Using Sony a6700 with this sigma 18-50 F2.8, and Sony 11mm F1.8 will be the perfect vlog setup for me. You can literally do anything with this combo, filter size 55mm all, light weight and versatile 😊
You explained the lenses and their capabilities soooo well! Awesome! That 18-50 zoom and 17-70 zoom at the beginning was really helpful in understanding the range! Keep up the good work!
Sigma's Size is just too hard to pass up. Yes I wish it had the IS function of the Tamron, but like others here, I want my APS-C set-up to be as small as possible.
To me, this is either irrelevant to a negative. I don't see the sigma size being a benefit. The Tamron, though, much more room to hold, and looks more professional. Weights, well, a6700 (which i also feel is too small, without a cage or something like the smallrig bottom rail) with either lens is still light enough where a few grams doesn't make much difference to me, and irrelevant on a tripod. The tamron IMO is actually more efficient use space, because you're getting an extra mm wider, and and extra 20mm tighter over the sigma. You'd need 2 lenses, and swaps to do what the 17-70 can do. Plus the Tamron has OS, which helps a good bit with 40-70mm focal lengths, unless in bright conditions. I feel like Tamron wanted something like, the "universal" lens. One that you could just take and be pretty much covered for 90% of everything. It does that, and it's not a MASSIVE lens by any stretch. I'd call it like, just over medium. While the sigma I would just say is a very SMALL lens. I almost think that it could have been a better lens, if they didn't mind designing it larger. I also dislike the hood attachment on the sigma, but that's a nit pick, not important.
The VC in the Tamron actually interferes with the IBIS in any Sony camera. Only Sony lenses with OSS work with the IBIS, not 3rd party lenses. So you are better off without it.
I now have both lenses since I couldn't decide on either one. I noticed that the Tamron isn't as gargantuan and heavy as people say, although it is a bit bigger and heavier than the Sigma. But the weight is not terribly noticeable when comparing them during real-world use. And I actually prefer the size of the Tamron because its easier to use the focus ring and you can get a better grip the lens. Both do really well and are very similar optically, but I tend to reach for the Tamron more because its more versatile than the Sigma. The only time I felt the need to pick up the Sigma is when I wanted to go as incognito and light as possible on trips, journalism, or whatever else calls for that need. Also, even though the Sigma can get in closer to the subject than the Tamron can, the Tamron could still get in very close - almost touching the glass - and focus. So the Sigma was not all that enticing to use over the Tamron in that regard. If I were to make a recommendation to someone who is starting their photography/videography journey and is torn on which one of these zoom lenses to get, I would highly recommend the Tamron over the Sigma unless you just don't or won't have the budget to buy a $700 lens and can only spend $550, or if you know without a doubt that you are prioritizing the smallest size and weight possible. I hope this helps! Especially for those who were being driven crazy from deciding on which one of these zooms to get.
I'm about to purchase the Sony A6700 along with the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8, but I'm really torn between that and the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. I'm particularly concerned about the stabilization (VC) issues that many people have been pointing out. Could you share your experience and help me decide which one to go for? My main focus is on filmmaking, UA-cam content (both indoor and outdoor), and portrait photography. the price difference is around $90 USD(Im ok with that!)
@@VoidBlooom I'm wondering why no one seems to compare it to the 1670Z Sony, it does stabilization fine. The Sigma and Tamron I can't say anything about but the 1670Z I have never had any issues or weird things with that are specific to it, like pan motion with OSS on gets weird but that's any OSS lens. The one thing the Sony has which some might consider a downside is that it 'disappears' - it has no *look* to it, no character or quirks. I have it in a sense specifically because of that, if I take a picture using it, no one who sees the picture is going to wonder what lens or camera I'm using, they are just going to look at subject of the picture. It may or not be what you want. I do sometimes wish that someone would ask what gear I'm using but it never really happens like that. I'm running it on an FX30, which make for a very versatile package for video, while able to do well enough for stills.
@@VoidBlooom I was also concerned about the VC not behaving well with my Sony camera's IBIS, but it wasn't as bad as reviewers were making it out to be. I think there is a setting in the camera that eliminates that problem completely. I always use Tamron's VC with IBIS. It's been working really well for me with both photography and videography. Footage was pretty smooth when walking with it. It wasn't gimbal perfect, but it worked well. The walking footage looked like walking in a video game. Walking footage came out janky with the Sigma, even with IBIS on. Honestly, I think the Sigma fits much better on a tripod or gimbal for video and as a single travel photography lens, due to its smaller size and weight. The Sigma provides enough while not asking for new iPhone prices, which is what most people need, and why it's so popular now. However, the Tamron has it all: Vibration Control, weather sealing, wider and more versatile range, close focusing distance, and it produces sharp images from corner-to-corner. The Sigma produces sharp images too, but it's not that noticeable on which produces better images than the other. But I do like the bokeh on the Tamron better, though I think that's just personal preference. The trade-off for more features on the Tamron are a larger size and weight to accommodate the wide range and its VC, and it's higher price. The extra weight was becoming very noticeable after some time using it when comparing it to the Sigma. But I think the trade-offs are worth it. You can definitely use the Tamron on a tripod. If you want to do gimbal work, then you would need a gimbal that supports a decent weight; maybe 5 lb. to be safe. But, all-in-all, I think the Tamron is a better all-'rounder for UA-cam and photography work. It does everything really well. I use it more than the Sigma, and I don't regret purchasing it. If you're cool with dropping a little extra money, then I think you'll really love it. Sorry for the long read, but I hope this helps relieve some anxiety on which one to get 😅
Great video. Big oversight though is the huge benefit of the weather sealing on the Tamron. If - like many photographers - you're going to be in rain, snow, sand, mist, humidity, etc., the Tamron is the clear winner. Note that I own the Sigma and it's great. Sharp and small. Just can't use it in anything but ideal conditions, so it doesn't get used.
