Excellent review! I don't own any of these lenses, but if I had to choose one, I'd go with the Sigma. The Sigma 100-400mm to me seems like the better value overall from these three lenses. Longer reach, excellent build quality and performance, etc.
Thank you! This video is exactly what I was looking for! Think i'll go with the sony. The sigma looks great, it's just a bit too large and I don't need the additional 100mm. Thanks again Gary :)
I needed to buy a backup lens for landscapes / cityscapes to my Tamron 70-180/2.8 and after trying out the APSC Sony 70-350 (disappointing) I sold it. I also sold my Sony 100-400mm, superb lens but it's too heavy to take hiking / camping (alongside my other lenses and cameras) so I wouldn't consider the Sigma 100-400 either for that reason (also 100mm on FF is too long for most mountain work where you often need that 70-85mm range and the best lens, for me, is a 70-200 / 70-180 as it's been very rare, inc. from 4 trips to Nepal, that I'm ever shooting over that FL). The Tamron 70-300 wins over the Sony in a number of areas (for me), every single review I've seen has the Tamron sharper in the centre, sides and corners at almost all focal lengths and apertures. The Sony levels it up at times but never supersedes the Tamron. For some the Sony's IBIS will be imperative (if you shoot at slow shutter speeds and handheld) but for landscapes / cityscapes on a tripod it's irrelevant. These aren't bokeh lenses so if you want isolation I wouldn't be using these, I don't see that as their intended use (however the Sony's is slightly nicer and the Tamron's somewhat painterly, which some prefer). build quality has never been an issue with any lens I've used (inc. Sony, Tamron, Sigma, Laowa, Voigtlander, Zeiss and Samyang) so that isn't a factor (for me), ditto weather sealing which both the Tamron & Sony have (and a plastic bag and two rubber bands solve that issue anyway). That all said the price and weight difference is HUGE and in fact you could buy both the Tamron 70-300 + Tamron 70-180 (or say the Tamron G2 28-75mm) for the same as the Sony (and Tamron has a 5 year guarantee vs 1 year of the Sony).
This is just the review i was looking for 👍 im still in high-school and i hope to go pro someday, i think I'll be going with the sigma... after a few more shifts at work 😅
@@khalilkafieh8099 Congratulations, I am proud of you. I'm also a senior in hs shooting sports, I got this lens & am now waiting for this pandemic to improve so I can shoot again. My Instagram is @mtruproductions if you ever want to reach out.
Thanks for this quick and helpful vid! I purchased the Sony 70-350 yesterday. I purchased the a6400 and Tamaron 17-70 a few months ago, returning the a6100 w/kit lenses. The more I read about the kit lenses the less entusiastic I became. The a6400 + Tamaron 17-70 is a fantastic combo. This particular Tamaron lens seems substantially better than the 70-300 you reviewed here. Would you agree?
Thanks for sharing your experience. The 70-300 is a full frame lens. So usually when you use a full frame lens on a crop sensor camera the level of sharpness is a bit softer. The 17-70 is a crop sensor lens so it will perform better on the a6400 😊😊😊
I am looking at the tamron 70-300 for the price and it is extremely lightweight. However i still hesitate with the 28-200 more versatile. Sigma and sony are probably very good, but my wallet is extremely small after buying sony a7c, tamron 17-28 and azden smx30. The 70-300 is very tempting.
Yeah I know right. Budget gets really small after investing in some lenses 😂 It also really depends on what you are shooting most of the time. In case you are just occasionally in need of that range then the Tamron is a very good choice
@@GaryJahman I guess these early Sony G lenses have a lot product variation. The newer are much more consistent, eg. the new 20-70G is excellent (I own two of them) and adds perfect to a 20-300mm Kit of high quality, around 1 kg of lenses plus camera (A1 and A7R4 in my case) ;-).
Can you use CPL filters with Tamron? Is the front element rotating when acquiring focus? My T 28-75 doesn't rotate so hoping this is the case for 70-300
Great review, i was hesitating i think i will buy the sony, the double oss with the body and 5.6 in the long end i think is a big advantage for low light and video. Is it sharp enough? Some people say the tamron is sharper
Thanks, yeah it is a big advantage in certain situations such as capturing a flying bird or something. For me the sharpness is pretty much similar and if you shoot in raw then you can pretty much enhance the image as much as you desire
@@GaryJahman I rented the Tamron lens last weekend and decided that it wasn't going to be "it". Beyond that, I don't know. I like the extra zoom on the Sigma lens (and I want to shoot the moon), but it gives me a larger gap between my normal lens (18-50mm) and my zoom lens.
the Tamron 70-300mm is a scam, 550 bucks for a lens without stabilization. tamron had a 70-300 years ago (vc di ii pzd) that had good stabilization but only came out for bigger dslr and it cost under 400 bucks when it came out. i got one from my canon days still and use it on sony with a ef-e adaptor. sadly those adaptors are a buggy mess that drains your battery and makes those lenses perform really bad.
Sony, if your camera does not have in body image stabilisation. But if the camera already has image stabilisation then it does not really matter that much. Hope this helps!
@@mikeyama7277 yes, just slightly to be honest. So if you got steady hands then the difference is not that big. So there is a difference, where the Sony is slightly better. I'd say 10% better :D
The reason Sigma and Sony feel better then the Tamron is your paying more than double the price. They weigh more so on a long day's shooting I would pick the Tamron hands down. I don't think paying more the twice the price gives you twice the Len's. That's just my opinion.
