Honestly, I’ve never really shot much outside of the 20-70 range and I’m worried that any $ I’d spend on a 70-200 or 100-400 variant would be wasted on me.
Love love my Tamron 70-180m. Since I am a hobbyist/enthusiast stills shooter, I just couldn’t justify the cost of the GM. I am very happy with my Tamron.
I have bought seven different Tamron lenses over the past four years for three different brands. Each one of them has been a great value and given me superb results. For my Sony system, I have bought the Tamron 20mm ( My favorite incognito lens), Tamron 17-28mm, and Tamron 28-75mm lenses. I went from big bulky DSLR systems to Sony mirrorless. I sold my Tamron lenses that worked with my Nikon cameras and kept a Tamron 70-200 g2 that was for my Canon. Why in the world would I want to lug around a big lens with a small camera? No way! My current setup includes A7R iii's and Tamron glass. I have no regrets. The 700-200 g2 works fine with the Sigma MC-11 adapter, but I hate carrying so much weight now and it usually stays at home. As soon as I get around to it, I will be selling the 70-200 g2 and getting the Tamron 70-180mm.
I have the Tamron for a week now and already made two photoshoots with it. Your video was one the videos who convinced me to get it. So the size and weight is AWSOME for a 2.8 tele lens! Also the AF. It has good , near to awsome bokeh and awsome IQ too. On my A7R III pictures look incredible ! Also for the price is awsome ! I got the lens at black friday pro, for 1200$ (regular price in my country is 1500$) . The only downside I can find it is the lack of teleconverters. Cheers !
Also, something else to note is that the Tamron has way less focus breathing (where the lens "zooms" in and out when focussing). You can clearly see it at 4:50. The Sony GM zooms in and out when focussing.
It's hard to beat the Sony. I shot an entire wedding with it. I rented it and a wide angle zoom. The wide angle was having focus issues. So 70-200 gm & my 85 1.8 it was. The pics on the 70-200 was omg. Even in low light at 1600 iso the pics were crisp. As a paid professional, low light performance can make or break you. The only issue I have with the 70-200 is it needs to be updated. That's why I went with the 135gm. Newer tech. Love the 135gm.
If you just want a 70-200 F2.8 lens, the Tamron is a no-brainer. However, there is a catch, the G Master supports teleconverter, it can be coverted to a super telephoto lens. With the telecoverted you are buying 2 high quality lenses with that price, which makes the value not that bad anymore. 70-200 might be sufficient for some small events, for sports or animals, it's not enough. The only reson I would buy the G Master is for the teleconverter. I really hope Tamron make a telecoverter for their 70-180 lens.
Depends what you want the lens to do... Different horses for different courses... I wish that Tamron had included a 1.4x or 2x TC for this lens... However, for travel, the weight and size of the Tamron makes it a no brainer choice. I own both the Sony 70-200mm f/4 and the 70-350mm OSS lens. I am seriously considering replacing the 70-200mm f/4 lens with the Tamron 70-180mm.
I’d love the OSS and extra reach on the GM, but it rarely every drops below $1,800 used - it’s difficult justifying the price difference for a range that I don’t even know whether I’d use as often as 24-70 or 24-105
This comparison is not fair, but still good to know all difference. Thanks for making it, now I know that my 70200 GM is worth what I paid for it :) 7:21 i prefer colors on GM, on tamron it's like gradient. 7:57 squares top lines on tamron got yellow color instead of white.
how does it feel when comes to portraits and bokeh ? do you miss gm over tamron ? i lean towards tarmon to buy next but i do have the 28-75 one and feels a bit clumsy in some situations when is ghosting in lower light situations.
@@Adrian_G444 I still do not miss the GM at all. The bokeh and the IQ coming from the 70-180 Tamron suffices. I used to own the 28-75 as well. I traded up to get the Sigma 24-70. The 70-180 is newer technology so it's better than the 28-75.