@@mr.croissant7960 well, on a normal day its pretty hot outside (90F), from 1-3pm it rains and then sun is out again. It’s like that 5/7 days a week. Although I’d mostly shoot early in the morning or at night, I would want to get gear that could stand quick weather changes and all that, i don’t know if im making any sense but the point is, i’ve seen multiple reviews and comparisons for both of these lenses and the Sigma seemed like the better option but the Tamron has the weather sealing, so I just want to know if the weather sealing really does something or not. at the end of the day i probably wouldn’t shoot while there isn’t good weather outside.
Love your video, one question which one works better in low light? And can I use the a6700 with the tamron to shoot professional wedding photography and videography? My budget is tight I’m trying to save 😅😅😅
Great review, Kensei. I went back and forth on both lenses, and I finally pulled the trigger on the Sigma 18-50mm……….TODAY. Both are GREAT, but those two little words came into play………SIZE and WEIGHT. Perhaps I’ll purchase the Tamron 17-70 one of these days, but with my upcoming vacation this brand new Sigma 18-50 will be just fine. 🍻👊🏾
I watched quite a few videos on these lenses and for the guys who do the pixel peeking, they all agreed that the Sigma was a lot better. Even the Sony equivalent beat the Tamron. So I went with the Sigma for my A6700. It works on my A6400 and A6600 just fine too! I have other lenses for the A7C since it's a full frame, but I have it set to auto change for APS-C lenses so it swaps to the Super 35 mode I believe it's called. It makes the full frame sensor work with APS-C lenses so you don't get the outside blackened shadow around the pictures. But the Sigma just seems to work just fine for vlogging and street photography and it's so light that you don't get tired of the weight. Just no stabilization so you need to be careful with video if you don't have IBIS on your camera. Thanks for sharing!
really interesting take at the end, thank you for the great comparison. I subscribed during the first 10 seconds, love your style, keep up the good work.
I ordered the Tamron when it first came out, sold it a few months later and picked up the Sigma when it came out. I definitely prefer the colour from the Sigma, and although I missed the stabilization, now that I'm upgrading to the a6700 that doesn't matter as much to me.
Omg, this is exactly me! I did exactly the same thing and now I am happy with the Sigma....but I gotta admit that the oss in Tamron did help a bit for VDO work but not much.
Man, among those creators that doing video about FX30/A6700, your color grading is which I impressed the most. You inspired me to get an a6700 but damn, my color grading is still garbage. Wish you have a tutorial on how you color grading/ how do you exposure in Slog. That would be super helpful! A thumb up for your video as always. Cheers.
I'm about to purchase the Sony A6700 along with the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8, but I'm really torn between that and the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. I'm particularly concerned about the stabilization (VC) issues that many people have been pointing out. Could you share your experience and help me decide which one to go for? My main focus is on filmmaking, UA-cam content (both indoor and outdoor), and portrait photography. the price difference is around $90 USD(Im ok with that!)
i just bought the Sigma for my a7C and it has never leave the camera. Its the perfect size, nice good range, great image quality both photo and videos. The only thing i cant stand is the constant yapping from ppl saying how it is an APSC lens, its not meant for FF, there will be noise, image will be less sharp yada yada. I dont see it all, in fact Im enjoying the great images it captures plus its easy on the bicep too!
One great test for sure, and your process deserves recognition for its results. You cover most every possible thing within those 10 minutes. May I add the length and weight of the Tamron creates a very good balance when paired with the FX30, especially if a camera cage is in the mix. Other thing to know, quite an important one and often forgotten : Sony own partially Tamron (up to 11%, if my data are up-to-date). This means lots of informations are passed from the Sony side when designing lenses and its various internal softwares. Because we all know these lenses are equipped with lots of microchips, so high-standard programming is crucial for perfect operation. In this regard, and thanks to expertise being shared, Tamron can have the lead over Sigma (providing all processes are done properly). Even more so when software updates are being released, thanks to users' feedback and testers usage. I think this is something to add in the determining factors when time comes for the choice. ✋️🙂
Great video!, Odd question though, Is your WB messed up at 10:16? Your skin tone is freaking out into the alien side of sony colors.. LOL just thought I'd swing that out there to mention... I totally recommend the 17-70 over the 18-50 anyday by the way, the 24-105 equivalent is just too good to pass up on APSC.
@@KenseiAkatsu Oh weird!! Yeah its like really really yellow/green, only mentioning because u put a portrait of yourself next to it and it didnt add up!
I have a Sony FX30. Should I use a Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 (APSC) or a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 (full frame). The choice for the full frame lens would be for the following reasons: 1. Optical quality; 2. Being able to use this lens on a full frame camera that I intend to have in the near future. Do these reasons justify the biggest value I'm going to pay for the Sigma 24-70mm lens?
Thanks for your work. Good review and video. One question is bugging me. I saw lot of people complain about the IBIS and VC fighting each other and not being really compatible in the Tamron 17-70. Sometimes the video shakes or flick in a very anoying way and you can't disable only VC. Did you found those issues in your video testing? Thanks!
@@tandraoconnor7919 I use it for personal use but with very nice results. It really fit my needs of an all around lens both for video and photography. Only issue may happen sometimes is related to the autofocus but that happens with major part of not dedicated sony lens.
I came to the same conclusion and bought the Sigma after trying out a friend's copy. The 17-70f2.8 Tamron is more or less the same size ( and heavier!) as the full frame Tamron 28-200 lens. I am looking for a more compact carrying experience when I use my APS-C cameras.
@@KenseiAkatsu No, I think the Sigma hits the sweet spot for a small, lightweight-" happy to take with you " camera and lens combo. I use my Tamron full frame, 70-300 lens when I want more reach on my a6500.
