Just ordered one of these after hiking around with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and 70-180 f2.8. Got some nice photos on that trip, but the weight and swapping lenses was a real pain.
I think this lens should be compered to the tamron 28-75. The alternative here is to have two lens combo than three lens combo. A wide zoom, like 17-28 and the 28-200. Less lenses on your backpack, less weight, less cost.
I gave it a thumbs up because by far you two are my favorite as far as camera reviewers, you look like you still have a bit of fun and give lots of detail, I’m an amateur and I got my Mom a S1R, she likes that you put the settings sometimes so she can stumble her way through correct exposure. She also likes that you get out of the house or studio and show nature or things. Me too!
I actually feel like this is being overlooked for professional use if you already have several fast primes. I’m considering replacing my 24-70 2.8 for this because of the sheer volume of keepers I could quickly get with decent light, and then switch to primes for specific uses and low light on the mid to long end. Has anyone else made a similar move and tried this out during paid gigs at weddings/events?
Hello bro i have just started as a wedding photographer i have sony a7 m3 and i have 28-70 f3.5 - 5.6 and now i am a bit confused which lens to buy 35mm/85mm or should i buy tamron 70-180 f2.8 bro can you please suggest??
I'd like to know how well it compares to the Nikkor 24-200 Z, that lens seems to be very sharp for a superzoom. Great test and lovely landscape over there!
I took this lens on vacation recently (since the Sony option continually gets terrible reviews) and it was shocking how often 28mm was just....not....quite....wide enough, and I had to keep switching to my 16-35mm. But people shoot different things so maybe others won't have an issue. (For my fellow infrared shooters, I will note that this lens is excellent, no hotspots.)
What wouldve been interesting to add in your conclusion would be how it compares optically to the older sony 24-240mm. Specially because the latter does include OIS, negating most of the benefits of benefits of the wider aperture of the tamron. Some reviews says it blows the 24-240mm out of the water both in terms of sharpness as resolution. What does DPReview think?
I wrote this above: 6:01 'So the Tamron is 2/3 stop brighter..' You are mixing up light transmission and aperture/dof. Use a tripod for consistency if that's a concern. Comparison against the Sony is justified, but please do that in a comprehensive manner instead of just dropping some loose arguments. It's a pity how thin dpreviews reviews are although I can appreciate the video and person in front of the camera. But I am into photo and this is probably the last video I watch from dp. A pity. I am almost never ever give negative feedback or a thumb down, but a review should cover the technical aspects of a high end tech product (it is, see Tamron/industrial e g).
The Tamron 28-200mm just blows the Sony 24-240mm out of the water. It's the reason I went FE mount. Center sharpness wide open resolves a 42MP cameras well, allowing for crazy center crops. Perfect for travel.
I went a lighter and cheaper route and paired with the Tamron 20mm F2.8. I really like the combo, as it gives me a do-it-all lens and an UWA without much weight while sharing filters. I looked at the 17-28mm, but couldn't justify the price for a lens that I wouldn't use very often. The 20mm is very sharp for a $250 lens!
Great review. In-depth info delivered in a lively way with humor supporting important data points. Leaning toward this lens to compliment our Rokinon primes on A7Sii (need mo' run-n-gun). Thanks for putting this together. 🙏
wow these look amazing! I know this is a silly dumb question however I new to understanding this. What is that thing is put around the lens at the end? I see so many photographers have that thing on top of the lens. What is the purpose for those?
the main 3 things that’ll always go on most photographers camera lenses is listed below i wasn’t sure which you were mentioning but hope i helped it’s a long video 1. lens hood - the pointy black thing around the lens is to block unnecessary unwanted light entering the lens causing something we call “lens flare” 2.lens cap - the black thing that’s flat and covers the whole front portion of the lens is only used to protect the front lens element when you are no longer shooting or traveling 3. ND filter - darkens sunlight in photos or videos which help for using slower shutter speeds for long exposures or certain video effects you’re trying to achieve
Love the oly video, that water droplet just shows wth the stabilisation is doing .-. slowmo was a bit soft, but still lovely, should have used more of it.