@@andyqbui thanks mate.. that's exactly what i wanted to hear to make the decision towards tammie. I like the build of GM but its just sooo heavy to work with in hot sunny places
I got the Sony new on a special sale at 12mo no interest rate for about 2K tax included so I couldn’t let that pass and did well however I should have waited for the Tamron to come out. No complaints at all on my 70-200 but I would have benefited more with the Tamron size.
Professional Sony shooters on UA-cam means that the 70-200 GM is one of three lenses that Sony must upgrade (together with the 85 GM and the 24-70 GM).Newer GM lenses are so much better.
I feel like most of the pros here on UA-cam usually argue that the 16-35 gm or the 24 gm are their go-to lenses, but they’re usually more about wider shots for talking and vlogging. I think the 24-70 gm is the most versatile of the trilogy, but everyone will have their personal favorite focal lengths.
Just bought the Tamron after renting the Sony. While it produced stellar images, it was so heavy I rarely bothered with it. The Tamron is so small and light... no brainer for me.
5:42, GM is not perfectly focused so sharpness and subject separation is not possible to evaluate but I like what I saw here from the tamron. It has a cooler tone and more contrast. 6:19, tamron's centre sharpness is just head on. The GM shot seems less than optimal exposure. One of those lens has an inconsisitant T-value sugesting not a true 2.8 aperture. Again I like the tamron's color rendering and it seems to be recording information truer to how light gets splashed onto the subject. 6:58 once again the GM seems to be less exposed. I guess that lens is the culprit of having less than advertised T-value. 7:52 this goes to the GM. But by a hair though. Tamron maybe contarsier and that was the reason for its loss of clarity as the lighter color fonts edges gets buried by color. 8:28 Tamron. More contrast and more clarity in the corner for sure. The whole test is basically what Sony should have been doing all along rather pumping A7 bodies every year - Refresh your GM trios. 16-35GM is a gem and still shine compared to 12-24GM today. But the 24-70GM and 70-200GM were a bit old and not on par to compare with all the other lens on market today,(tamron, RF and etc.) and needs replacement/refresh, same goes to the 85GM.
You forgot to say with Sony we can always add a teleconverter (x1.4 or x2.0) if ever we would ever require a longer reach without having to carry an extra lens in our bag.
Final pros & cons written by a true Sony Fanboy but at least you showed the overall strength of Tamron. I'll go for Tamron without hesitate. With Sony you'll just look like a 'rich b*ch'. I wonder what Sigma will come up with but at this point Sony is a 👎 for me.
How you can test the contrast of lenese in orange and white leters?! You shol do this test in white and black leters my friend!and the most important you shold test this lenses against the sun!thats why like a pro never trust youtubers!
Which one are you going with?
Tamron. The GM is out of my reach for now.
Honestly, I’ve never really shot much outside of the 20-70 range and I’m worried that any $ I’d spend on a 70-200 or 100-400 variant would be wasted on me.
Uses Tamron for mostly sports and uses fast shutter speeds and on mono pod. Therefore, I have no problem being without stabilization!
Probably a used Sony F4 70-200 G (non master) for just a little less than the Tamron.
Straight up question, with money in mind and the use for mostly videoing which would u suggest?
Love love my Tamron 70-180m. Since I am a hobbyist/enthusiast stills shooter, I just couldn’t justify the cost of the GM. I am very happy with my Tamron.
A lot of us pros can't justify the cost of the GM either. Its just not that much better.
I have bought seven different Tamron lenses over the past four years for three different brands. Each one of them has been a great value and given me superb results. For my Sony system, I have bought the Tamron 20mm ( My favorite incognito lens), Tamron 17-28mm, and Tamron 28-75mm lenses. I went from big bulky DSLR systems to Sony mirrorless. I sold my Tamron lenses that worked with my Nikon cameras and kept a Tamron 70-200 g2 that was for my Canon. Why in the world would I want to lug around a big lens with a small camera? No way! My current setup includes A7R iii's and Tamron glass. I have no regrets. The 700-200 g2 works fine with the Sigma MC-11 adapter, but I hate carrying so much weight now and it usually stays at home. As soon as I get around to it, I will be selling the 70-200 g2 and getting the Tamron 70-180mm.