I have had the 17-70 for over a year now, and im going to sell it for the Sigma 18-50. Why? Loss of contrast at 60-70MM wide open. I have tried replacing the lens, and the lens on different camera's. All had the same bad contrast on contrasting edges wide open and zoomed in. After 50MM, I need to stop down to 4.5 or 5.6 or the photo's look like crap, and I forget very often. So many photo's ruined because I forgot to stop down. Plus its MASSIVE. I also got the Tamron 28-75 G2. Its full frame, and MUCH better, but its the extract same size/weight as the 17-70.
I got the Tameron before watching this and have the Sony ZV 10. It seems ok and I wanted a bigger lens for optocs. Should I exchange it for the sigma or keep it? I bought it used so around the same as Sigma.
I have a really important cuestion for me, do you recommend the tamron 17-70 for vloggin? I know for vlogging I should buy a len with less focal distance, but i'm thinking about it for both purposes, phtos and videos, I would appreciate you to help me with this...
Cool! Thank you for this video. Actually thinking about buying a6700 and sigma 18-50 to film bouldering. Do you think its wide enough or would you recommend something wider for bouldering vlogs?
no, i have it and the vibration compentantion it’s not that good, it has some weird “jumps” on the shot, i’m going to sell mine because of it, and use the sigma with a gimbal to shoot videos
Adding to the size and lightness there is the fact that Sigma is significantly cheeper. I think the last thing I have to get out of the way now is wether I can skip on that extra 20mm of zoom or not…
Im trying to decide... Love my old tamron 17-50 2.8 but now I want a good camera for shooting my family and it has to be light, so surely i will end with the Sigma.
@@jesuslopez6873 Just increase the shutter speed. People go mad about the rule of doubling the shutter speed from your fps, but when you're seeing a video 99% of people won't notice the difference. Unless you're professional working on a movie or something you can skip the filter using shutter speed for most situations.
I wish these lenses could zoom out to 16mm, like super-expensive Sony lens, or even to 15mm, like Canon's zoom. It would be very good for vlogs and wide angle shots. I would even sacrifice some range at the far end. Difference between 16mm and 17mm is only 1mm, but that's almost 7%, and compared to 18mm it's almost 15%.
Hello, I would like to ask you, I have seen some videos of this lens presenting problems with stabilization, apparently the lens stabilization is not very compatible with the camera stabilization, I saw a video with a Sony fx30, but I don't know if it is with the 7iv something similar happened? Could you give me your opinion please?
unfortunately I had 2 Tamron lenses break, it snaps right at the focus lens, first time I thought I was just unlucky, second time it was obvious the lens had a weak point, didn't take much for it to snap.
How I see it is, Tamron's pro is their image, but I buy Sigma's because of their ergonomics, form factor, and build quality. I had a tamron 28-70 and for video I wanted dedicated af/mf switch. Also after a few months the coating on the barrel of the Tamron had tons of tiny micro scratches that made it look not so nice. I was by no means rough with the lens. Picked up the Sigma 28-70 and never looked back.
I bought the sigma 18-50mm strictly for the form factor... keeps my a6400 small. Biggest downside is no oss, but other than that it has insane quality.
@@nicuchitineac1950 I only do photography, 50mm is fine, i just try to shoot at least around 1/160s so I know the image is in focus. If you're doing video at that length it would I might suggest cropping in when editing to make it look stabilized.
For the same price would you buy sigma 18-50 or tamron 17-70, I already have sigma and i need glass for a second camera angle- Stationary. Now i can get Tamron for the same price as Sigma.
As you said Tamron is good for landscape photography...what would you suggest for a passionate person who likes to take pictures and doesnt want to spend more money.shall i buy sigma or tamron 🥲. I own Sony A6000😅 too old
If I would own an APSC like the 6700 not my full frame cameras... I would definitely go with the 18-50 and maybe get a couple of primes like the 16mm and the 56mm... keep the entire set up compact, lightweight and budget friendly... (maybe a telephoto lens like the Sony 70-350)
very hard to choose because im currently using Sony 15mm with zve10 and the image quality is good., been weeks im searching on the internet which zoom lens should I get
People look at the focal length of the Tameron and think it's more versatile, but I want to be able to shoot close with my lenses where possible. Sharpness, I hear sony wins that round, but not on price alas.
I bought the 18-50 for my ZV-E10 and it was great and stayed on my camera 80% of the time, but I wanted the stability built into the 17-70. However now that I have the a6700 the 18-50 is even better and I feel I don't need what the 17-70 has to offer because of IBIS and Active Stab. If I get another lens it will be something like a 10-20mm or 50-200mm or a good prime. The 18-50 is small enough, priced low enough and good enough to do what I need to do in most (90%) of the time. It is I that needs to get better.
Thanks, your comment helped me! I'm going for Sigma! just sold my A6500 to get an A6700, I have both Viltrox 13mm 1.4 and 23mm 1.4 lenses, so I was looking for a real experience on a zooming lens.
I had both the Tamron 11-20 and the Tamron 17-70 that I used on my Sony a7 iv. They are fun lenses to use because they are lightweight compared to full frames, they don't cost much and you have all the focal lengths you need with the same filter size. but unfortunately they have a big problem... they make a very annoying flare when a ray of sunlight enters the lens. and it ruins your shots. Then the bokeh and the colors are unfortunately not beautiful. Sigma always wins on this.
great vid! i wanted to buy the tamron 17 70 but i saw a lot of videos saying that the tamron has some jumping frame issues... I mainly do videos and after watching yours I think I'm getting the sigma, as it doesn't have any weird frame behavior..
Both of these lenses are not designed for videography! Prime lenses and fixed-body zoom lenses are suitable for videography. SEL1655G and SELP18105G are the best zoom lenses for the filming! SELP18110G is a genuine cinema lens. It is a waste of money to use photographic zoom lenses for filming.