From Tamron: aperture values of F3.5 at 50mm, F4.5 at 100mm, F5.6 at 200mm My camera is in the shop, or I'd test F2.8. I don't think it lasts very long. Maybe 32mm? Can't remember.
Hello Chris, I purchased this lens based on the positive reviews on UA-cam, but unfortunately it doesn't focus sharply beyond 130 mm. I first thought it was hand shake and shutter speed issue, but then when I tried to focus manually with a Sony A7iii on a tripod, by rotating the focus ring with my model 10 feet away from me but I could not get a sharp focus on her eyes at any distance!!! It also did not focus sharply at 200 mm for a sunset scene!. Your feedback is appreciated.
Just wondering, are you using the latest firmware with the lens? There's a new version to be downloaded that should take care of the AF issue. But that might not solve your problem, since you tried manual focus as well :/ Did you turn off the camera stabilization while using it on a tripod? The reason I'm asking is that I'm interested in buying the Tamron 28-200 to replace my 28-75 (that I'm super happy with). Just to get that extra reach in a single lens. But comments like yours kind of make me wonder if that's a good idea?
@@edc641 The issue has been resolved. I had a low grade(Gobe) CPL on which was causing the issue which has now been fixed and I get perfect sharp images. The only flaw is that above appx. 100 mm you have to close the aperture down to f/5.6
@@CC-gt3ro Correct. I actually bought the lens myself a couple of weeks ago, downloaded and installed the latest firmware (v3), and the lens has stayed mounted to the camera ever since. Super happy with it!
@@edc641 do you think the 28-200 replace your 28-75f2.8? I hesitate between buying the duo 28-75 and 70-180 constant f2.8 which is more expensive and less ramge OR combining two more affordable lens to have more range, the tamron 28-200 and the new tamron 70-300 (105-450 super 35) for nearly the same price than the 70-180 itself. The constant 2.8 as i have on the 17-28 is very important for low light, but the focal range up to 300 (450) is also very tempting.
This lens will be a good reason for M43 users to switch to a FF system, without sacrificing much of the weight .. I will worry about the stabilization and image quality though as a Olympus 12-100mm user, especially for video. And ironically this video is shot on a M43 camera.
i like old chevy suburbans in the field..gotta have a good rest to take stable pics. Oh and its called cross dimensional analysis u know for those who like to convert..😁
Haha I clicked on it and watched the first 20 seconds and said “This looks familiar” I’m sorry guys, I know how frustrating a technical glitch can be on UA-cam. Especially if it doesn’t get monetized, the notifications don’t go out and then it hurts your ranking in the algorithm and well, it becomes a video that doesn’t get watched or help you.
I'm amused by the measures you used for the weight comparison, the Tamron 28-200 being evaluated and the NIKKOR Z 58mm f/0.95 S Noct . LOL. A $700 ish 576g Superzoom aimed at a compact traveler ILC market, against a $7,999.95, 2,000g Showcase, Specialized, Prime Lens. Why, it would be almost impossible to tell them apart if they were mounted on identical camera bodies! How about comparing the weights of the Tamron 28-200 (576G) to the Nikon 28-300 (800g), 10 year old Superzoom design, or any of a large number of Superzoom Lenses from Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc.? At least the Nikon 28-300 is a choice for many shooters if you want the most versatile lens possible on a single camera body for walkabout uses. If I'm using a single camera whether it is my D500, D850, or Z7, chances are I will have my Nikkor 28-300 lens mounted. On the D500 its a 42-450mm Superzoom.
That's a joke boy, ya' missed it. Went right passed ya'. Ya' gotta keep--I say ya' gotta keep on ya' toes! Toes that is! The fast ones get right by ya'!