Spot on. I love my tamron 70-180 but there are def a few situations where the GM is the clear winner.
Well not where it counts the most which is IQ wide open and AF where the Tamron surprisingly wins both categories
I have the Tamron for a week now and already made two photoshoots with it. Your video was one the videos who convinced me to get it. So the size and weight is AWSOME for a 2.8 tele lens! Also the AF. It has good , near to awsome bokeh and awsome IQ too. On my A7R III pictures look incredible ! Also for the price is awsome ! I got the lens at black friday pro, for 1200$ (regular price in my country is 1500$) . The only downside I can find it is the lack of teleconverters. Cheers !
Which one will you take I got the Tamron 70 to 180 never tried to 70 to 200 G master
Also, something else to note is that the Tamron has way less focus breathing (where the lens "zooms" in and out when focussing). You can clearly see it at 4:50.
The Sony GM zooms in and out when focussing.
It's hard to beat the Sony. I shot an entire wedding with it. I rented it and a wide angle zoom. The wide angle was having focus issues. So 70-200 gm & my 85 1.8 it was. The pics on the 70-200 was omg. Even in low light at 1600 iso the pics were crisp. As a paid professional, low light performance can make or break you. The only issue I have with the 70-200 is it needs to be updated. That's why I went with the 135gm. Newer tech. Love the 135gm.
hi mate... could you share a low light photo example? you made me very curious... also what body you're using?
thank you
If you just want a 70-200 F2.8 lens, the Tamron is a no-brainer. However, there is a catch, the G Master supports teleconverter, it can be coverted to a super telephoto lens. With the telecoverted you are buying 2 high quality lenses with that price, which makes the value not that bad anymore. 70-200 might be sufficient for some small events, for sports or animals, it's not enough. The only reson I would buy the G Master is for the teleconverter. I really hope Tamron make a telecoverter for their 70-180 lens.
Depends what you want the lens to do... Different horses for different courses... I wish that Tamron had included a 1.4x or 2x TC for this lens... However, for travel, the weight and size of the Tamron makes it a no brainer choice. I own both the Sony 70-200mm f/4 and the 70-350mm OSS lens. I am seriously considering replacing the 70-200mm f/4 lens with the Tamron 70-180mm.
I do wish you would do metric sizes, not just in weights
Noted.
I’d love the OSS and extra reach on the GM, but it rarely every drops below $1,800 used - it’s difficult justifying the price difference for a range that I don’t even know whether I’d use as often as 24-70 or 24-105
This comparison is not fair, but still good to know all difference. Thanks for making it, now I know that my 70200 GM is worth what I paid for it :)
7:21 i prefer colors on GM, on tamron it's like gradient.
7:57 squares top lines on tamron got yellow color instead of white.
I used to own the GM. I don't miss it. I love the size and weight of the Tamron.
how does it feel when comes to portraits and bokeh ? do you miss gm over tamron ? i lean towards tarmon to buy next but i do have the 28-75 one and feels a bit clumsy in some situations when is ghosting in lower light situations.
@@Adrian_G444 I still do not miss the GM at all. The bokeh and the IQ coming from the 70-180 Tamron suffices. I used to own the 28-75 as well. I traded up to get the Sigma 24-70. The 70-180 is newer technology so it's better than the 28-75.
@@andyqbui thanks mate.. that's exactly what i wanted to hear to make the decision towards tammie. I like the build of GM but its just sooo heavy to work with in hot sunny places
I got the Sony new on a special sale at 12mo no interest rate for about 2K tax included so I couldn’t let that pass and did well however I should have waited for the Tamron to come out. No complaints at all on my 70-200 but I would have benefited more with the Tamron size.
when you said teleconverters are not compatible with the tamron do you mean lost of autofocus and quality or it just simply isnt compatible?