I passed on both and found used 18-105 F4 18-70, 18-135 all about the same price that made no sense to me but again size and weight I went wit( the 18-135 Sony been very happy great range , light and results seem pretty good to me
Well, Sigma cost a lot less as well. I do have the 24-70 GM, because I have a full frame, that I'm selling and just got the A6700, so I'm between these 2 lenses 🤣🤣🤣
With my essential tremor, I have to lean into the Tamron, but the Sigma is super small and light in comparison. Difficult choice... UPDATE: I got to handle the Sigma on Thursday... It's TINY and definitely the smallest f2.8 zoom I've ever picked up. Smaller than the FE Tamron 20-40mm f2.8 which I like a lot.
neither lens. Instead, sony 18-135 solves all your issues, weighs less, smaller, and has tremendous flexibility. To add to this, get the sigma 30mm 1.4 and the sony 70-350mm, all incredibly small travel lenses that give you unreal reach.
The 18-135mm seems like a meh lens tbh. It’s variable aperture is an issue, very sharp in the centre but that’s about it. Well I mean that is from my perspective at least, considering I will be using it professionally
![Tamron 17-70 F2.8 vs Sigma 18-50 F2.8 Lens Comparison | Best APS-C Zoom Lens for Sony [A6400, A6700]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/nZA_J1t3eac/mqdefault.jpg)
Which was your favorite??
Yes
I think Tamron is better than Sigma in this video
Sigma
Using Sony a6700 with this sigma 18-50 F2.8, and Sony 11mm F1.8 will be the perfect vlog setup for me. You can literally do anything with this combo, filter size 55mm all, light weight and versatile 😊
That might be the great setup!!
Do you need a gimbal for vlogging using sigma?
This is going to be my exact set up I already have the 11mm but I want to sell my 30mm lens to get a hold of the 18-50mm paired with the Sony a6700
everytime I look for a review on ANY gear you have a video, it's crazy. But I'm glad, you're amazing
You explained the lenses and their capabilities soooo well! Awesome! That 18-50 zoom and 17-70 zoom at the beginning was really helpful in understanding the range! Keep up the good work!
Sigma's Size is just too hard to pass up. Yes I wish it had the IS function of the Tamron, but like others here, I want my APS-C set-up to be as small as possible.
Then, this sigma might be perfect for you!
To me, this is either irrelevant to a negative. I don't see the sigma size being a benefit. The Tamron, though, much more room to hold, and looks more professional. Weights, well, a6700 (which i also feel is too small, without a cage or something like the smallrig bottom rail) with either lens is still light enough where a few grams doesn't make much difference to me, and irrelevant on a tripod.
The tamron IMO is actually more efficient use space, because you're getting an extra mm wider, and and extra 20mm tighter over the sigma. You'd need 2 lenses, and swaps to do what the 17-70 can do. Plus the Tamron has OS, which helps a good bit with 40-70mm focal lengths, unless in bright conditions.
I feel like Tamron wanted something like, the "universal" lens. One that you could just take and be pretty much covered for 90% of everything. It does that, and it's not a MASSIVE lens by any stretch. I'd call it like, just over medium. While the sigma I would just say is a very SMALL lens. I almost think that it could have been a better lens, if they didn't mind designing it larger. I also dislike the hood attachment on the sigma, but that's a nit pick, not important.
The VC in the Tamron actually interferes with the IBIS in any Sony camera. Only Sony lenses with OSS work with the IBIS, not 3rd party lenses. So you are better off without it.
I like your humor. Thank you! I'm still with my ZV-1.
I guess you exactly know what Fx30 users want to know about lens! Thank you for your video
I now have both lenses since I couldn't decide on either one. I noticed that the Tamron isn't as gargantuan and heavy as people say, although it is a bit bigger and heavier than the Sigma. But the weight is not terribly noticeable when comparing them during real-world use. And I actually prefer the size of the Tamron because its easier to use the focus ring and you can get a better grip the lens. Both do really well and are very similar optically, but I tend to reach for the Tamron more because its more versatile than the Sigma. The only time I felt the need to pick up the Sigma is when I wanted to go as incognito and light as possible on trips, journalism, or whatever else calls for that need. Also, even though the Sigma can get in closer to the subject than the Tamron can, the Tamron could still get in very close - almost touching the glass - and focus. So the Sigma was not all that enticing to use over the Tamron in that regard. If I were to make a recommendation to someone who is starting their photography/videography journey and is torn on which one of these zoom lenses to get, I would highly recommend the Tamron over the Sigma unless you just don't or won't have the budget to buy a $700 lens and can only spend $550, or if you know without a doubt that you are prioritizing the smallest size and weight possible.
I hope this helps!
Especially for those who were being driven crazy from deciding on which one of these zooms to get.
This helped me quite a bit! Thanks!!
Thanks
Which are you recommending for actions/sports photography?
I'm about to purchase the Sony A6700 along with the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8, but I'm really torn between that and the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. I'm particularly concerned about the stabilization (VC) issues that many people have been pointing out. Could you share your experience and help me decide which one to go for? My main focus is on filmmaking, UA-cam content (both indoor and outdoor), and portrait photography. the price difference is around $90 USD(Im ok with that!)
@@VoidBlooom I'm wondering why no one seems to compare it to the 1670Z Sony, it does stabilization fine. The Sigma and Tamron I can't say anything about but the 1670Z I have never had any issues or weird things with that are specific to it, like pan motion with OSS on gets weird but that's any OSS lens. The one thing the Sony has which some might consider a downside is that it 'disappears' - it has no *look* to it, no character or quirks. I have it in a sense specifically because of that, if I take a picture using it, no one who sees the picture is going to wonder what lens or camera I'm using, they are just going to look at subject of the picture. It may or not be what you want. I do sometimes wish that someone would ask what gear I'm using but it never really happens like that.