I would say, this lens is a kit-quality superzoom travel lens. It is not for weddings or any other quality work. Sharpness is no that good, especially if you zoom over 40 mm. Here is my video, which was shot in Alaska using this lens, as well as some clips using Sony 20mm 1.8 lens. Some clips even shot using iPhone 12 Pro. ua-cam.com/video/futYf-CaOI8/v-deo.html
Oleg, I disagree. Center sharpness is very good at 42MP, and I can crop in quite a bit to gain reach while maintaining good resolution. The main takeaway is that it's far sharper than the Sony and Canon superzooms, sharper than the Nikon superzoom, and features wider maximum apertures and slower narrowing as you zoom in. Versus the kit lenses, you're definitely seeing an edge in center sharpness. You're not going to be doing indoor weddings with an F2.8-F5.6, but that is to be expected... Example of cropping in: flic.kr/p/2maGBDA flic.kr/p/2jPf9Un Sony Alpha Blog rates this as similar center and one step below in edge sharpness to the 24-105mm F4 in the same focal lengths.
@@HappyHubris Here is a shot at 200mm 1/500 f/5.6. As you see, it is not as sharp as I would like it to be, and it was focusing using eye detection: 1drv.ms/u/s!AhTTBbUSl2oHg-pxz0jEVB834ndLMw?e=fuhpv7
@@HappyHubris ISO was around 200. I wonder if Tamron will replace my lens. It is surely not as sharp as you have, even though I use 24mpx sensor, but anyway it should be better at sharpness.
6:01 'So the Tamron is 2/3 stop brighter..' You are mixing up light transmission and aperture/dof. Use a tripod for consistency if that's a concern. Comparison against the Sony is justified, but please do that in a comprehensive manner instead of just dropping some loose arguments. It's a pity how thin dpreviews reviews are although I can appreciate the video and person in front of the camera. But I am into photo and this is probably the last video I watch from dp. A pity.
Serious question: what do you do with photos like those shot in this video? They are beautiful but too boring to share on social media, and if you store them and your hard drive, you'll probably never look at them again🤔 really nothing against the photographer's skills, genuinely wondering since I also have many pics like that.
Has this not been here before? Liked the video already :D
Yes - due to a technical issue we had to re-upload this video (and lost the existing comments in the process). Sorry for any confusion!
@@dpreview There were some Toxic comments regarding Olympus on the last one. Maybe it is best this way.
@@tonyzhu403 Damn that sucks. Agreed though.
@@tonyzhu403 Yeah, no loss there.
Just ordered one of these after hiking around with the Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and 70-180 f2.8. Got some nice photos on that trip, but the weight and swapping lenses was a real pain.
I think this lens should be compered to the tamron 28-75. The alternative here is to have two lens combo than three lens combo. A wide zoom, like 17-28 and the 28-200. Less lenses on your backpack, less weight, less cost.
I gave it a thumbs up because by far you two are my favorite as far as camera reviewers, you look like you still have a bit of fun and give lots of detail, I’m an amateur and I got my Mom a S1R, she likes that you put the settings sometimes so she can stumble her way through correct exposure. She also likes that you get out of the house or studio and show nature or things. Me too!
I actually feel like this is being overlooked for professional use if you already have several fast primes. I’m considering replacing my 24-70 2.8 for this because of the sheer volume of keepers I could quickly get with decent light, and then switch to primes for specific uses and low light on the mid to long end. Has anyone else made a similar move and tried this out during paid gigs at weddings/events?
If you pair this with a camera top flash you will be very happy
have you tried because i am looking for weddings so??
Hello bro i have just started as a wedding photographer i have sony a7 m3 and i have 28-70 f3.5 - 5.6 and now i am a bit confused which lens to buy 35mm/85mm or should i buy tamron 70-180 f2.8 bro can you please suggest??
@@CarlosTucker-sp4bj try samyang 35-150 f2 or Tamron.
I'd like to know how well it compares to the Nikkor 24-200 Z, that lens seems to be very sharp for a superzoom. Great test and lovely landscape over there!
The oh so accurate grams to lbs. conversion never ceases to make me laugh.
I took this lens on vacation recently (since the Sony option continually gets terrible reviews) and it was shocking how often 28mm was just....not....quite....wide enough, and I had to keep switching to my 16-35mm. But people shoot different things so maybe others won't have an issue.