Professional Sony shooters on UA-cam means that the 70-200 GM is one of three lenses that Sony must upgrade (together with the 85 GM and the 24-70 GM).Newer GM lenses are so much better.
TVe200 exactly i am so scared to buy this its at least 5 years old and the new g masters are just better I hope they update
I feel like most of the pros here on UA-cam usually argue that the 16-35 gm or the 24 gm are their go-to lenses, but they’re usually more about wider shots for talking and vlogging. I think the 24-70 gm is the most versatile of the trilogy, but everyone will have their personal favorite focal lengths.
They just announced an upgrade!
@@I_am_Jordan_K Yes, and the new one seams to be great.
Tamron for ergonomy - value - optics & macro range. However I am waiting for the tamron 300 zoom.
Tamron all day. Smaller, lighter, cheaper and sharper. A perfect pairing for the compact size of Sony mirrorless cameras.
This. Better contrast on the Tamron too
Holding out to see what the Sigma will be like before choosing
To the point review. Eagerly waiting for Sony 100-400 FE vs sigma 100-400 comparison.
I liked how in your tests the Tamron smashed the double expensive Sony G Master in the CORNERS FOR SHARPNESS😎😎! Way to go Tamron 70-180 mm f/2.8!
Just bought the Tamron after renting the Sony. While it produced stellar images, it was so heavy I rarely bothered with it. The Tamron is so small and light... no brainer for me.
Thank you!! Your comment is super helpful for me!!!
definitely going for the Tamron
5:42, GM is not perfectly focused so sharpness and subject separation is not possible to evaluate but I like what I saw here from the tamron. It has a cooler tone and more contrast.
6:19, tamron's centre sharpness is just head on. The GM shot seems less than optimal exposure. One of those lens has an inconsisitant T-value sugesting not a true 2.8 aperture. Again I like the tamron's color rendering and it seems to be recording information truer to how light gets splashed onto the subject.
6:58 once again the GM seems to be less exposed. I guess that lens is the culprit of having less than advertised T-value.
7:52 this goes to the GM. But by a hair though. Tamron maybe contarsier and that was the reason for its loss of clarity as the lighter color fonts edges gets buried by color.
8:28 Tamron. More contrast and more clarity in the corner for sure.
The whole test is basically what Sony should have been doing all along rather pumping A7 bodies every year - Refresh your GM trios.
16-35GM is a gem and still shine compared to 12-24GM today. But the 24-70GM and 70-200GM were a bit old and not on par to compare with all the other lens on market today,(tamron, RF and etc.) and needs replacement/refresh, same goes to the 85GM.
You forgot to say with Sony we can always add a teleconverter (x1.4 or x2.0) if ever we would ever require a longer reach without having to carry an extra lens in our bag.
Please make a video on best gaming configuration under $4000
Fantastic review!!!
I got the Sony at 1800. So went with that.
New?
@@omeryonis5493 used
nice lens bro..nice comparison too
I do wish the tamron had optical stabilization. Still .. probably going with the tamron. The Sony seems dated and I agree its ready for an update
Tamron is a great lens and my Sony A7Rlv has good in camera stabilization
Review of sigma 100 400 e mount please 🙏
I'd be happy with either
The cons can be looked past. It’s worth saving the bucks
Final pros & cons written by a true Sony Fanboy but at least you showed the overall strength of Tamron.
I'll go for Tamron without hesitate.
With Sony you'll just look like a 'rich b*ch'.
I wonder what Sigma will come up with but at this point Sony is a 👎 for me.
Back focus just kills is it for me. Totaly unacceptable for such an expensive lens !
Tamron all the way !
Sony is back focusing..i would rather have a sharp focus than a better bokeh.
I went with the tampon due to cost only... If I had the money I would have bought the Sony lens 😇
The bigger the better like women say :D
Sony g master is better bro
How you can test the contrast of lenese in orange and white leters?! You shol do this test in white and black leters my friend!and the most important you shold test this lenses against the sun!thats why like a pro never trust youtubers!