I'm running it on an FX30, which make for a very versatile package for video, while able to do well enough for stills.
@@VoidBlooom I was also concerned about the VC not behaving well with my Sony camera's IBIS, but it wasn't as bad as reviewers were making it out to be. I think there is a setting in the camera that eliminates that problem completely. I always use Tamron's VC with IBIS. It's been working really well for me with both photography and videography.
Footage was pretty smooth when walking with it. It wasn't gimbal perfect, but it worked well. The walking footage looked like walking in a video game. Walking footage came out janky with the Sigma, even with IBIS on. Honestly, I think the Sigma fits much better on a tripod or gimbal for video and as a single travel photography lens, due to its smaller size and weight. The Sigma provides enough while not asking for new iPhone prices, which is what most people need, and why it's so popular now.
However, the Tamron has it all: Vibration Control, weather sealing, wider and more versatile range, close focusing distance, and it produces sharp images from corner-to-corner. The Sigma produces sharp images too, but it's not that noticeable on which produces better images than the other. But I do like the bokeh on the Tamron better, though I think that's just personal preference.
The trade-off for more features on the Tamron are a larger size and weight to accommodate the wide range and its VC, and it's higher price. The extra weight was becoming very noticeable after some time using it when comparing it to the Sigma. But I think the trade-offs are worth it. You can definitely use the Tamron on a tripod. If you want to do gimbal work, then you would need a gimbal that supports a decent weight; maybe 5 lb. to be safe.
But, all-in-all, I think the Tamron is a better all-'rounder for UA-cam and photography work. It does everything really well. I use it more than the Sigma, and I don't regret purchasing it. If you're cool with dropping a little extra money, then I think you'll really love it.
Sorry for the long read, but I hope this helps relieve some anxiety on which one to get 😅
Great video. Big oversight though is the huge benefit of the weather sealing on the Tamron. If - like many photographers - you're going to be in rain, snow, sand, mist, humidity, etc., the Tamron is the clear winner. Note that I own the Sigma and it's great. Sharp and small. Just can't use it in anything but ideal conditions, so it doesn't get used.
I live in very hot/humid area so probably the Tamron is the better option right?
The way you phrase that makes it sound like the weather conditions around you are never ideal. Could you please clarify?
@@mr.croissant7960 well, on a normal day its pretty hot outside (90F), from 1-3pm it rains and then sun is out again. It’s like that 5/7 days a week. Although I’d mostly shoot early in the morning or at night, I would want to get gear that could stand quick weather changes and all that, i don’t know if im making any sense but the point is, i’ve seen multiple reviews and comparisons for both of these lenses and the Sigma seemed like the better option but the Tamron has the weather sealing, so I just want to know if the weather sealing really does something or not. at the end of the day i probably wouldn’t shoot while there isn’t good weather outside.
I don't usually subscribe, but you just captured everything (evidences included) for potential buyers to based their decision off. Very well done!
Love your video, one question which one works better in low light?
And can I use the a6700 with the tamron to shoot professional wedding photography and videography? My budget is tight I’m trying to save 😅😅😅
Great review, Kensei. I went back and forth on both lenses, and I finally pulled the trigger on the Sigma 18-50mm……….TODAY.
Both are GREAT, but those two little words came into play………SIZE and WEIGHT.
Perhaps I’ll purchase the Tamron 17-70 one of these days, but with my upcoming vacation this brand new Sigma 18-50 will be just fine.
🍻👊🏾
I watched quite a few videos on these lenses and for the guys who do the pixel peeking, they all agreed that the Sigma was a lot better. Even the Sony equivalent beat the Tamron. So I went with the Sigma for my A6700. It works on my A6400 and A6600 just fine too! I have other lenses for the A7C since it's a full frame, but I have it set to auto change for APS-C lenses so it swaps to the Super 35 mode I believe it's called. It makes the full frame sensor work with APS-C lenses so you don't get the outside blackened shadow around the pictures. But the Sigma just seems to work just fine for vlogging and street photography and it's so light that you don't get tired of the weight. Just no stabilization so you need to be careful with video if you don't have IBIS on your camera. Thanks for sharing!
@kornholeeoo How does the sigma work with Ibis in camera?
Was not expecting the philosophical turn! Thank you :) All these comparisons seem void and overkill.
really interesting take at the end, thank you for the great comparison. I subscribed during the first 10 seconds, love your style, keep up the good work.
I ordered the Tamron when it first came out, sold it a few months later and picked up the Sigma when it came out. I definitely prefer the colour from the Sigma, and although I missed the stabilization, now that I'm upgrading to the a6700 that doesn't matter as much to me.
Omg, this is exactly me! I did exactly the same thing and now I am happy with the Sigma....but I gotta admit that the oss in Tamron did help a bit for VDO work but not much.
A6700 + Sigma 1850 might be the king of vlogging?
@@KenseiAkatsu the Sony 11mm or 15mm are probably better options imo, or the Tamron 11-20
What if i have sony a6400 and sigma 16mm, which lens would be better ?
So the IBIS in the a6700 is enough to justify the sigma 18-50 over the tamron 17-70 now? Thanks!
Man, among those creators that doing video about FX30/A6700, your color grading is which I impressed the most.
You inspired me to get an a6700 but damn, my color grading is still garbage. Wish you have a tutorial on how you color grading/ how do you exposure in Slog.
That would be super helpful!
A thumb up for your video as always. Cheers.
I might do the color grading tutorial again, but on my 2nd channel!
You shot on slog?
did the color grading tutorial end up happening? I like this guy!
I'm about to purchase the Sony A6700 along with the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8, but I'm really torn between that and the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8. I'm particularly concerned about the stabilization (VC) issues that many people have been pointing out. Could you share your experience and help me decide which one to go for? My main focus is on filmmaking, UA-cam content (both indoor and outdoor), and portrait photography. the price difference is around $90 USD(Im ok with that!)