(For my fellow infrared shooters, I will note that this lens is excellent, no hotspots.)
What wouldve been interesting to add in your conclusion would be how it compares optically to the older sony 24-240mm. Specially because the latter does include OIS, negating most of the benefits of benefits of the wider aperture of the tamron. Some reviews says it blows the 24-240mm out of the water both in terms of sharpness as resolution. What does DPReview think?
I wrote this above: 6:01 'So the Tamron is 2/3 stop brighter..' You are mixing up light transmission and aperture/dof. Use a tripod for consistency if that's a concern. Comparison against the Sony is justified, but please do that in a comprehensive manner instead of just dropping some loose arguments. It's a pity how thin dpreviews reviews are although I can appreciate the video and person in front of the camera. But I am into photo and this is probably the last video I watch from dp. A pity.
I am almost never ever give negative feedback or a thumb down, but a review should cover the technical aspects of a high end tech product (it is, see Tamron/industrial e g).
I just watched a Dustin Abbott video on this lens. He does a direct image quality test against the 24-240. The tamron is in another league.
The Tamron 28-200mm just blows the Sony 24-240mm out of the water. It's the reason I went FE mount. Center sharpness wide open resolves a 42MP cameras well, allowing for crazy center crops. Perfect for travel.
How about traveling with this 28-200mm and the Tamron 17-28mm? Anyone have done both?
I intend to do it but with sony 20 1.8
I went a lighter and cheaper route and paired with the Tamron 20mm F2.8. I really like the combo, as it gives me a do-it-all lens and an UWA without much weight while sharing filters. I looked at the 17-28mm, but couldn't justify the price for a lens that I wouldn't use very often. The 20mm is very sharp for a $250 lens!
Love your reviews Chris - you’re a natural. Thanks again
I enjoy your sense of humor. Such goods!
Great review. In-depth info delivered in a lively way with humor supporting important data points. Leaning toward this lens to compliment our Rokinon primes on A7Sii (need mo' run-n-gun). Thanks for putting this together. 🙏
Love the 4k res on this video. Beautiful shots of the landscapes and water droplets.
4:31 What Chris doesn't know is that he probably actually did pack a fishing rod, but Jordan threw it away when Chris wasn't looking.
I thought I’d said this video was amazing and you guys were brill before. 👌Groundhog Day.
really like the magnification ratio for this
0.19m (WIDE), 0.8m (TELE) 1:3.1 (WIDE), 1:3.8 (TELE)
wow these look amazing! I know this is a silly dumb question however I new to understanding this. What is that thing is put around the lens at the end? I see so many photographers have that thing on top of the lens. What is the purpose for those?
the main 3 things that’ll always go on most photographers camera lenses is listed below i wasn’t sure which you were mentioning but hope i helped it’s a long video
1. lens hood - the pointy black thing around the lens is to block unnecessary unwanted light entering the lens causing something we call “lens flare”
2.lens cap - the black thing that’s flat and covers the whole front portion of the lens is only used to protect the front lens element when you are no longer shooting or traveling
3. ND filter - darkens sunlight in photos or videos which help for using slower shutter speeds for long exposures or certain video effects you’re trying to achieve
The thing at the end of the lens is usually the camera
Love the oly video, that water droplet just shows wth the stabilisation is doing .-. slowmo was a bit soft, but still lovely, should have used more of it.
Your very well spoken. Thank you.
Olympus C4K 24P. Go Go Go!!
Jordan didn't bring a monopod this time, eh?
Like yours reviews, hope you'll get bigger audience soon! ;)
These videos are just so entertaining
Right!? 4:39 had me in stitches 😂
Immediately followed by a little skipping heel click 😂
Wow… I had to comment twice because of your description ability!
Interested in Tamron 20-40 f2.8 review
Great review. Thanks.
4:55 how did he do it😂🫡🔥
how would this do when traveling with an a7c and tamron 20mm?
I use this combo on my A7R3, and it's perfect.
