tamaron 17-70mm F2.8 vs Fuji 18-55mm f2.8-f4 Which one is better? In terms of image quality, sharpness
I prefer the XF16-55. For those two, I might give the Tamron a slight edge, but didn’t compare them side by side
@@MaartenHeilbron Thank you
How do you figure this lens is more similar to the XC line than the XF? On what criteria is that comment made? I am sceptical of the claim but would like your insight to see if it's reasonable.
I'm not sure how you understand the difference, but for me the XC are the less expensive plastic lenses without aperture rings. You?
@@MaartenHeilbron for me, it's softer/inferior image quality.
A less obvious way to judge, but understood.
I purchased it for Sonys E-Mount long time ago and i hated the design and build quality immediately. In fact i think it is the ugliest lens, i ever owned. But the pictueres were good, , the stabilisation was good and i liked the minimal focal distance. The specs represented the perfect always walk around lens for me. But it was so ugly and also the bokeh is not the best. So switched to the Sony 16-55/F2.8 as an alternative. I sold the Tamron and got the Sony. And the Sony was beautiful, very sharp pictures, what a nice lens. BUT it was missing OSS and had not as much focal length on the telephoto end. AND most importantly, i was much much more expensive. I then watched many other reviews about the Tamron and changed my mind to give it a second chance. I still could return the Sony and so i did and bought the Tamron again. And what can i say, i came to terms with it and kept it. I still cant look at it, it is so ugly. But i get very nice and sharp pictures with all the focal range i need, at constan F2.8 and stabilized and for a decent price.
Great story! Thanks for sharing. I appreciate your thoughts on both of these lenses.
Stay safe? Lens cap injuries are just waiting to happen. I'm out there in Fort Gibraltar, Winnipeg and camera lacerations abound.
Thanks for the reminder of this important issue. It's worth a video.
What's the lens cap injury?
So which is better this lens or sigma 18-50mm f2.8? Thanks
Haven't tried the Sigma, so not really qualified. Viewers?
@MaartenHeilbron apparently based on the 40mp bodies the Sigma has the better optics.
How is this when compared with fuji 18-55 f2.8-f4 and 16-80 f4?
I prefer the Fujifilm lenses with aperture rings.
@@MaartenHeilbron Thank you.
5:43 Sony has a 10~15% stake in Tamron. Could be the reason. Not sure.
And I thought it was just carelessness in repurposing the manual for the Sony version of the lens!
And yes.. its 1st comment
And second!
So is the 17-70 better than the 16-80?
I didn't think so.
depends on the purpose of course. As far as i know the 17-70 is better and should be better.
Is it compatible with X-T 1?
It's compatible with all cameras with the X-mount lens system (that includes the X-T1).
@@MaartenHeilbron Thank you for the reply! There is this question because the official website of Tamron has not included X-T1 among the compatible bodies. May be it is an old body not worth to include.
Interesting - I can't imagine why it would not be. However, I haven't tried that combination, so it's possible there's something odd. I'd send their tech support a quick email to confirm, or ask your local photo shop, or an online vendor like B&H.
@@davidleung5166 as an indication, check firmware updates. Fuji did some fixes for 17-70 also on older bodies!
I have both the 16-80 and the 16-55. For image quality 16-55, no question but for travel the 16-80 is perfect. For low light I have a few f2 primes which take up no space in my camera bag. I have a couple of Tamron lenses for my Sony system and can attest, for the money, they make great lenses. So do not worry about image quality etc. However I shoot Fujifilm for the experience, but don't listen to me as I am an old fart, grown up with film. For me the experience of taking a photo is often more important than the result.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts. Interesting.
@@MaartenHeilbron Many viewers, and photographers, in contrast to those who only take images with phones,, fall into this poster's category. Who knows where it will end? But in the meantime my friend, just enjoy what you have been , and continue, to enjoy
That category being self-identified "old farts"?
Unless you really need f 2.8, this lens being not original Fuji, and NOT parfocal, is going to be majorly challenged by the new Fuji 18-120 f4, which IS parfocal (powerzoom), and and original.
Right. It's the f2.8 that gives this lens the advantage.
@@MaartenHeilbron yes… and to be honest - i have several lenses that go higher than f 2.8 - 1.4 and such - and I think that I can count with ZERO fingers, the number of times I’ve shot at lower than 3.2 - the depth of field just becomes too razor thin to be pretty
Understood.
I invariably enjoy all your photographic reviews.
However, you really didn't like this lens - at all.
This is your prerogative, preferring at the end, the magic Fuji 18-55, which I will never part with.
That said , in commenting upon the actual results, which after all is essentially what this lens is about, you didn't appear to find fault.
Just one of those pieces of equipment you didn't like, but nobody, including me, says you have to like all that you review .
Thanks for allowing me my preferences, appreciated.
Reading user experiences over past time, 17-70 has quality variations, often AF and sharpness issues. When needing OIS, the 18-55 seems a solid choice.
Great review. Thanks
I appreciate your kind words, thank you.