You make the coolest content! Very helpful and encouraging.
i just bought the Sigma for my a7C and it has never leave the camera. Its the perfect size, nice good range, great image quality both photo and videos. The only thing i cant stand is the constant yapping from ppl saying how it is an APSC lens, its not meant for FF, there will be noise, image will be less sharp yada yada. I dont see it all, in fact Im enjoying the great images it captures plus its easy on the bicep too!
How much file size does it produce for jpeg and raw btw?
I sold my Sigma 18-50mm for Tamron 17-70mm and never looked back.
Very useful review. Looks like for travel videography Tamron would be a good choice, what do you say?
One great test for sure, and your process deserves recognition for its results. You cover most every possible thing within those 10 minutes.
May I add the length and weight of the Tamron creates a very good balance when paired with the FX30, especially if a camera cage is in the mix.
Other thing to know, quite an important one and often forgotten : Sony own partially Tamron (up to 11%, if my data are up-to-date). This means lots of informations are passed from the Sony side when designing lenses and its various internal softwares. Because we all know these lenses are equipped with lots of microchips, so high-standard programming is crucial for perfect operation.
In this regard, and thanks to expertise being shared, Tamron can have the lead over Sigma (providing all processes are done properly). Even more so when software updates are being released, thanks to users' feedback and testers usage.
I think this is something to add in the determining factors when time comes for the choice.
✋️🙂
Great video!, Odd question though, Is your WB messed up at 10:16? Your skin tone is freaking out into the alien side of sony colors.. LOL just thought I'd swing that out there to mention...
I totally recommend the 17-70 over the 18-50 anyday by the way, the 24-105 equivalent is just too good to pass up on APSC.
I don't know. I thought it was pretty normal.
Btw it was fixed at 5500K.
Right, that focal length advantage is so huge!
@@KenseiAkatsu Oh weird!! Yeah its like really really yellow/green, only mentioning because u put a portrait of yourself next to it and it didnt add up!
I have a Sony FX30. Should I use a Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 (APSC) or a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 (full frame).
The choice for the full frame lens would be for the following reasons:
1. Optical quality;
2. Being able to use this lens on a full frame camera that I intend to have in the near future.
Do these reasons justify the biggest value I'm going to pay for the Sigma 24-70mm lens?
My brother, see this comment, please!
Full frame lens does not always provide better quality in the APSC camera. Usually APSC lens perform better on APSC camera and it is cheaper.
Thank you so much for this review. It's exactly what I needed
What about the Sony 16-55 GM?
16-55 g
Thanks for your work. Good review and video. One question is bugging me. I saw lot of people complain about the IBIS and VC fighting each other and not being really compatible in the Tamron 17-70. Sometimes the video shakes or flick in a very anoying way and you can't disable only VC. Did you found those issues in your video testing? Thanks!
Did you find a solution for this?
@@traveloittemallu Got the sigma in the end. Saw that there is no Tamron firmware yet for that issue
@@davidchumillaDo you enjoy working with the Sigma do you use it for professional work?
@@tandraoconnor7919 I use it for personal use but with very nice results. It really fit my needs of an all around lens both for video and photography. Only issue may happen sometimes is related to the autofocus but that happens with major part of not dedicated sony lens.
I have a6700, and this is the only thing that makes me consider Sigma. Do you think that Tamron is gonna address the issue somehow?
I literally was searching for this right now and then the video notification pop'd lol
What a nice timing!!
I came to the same conclusion and bought the Sigma after trying out a friend's copy. The 17-70f2.8 Tamron is more or less the same size ( and heavier!) as the full frame Tamron 28-200 lens. I am looking for a more compact carrying experience when I use my APS-C cameras.
This sigma sounds the ultimate option for APSC right now, to me.
You think there is better option?
@@KenseiAkatsu No, I think the Sigma hits the sweet spot for a small, lightweight-" happy to take with you " camera and lens combo. I use my Tamron full frame, 70-300 lens when I want more reach on my a6500.
I have had the 17-70 for over a year now, and im going to sell it for the Sigma 18-50. Why? Loss of contrast at 60-70MM wide open. I have tried replacing the lens, and the lens on different camera's. All had the same bad contrast on contrasting edges wide open and zoomed in. After 50MM, I need to stop down to 4.5 or 5.6 or the photo's look like crap, and I forget very often. So many photo's ruined because I forgot to stop down. Plus its MASSIVE. I also got the Tamron 28-75 G2. Its full frame, and MUCH better, but its the extract same size/weight as the 17-70.
could you just adjust the colour problem in post for photography?
for event videography tamron will help so much with the range 17-70, also the stabilization even we used the gimbal
exactly, the Tamron compared to the Sigma is 1.5 lenses. It is normal to be bigger! + VC
@@nicuchitineac1950hi can you please explain about vc?
@@DikaPratama-f9h is called vibration control or vibration compensation (stabilization).
@@DikaPratama-f9his called vibration control or vibration compensation (stabilization).
Is called vibration control or vibration compensation (stabilization).
I got the Tameron before watching this and have the Sony ZV 10. It seems ok and I wanted a bigger lens for optocs. Should I exchange it for the sigma or keep it? I bought it used so around the same as Sigma.
Tamron is alright
I have a really important cuestion for me, do you recommend the tamron 17-70 for vloggin? I know for vlogging I should buy a len with less focal distance, but i'm thinking about it for both purposes, phtos and videos, I would appreciate you to help me with this...
How much of the difference Tamron makes in terms of video in panning shots?
Cool! Thank you for this video. Actually thinking about buying a6700 and sigma 18-50 to film bouldering. Do you think its wide enough or would you recommend something wider for bouldering vlogs?
Wow nice!!
Actually I felt a little tight for that.
I think sony 10-20mm might be better for a bouldering vlog.