Hi, would you recomend it for a a6400 as an upgrade for the kitlens? No ibis and no oss for photos only
Get the Sony 18-105 f4 it's amazing
In the market for a zoom lens, I'm rocking a 16-35 and a 55mm at the moment. Anyone recommend this?
Jordan, did you took advise from Camera Conspiracies? EM1 III for video.
Lovely video, when do you expect Tamron to migrate their Mirrorless line to Canon R?
looks like no 3rd party bothered abt canon n nikon.may be bec of the mount type. all focus on sony
Until what focal length does it remain at 2.8?
From Tamron: aperture values of F3.5 at 50mm, F4.5 at 100mm, F5.6 at 200mm
My camera is in the shop, or I'd test F2.8. I don't think it lasts very long. Maybe 32mm? Can't remember.
@@HappyHubris thank you! 👍 I was considering it for travel but waiting on the 35-150 F2-2.8 now 😅
Hello Chris, I purchased this lens based on the positive reviews on UA-cam, but unfortunately it doesn't focus sharply beyond 130 mm. I first thought it was hand shake and shutter speed issue, but then when I tried to focus manually with a Sony A7iii on a tripod, by rotating the focus ring with my model 10 feet away from me but I could not get a sharp focus on her eyes at any distance!!! It also did not focus sharply at 200 mm for a sunset scene!. Your feedback is appreciated.
Just wondering, are you using the latest firmware with the lens? There's a new version to be downloaded that should take care of the AF issue. But that might not solve your problem, since you tried manual focus as well :/ Did you turn off the camera stabilization while using it on a tripod? The reason I'm asking is that I'm interested in buying the Tamron 28-200 to replace my 28-75 (that I'm super happy with). Just to get that extra reach in a single lens. But comments like yours kind of make me wonder if that's a good idea?
@@edc641 The issue has been resolved. I had a low grade(Gobe) CPL on which was causing the issue which has now been fixed and I get perfect sharp images. The only flaw is that above appx. 100 mm you have to close the aperture down to f/5.6
There is a firmware update v3
@@CC-gt3ro Correct. I actually bought the lens myself a couple of weeks ago, downloaded and installed the latest firmware (v3), and the lens has stayed mounted to the camera ever since. Super happy with it!
@@edc641 do you think the 28-200 replace your 28-75f2.8? I hesitate between buying the duo 28-75 and 70-180 constant f2.8 which is more expensive and less ramge OR combining two more affordable lens to have more range, the tamron 28-200 and the new tamron 70-300 (105-450 super 35) for nearly the same price than the 70-180 itself. The constant 2.8 as i have on the 17-28 is very important for low light, but the focal range up to 300 (450) is also very tempting.
Why not review the Lumix S 35mm f/1.8
Such a delight to watch this video. Thanks!
Deja Vu
I need to watch this again anyway
Can this only be used on a Sony ?
waiting for tamron to make a 24-105 f/2.8 like canon, but for Sony
When does it shift away from 2.8 ?
You lose F2.8 almost immediately but are still at F3.5 @ 50mm. From Tamron: "aperture values of F3.5 at 50mm, F4.5 at 100mm, F5.6 at 200mm"
Great review guys. One less lens i can uncheck from my list. Not the type of lens to maximize the capacity of the A7R4. Thanks
Maravilloso!!
Why is it my 28-200 lens are bad capturing
This lens will be a good reason for M43 users to switch to a FF system, without sacrificing much of the weight .. I will worry about the stabilization and image quality though as a Olympus 12-100mm user, especially for video.
And ironically this video is shot on a M43 camera.
For stills, this blows away the Oly on aperture and likely IQ. Mine resolves 42MP well in the center wide open.
Your goated bro.
i like old chevy suburbans in the field..gotta have a good rest to take stable pics. Oh and its called cross dimensional analysis u know for those who like to convert..😁
4:40 , alas you want to relocate to BC...
My brother lives in bc..its so beautiful i could take a good pic with a cheap phone camera and get rave reviews. 😁
Why is this video reuploaded??