@@KenseiAkatsuthere’s tamron 11-20 f2.8 as well.
hi what color profile did u shoot all the landscape videos in the tamron? thanks
S-log3
Hi buddy. Do you think Tamron 17-70 would be a suitable choice for shooting wedding clips? Are there frequent fluctuations during autofocus?
no, i have it and the vibration compentantion it’s not that good, it has some weird “jumps” on the shot, i’m going to sell mine because of it, and use the sigma with a gimbal to shoot videos
Adding to the size and lightness there is the fact that Sigma is significantly cheeper. I think the last thing I have to get out of the way now is wether I can skip on that extra 20mm of zoom or not…
I think the Sigma would make a great 2-lens setup together with the Sony 10-20mm f4. Great review!
Or the Sigma 10-18
thank you for the vid!
Great video! Kensei do you wear Jordan's? if so what are your favorites?
Actually never had it lol
@@KenseiAkatsu ohh ok
i was just about to search this up and instead the perfect video popped up on my recommended?? the exact lenses and camera haha
Glad that UA-cam found you and you found me.
is there a way we can turn off vibration compensation off in tamron?
In your camera settings, yes.
I have the Tamron and a6400. It's a great combination. The lens isn't too big. It is fine. I wouldn't pass on the lens for the size.
Can you use it for wedding photography bro cos I hav the same camera but deciding on the lens
@@Cjp123-cjpwhat is your pick?
Great comparison! Now compare them to the Sony 16-55mm f2.8 G 😅
That's my plan for the next video!
yes please @@KenseiAkatsu
For vlogging i prefer the Sigma 10-18, I had the 11-20 from Tamron and I was always dissatisfied with 11mm not being wide enough…
Im trying to decide... Love my old tamron 17-50 2.8 but now I want a good camera for shooting my family and it has to be light, so surely i will end with the Sigma.
how do you shot video at 2.8 without burning the image? What was the ISO and shutter speed?
Do you hear about ND filters?
@@Flacopepe18 no
@@jesuslopez6873 Just increase the shutter speed. People go mad about the rule of doubling the shutter speed from your fps, but when you're seeing a video 99% of people won't notice the difference.
Unless you're professional working on a movie or something you can skip the filter using shutter speed for most situations.
Sigma is good I have that lens I'm also buying the Tamron for work though, and I'll keep the sigma for personal use.
thankss 🙏 really fun to watch and helpful
My pleasure!
I wish these lenses could zoom out to 16mm, like super-expensive Sony lens, or even to 15mm, like Canon's zoom. It would be very good for vlogs and wide angle shots. I would even sacrifice some range at the far end. Difference between 16mm and 17mm is only 1mm, but that's almost 7%, and compared to 18mm it's almost 15%.
That's a good point.
I wish there was the lens with 15-50mm F2.8 for Sony APS-C cameras...
I'd imagine it's easier to get 15mm on cannon because their APSC sensors are a 1.6x crop compared to everyone else's 1.5x
@@AmaraARW fx30 in 4k video has 1.56 crop for some reason, and even more with digital IS.
@@sunflowerdeath It's because it's more demanding. The R7 for example is pixel binned in 4k60 because of how demanding it is
Thank you for the video
Hello, I would like to ask you, I have seen some videos of this lens presenting problems with stabilization, apparently the lens stabilization is not very compatible with the camera stabilization, I saw a video with a Sony fx30, but I don't know if it is with the 7iv something similar happened? Could you give me your opinion please?
Maybe because of the connection between Tamron and Sony??
unfortunately I had 2 Tamron lenses break, it snaps right at the focus lens, first time I thought I was just unlucky, second time it was obvious the lens had a weak point, didn't take much for it to snap.
I think this is a you problem nobody else is snapping their 17-70's in half :v
can you use it to full frame sensor?
If course we can use it
Dude, I’ve just found u!!!! And u are adorable ❤
How I see it is, Tamron's pro is their image, but I buy Sigma's because of their ergonomics, form factor, and build quality. I had a tamron 28-70 and for video I wanted dedicated af/mf switch. Also after a few months the coating on the barrel of the Tamron had tons of tiny micro scratches that made it look not so nice. I was by no means rough with the lens. Picked up the Sigma 28-70 and never looked back.
That is a great feedback, and I agree!
Sigma is very good at the damage and scratch!!
I bought the sigma 18-50mm strictly for the form factor... keeps my a6400 small. Biggest downside is no oss, but other than that it has insane quality.
Without stabilization, do you have any issues taking photos/video at 50mm?
@@nicuchitineac1950 I only do photography, 50mm is fine, i just try to shoot at least around 1/160s so I know the image is in focus. If you're doing video at that length it would I might suggest cropping in when editing to make it look stabilized.
Id go with the tamaron, i find the 105mm eq nicer
For the same price would you buy sigma 18-50 or tamron 17-70, I already have sigma and i need glass for a second camera angle- Stationary. Now i can get Tamron for the same price as Sigma.
Is the footage color graded or straight out of camera?
Graded
Very helpful ! 🙏🙏🙏
I may choose the Tamron. Answer in a few weeks.
wqat did u choose
@@MoreData-hz8hm Tamron ! Very efficient. Really good one.
Thx bro, now my first lense will be sigma i will buy
I notice Tamron's blurriness on the zoom. It's quite jarring and can't do a 'crash zoom' shot. The Sigma seems a bit more parfocal in this respect
As you said Tamron is good for landscape photography...what would you suggest for a passionate person who likes to take pictures and doesnt want to spend more money.shall i buy sigma or tamron 🥲. I own Sony A6000😅 too old
I bought the tamron for by a6400 amd now am using it with my a7iv 😁
Bought a tamron 17-70 a few months ago. Glad to hear the tamron wins the battle but ultimately loses the war in "smaller* size does matter" criteria 😅
FX30 and sigma1850. This is the golden combo!! lol
Pero en rendimiento como te va ?