Haha I clicked on it and watched the first 20 seconds and said “This looks familiar” I’m sorry guys, I know how frustrating a technical glitch can be on UA-cam. Especially if it doesn’t get monetized, the notifications don’t go out and then it hurts your ranking in the algorithm and well, it becomes a video that doesn’t get watched or help you.
Why reupload
I'm amused by the measures you used for the weight comparison, the Tamron 28-200 being evaluated and the NIKKOR Z
58mm f/0.95 S Noct . LOL. A $700 ish 576g Superzoom aimed at a compact traveler ILC market, against a $7,999.95, 2,000g Showcase, Specialized, Prime Lens. Why, it would be almost impossible to tell them apart if they were mounted on identical camera bodies! How about comparing the weights of the Tamron 28-200 (576G) to the Nikon 28-300 (800g), 10 year old Superzoom design, or any of a large number of Superzoom Lenses from Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc.? At least the Nikon 28-300 is a choice for many shooters if you want the most versatile lens possible on a single camera body for walkabout uses. If I'm using a single camera whether it is my D500, D850, or Z7, chances are I will have my Nikkor 28-300 lens mounted. On the D500 its a 42-450mm Superzoom.
We've been giving the weight of cameras in lenses in grams, pounds and Nocts for over a year now.
That's a joke boy, ya' missed it. Went right passed ya'. Ya' gotta keep--I say ya' gotta keep on ya' toes! Toes that is! The fast ones get right by ya'!
Deja vu
Perez Joseph Clark Nancy Anderson Charles
Pro tip...Match your shutter speed to your focal length
A7r3 is 42.4 MP not 42.6 but its all good
lmfaoo this was good
Deja vu 😁😂🤣
Everyone: Re-Like the Video, please.
I would say, this lens is a kit-quality superzoom travel lens. It is not for weddings or any other quality work. Sharpness is no that good, especially if you zoom over 40 mm. Here is my video, which was shot in Alaska using this lens, as well as some clips using Sony 20mm 1.8 lens. Some clips even shot using iPhone 12 Pro. ua-cam.com/video/futYf-CaOI8/v-deo.html
Oleg, I disagree. Center sharpness is very good at 42MP, and I can crop in quite a bit to gain reach while maintaining good resolution. The main takeaway is that it's far sharper than the Sony and Canon superzooms, sharper than the Nikon superzoom, and features wider maximum apertures and slower narrowing as you zoom in. Versus the kit lenses, you're definitely seeing an edge in center sharpness. You're not going to be doing indoor weddings with an F2.8-F5.6, but that is to be expected...
Example of cropping in: flic.kr/p/2maGBDA flic.kr/p/2jPf9Un
Sony Alpha Blog rates this as similar center and one step below in edge sharpness to the 24-105mm F4 in the same focal lengths.
@@HappyHubris Here is a shot at 200mm 1/500 f/5.6. As you see, it is not as sharp as I would like it to be, and it was focusing using eye detection: 1drv.ms/u/s!AhTTBbUSl2oHg-pxz0jEVB834ndLMw?e=fuhpv7
@@olegvorkunov5400 Were you at base ISO? Every lens has sample variation and every user has unique expectations.
@@HappyHubris ISO was around 200. I wonder if Tamron will replace my lens. It is surely not as sharp as you have, even though I use 24mpx sensor, but anyway it should be better at sharpness.
6:01 'So the Tamron is 2/3 stop brighter..' You are mixing up light transmission and aperture/dof. Use a tripod for consistency if that's a concern. Comparison against the Sony is justified, but please do that in a comprehensive manner instead of just dropping some loose arguments. It's a pity how thin dpreviews reviews are although I can appreciate the video and person in front of the camera. But I am into photo and this is probably the last video I watch from dp. A pity.
He is right though 2.8 is 2/3 brighter than a 3.5
Hasn’t been good for dog photography
Waiting for a 20-150 lens. 28 is shit, 200 you do not need.
Serious question: what do you do with photos like those shot in this video? They are beautiful but too boring to share on social media, and if you store them and your hard drive, you'll probably never look at them again🤔 really nothing against the photographer's skills, genuinely wondering since I also have many pics like that.