Honestly the Tamron is a great budget lens. After buying a Sony G Master lens (for sony camera) though, I can see why it's just a "budget" lens.
I like its image quality tho
Cual comprastes y para que cámara?
If I would own an APSC like the 6700 not my full frame cameras... I would definitely go with the 18-50 and maybe get a couple of primes like the 16mm and the 56mm... keep the entire set up compact, lightweight and budget friendly... (maybe a telephoto lens like the Sony 70-350)
feels great to read this knowing I bought the a6700 with he sigma 16m and sony 50mm with oss, and thinking of getting a zoom lens
very hard to choose because im currently using Sony 15mm with zve10 and the image quality is good., been weeks im searching on the internet which zoom lens should I get
which one did you end up buying?
@@bigabal sigma
My favorite is Tamron 17-70mm
tamron 17-70 is turning my a6700 into black mode, is that normal ?
Sounds like not normal 😕
That happened to my refurbished lens and I send it backed
@@M461Cfs yup turned out to be my lens
Klasse gemacht MFG Peter Preis Dinslaken
So goood
You sir, Rock!!!!
Thanks!!
People look at the focal length of the Tameron and think it's more versatile, but I want to be able to shoot close with my lenses where possible. Sharpness, I hear sony wins that round, but not on price alas.
Sony 1655 has 33cm MFD but this sigma got 12cm, so actually it's better than the genuine lens in that.
I bought the 18-50 for my ZV-E10 and it was great and stayed on my camera 80% of the time, but I wanted the stability built into the 17-70. However now that I have the a6700 the 18-50 is even better and I feel I don't need what the 17-70 has to offer because of IBIS and Active Stab. If I get another lens it will be something like a 10-20mm or 50-200mm or a good prime. The 18-50 is small enough, priced low enough and good enough to do what I need to do in most (90%) of the time. It is I that needs to get better.
Thanks, your comment helped me! I'm going for Sigma! just sold my A6500 to get an A6700, I have both Viltrox 13mm 1.4 and 23mm 1.4 lenses, so I was looking for a real experience on a zooming lens.
using Active Tab in a6700 in 4K, will it be getting 1.5x crop just like zv-e10?
Love it how dude is doing dynos outside and then goes on saying that the tamron’s weight is killing his arm 😂
You are making a good point!! 😂😂😂
I had both the Tamron 11-20 and the Tamron 17-70 that I used on my Sony a7 iv. They are fun lenses to use because they are lightweight compared to full frames, they don't cost much and you have all the focal lengths you need with the same filter size. but unfortunately they have a big problem... they make a very annoying flare when a ray of sunlight enters the lens. and it ruins your shots. Then the bokeh and the colors are unfortunately not beautiful. Sigma always wins on this.
Entonces recomiendas comprar sigma ??? Estoy en duda cual de ellos comprar ?
@@MegaDay66 mmm...i'm not spanish i don't understand what you say
that's why you use and ND filter
@@Surreal.Visuals from my experience even with the Nd filter the flare remains
the black sigma cap looks like a blue cap
I've also replaced Tamron for Sigma due to size and weight for a gimbal work
I would do the sama thing!
Great video, btw Japanese with UK accent wow 😂
Thanks 😅
I always prefer a smaller lens 🤏
DEFINITELY!!
great vid! i wanted to buy the tamron 17 70 but i saw a lot of videos saying that the tamron has some jumping frame issues... I mainly do videos and after watching yours I think I'm getting the sigma, as it doesn't have any weird frame behavior..
why'd you put the avangalen cicada noise in the video?
Both of these lenses are not designed for videography! Prime lenses and fixed-body zoom lenses are suitable for videography. SEL1655G and SELP18105G are the best zoom lenses for the filming! SELP18110G is a genuine cinema lens. It is a waste of money to use photographic zoom lenses for filming.
These are the few comments I've been looking for. Thanks
Just bought the Tamron for my a6400, mostly for the internal stabilization but it disappointed me so much. It's jittery and barely usable.
if you use sigma then its even worse
Too bad for that fringing, ahhhhhhhh, but so compact. Still can't decide.
I passed on both and found used 18-105 F4 18-70, 18-135 all about the same price that made no sense to me but again size and weight I went wit( the 18-135 Sony been very happy great range , light and results seem pretty good to me
Well, Sigma cost a lot less as well. I do have the 24-70 GM, because I have a full frame, that I'm selling and just got the A6700, so I'm between these 2 lenses 🤣🤣🤣
i have tamron and i truly love it !
tamron the best
So size does matter 😢
Neither go full frames. X)
What camera do you recommend?
@@KenseiAkatsu i like the a7iv and the and the zve1 depending what im doing. I was just being silly tho nothing wrong with the 6700. 🙌🏾
@@Roysphotos8 ZV-E1 looks nice. Im gonna try it soon!!
With my essential tremor, I have to lean into the Tamron, but the Sigma is super small and light in comparison. Difficult choice... UPDATE: I got to handle the Sigma on Thursday... It's TINY and definitely the smallest f2.8 zoom I've ever picked up. Smaller than the FE Tamron 20-40mm f2.8 which I like a lot.
The size+weight of the Tamron alone is a deal breaker. I came to APS-C to lighten up my system.
Exactly!!
For someone who has been using tamron 35-150, 17-70 seems like a baby.
neither lens. Instead, sony 18-135 solves all your issues, weighs less, smaller, and has tremendous flexibility. To add to this, get the sigma 30mm 1.4 and the sony 70-350mm, all incredibly small travel lenses that give you unreal reach.
The 18-135mm seems like a meh lens tbh. It’s variable aperture is an issue, very sharp in the centre but that’s about it. Well I mean that is from my perspective at least, considering I will be using it professionally