Good review-comparison. It would have been to comment about the distortion of the lenses on the top end of the focal range. As I see quite a big difference between the tamron and the sony. Anyway, I tend to perceive the tamron a tad sharper than the sony in the average focal lengths. Thanks anyway. Cheers!
![[UA] NAVI проти G2 Esports | Blast Premier Fall Final](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QWlIm4FGESQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Excellent review! I don't own any of these lenses, but if I had to choose one, I'd go with the Sigma. The Sigma 100-400mm to me seems like the better value overall from these three lenses. Longer reach, excellent build quality and performance, etc.
Thanks David! Yeah it's a true value champion 🤣🏆 Merry Christmas!
@@GaryJahman merry Christmas to you and your loved ones too!
Sigma is the heaviest amongst the 3, 1.1kg, that's an important factor when you're carrying it whole day
Bokeh is not background blur. The term was coined in the '90s to describe the effect on points of light.
@@simmo303 💯
Thank you! This video is exactly what I was looking for!
Think i'll go with the sony. The sigma looks great, it's just a bit too large and I don't need the additional 100mm. Thanks again Gary :)
Hi Luke! You're welcome 🤓🤓🤓
Also happy new year to you (in advance) 😂🥳🥳🥳
I needed to buy a backup lens for landscapes / cityscapes to my Tamron 70-180/2.8 and after trying out the APSC Sony 70-350 (disappointing) I sold it. I also sold my Sony 100-400mm, superb lens but it's too heavy to take hiking / camping (alongside my other lenses and cameras) so I wouldn't consider the Sigma 100-400 either for that reason (also 100mm on FF is too long for most mountain work where you often need that 70-85mm range and the best lens, for me, is a 70-200 / 70-180 as it's been very rare, inc. from 4 trips to Nepal, that I'm ever shooting over that FL).
The Tamron 70-300 wins over the Sony in a number of areas (for me), every single review I've seen has the Tamron sharper in the centre, sides and corners at almost all focal lengths and apertures. The Sony levels it up at times but never supersedes the Tamron. For some the Sony's IBIS will be imperative (if you shoot at slow shutter speeds and handheld) but for landscapes / cityscapes on a tripod it's irrelevant. These aren't bokeh lenses so if you want isolation I wouldn't be using these, I don't see that as their intended use (however the Sony's is slightly nicer and the Tamron's somewhat painterly, which some prefer). build quality has never been an issue with any lens I've used (inc. Sony, Tamron, Sigma, Laowa, Voigtlander, Zeiss and Samyang) so that isn't a factor (for me), ditto weather sealing which both the Tamron & Sony have (and a plastic bag and two rubber bands solve that issue anyway).
That all said the price and weight difference is HUGE and in fact you could buy both the Tamron 70-300 + Tamron 70-180 (or say the Tamron G2 28-75mm) for the same as the Sony (and Tamron has a 5 year guarantee vs 1 year of the Sony).
Wow thanks a lot Kevin for sharing your experience! Much appreciate this 👍 I’d agree with you 💯
This is just the review i was looking for 👍 im still in high-school and i hope to go pro someday, i think I'll be going with the sigma... after a few more shifts at work 😅
Thanks! It's totally worth it ! 🤓
@@GaryJahman just bought it the sigma 100-400! Cant wait to start shooting birds and the buck nearby my house!
@@khalilkafieh8099 oh nice! Do you have Instagram so that I can see the shots?
I'm also excited for you haha so cool!
@@khalilkafieh8099 Congratulations, I am proud of you. I'm also a senior in hs shooting sports, I got this lens & am now waiting for this pandemic to improve so I can shoot again. My Instagram is @mtruproductions if you ever want to reach out.
Thanks for this quick and helpful vid! I purchased the Sony 70-350 yesterday. I purchased the a6400 and Tamaron 17-70 a few months ago, returning the a6100 w/kit lenses. The more I read about the kit lenses the less entusiastic I became. The a6400 + Tamaron 17-70 is a fantastic combo. This particular Tamaron lens seems substantially better than the 70-300 you reviewed here. Would you agree?
Thanks for sharing your experience. The 70-300 is a full frame lens. So usually when you use a full frame lens on a crop sensor camera the level of sharpness is a bit softer.
The 17-70 is a crop sensor lens so it will perform better on the a6400 😊😊😊
I am looking at the tamron 70-300 for the price and it is extremely lightweight. However i still hesitate with the 28-200 more versatile. Sigma and sony are probably very good, but my wallet is extremely small after buying sony a7c, tamron 17-28 and azden smx30. The 70-300 is very tempting.
Yeah I know right. Budget gets really small after investing in some lenses 😂
It also really depends on what you are shooting most of the time. In case you are just occasionally in need of that range then the Tamron is a very good choice
i sold the mediocre Sony 70-300G because the Tamron is much sharper and lighter…❤
Thanks for sharing! ✌️✌️✌️
@@GaryJahman I guess these early Sony G lenses have a lot product variation. The newer are much more consistent, eg. the new 20-70G is excellent (I own two of them) and adds perfect to a 20-300mm Kit of high quality, around 1 kg of lenses plus camera (A1 and A7R4 in my case) ;-).
@@possisvideos that is a nice kit!
Can you use CPL filters with Tamron? Is the front element rotating when acquiring focus? My T 28-75 doesn't rotate so hoping this is the case for 70-300
Yes or course you can use CPL filters. The front element is not rotating 👍👍
@@GaryJahman perfect, thanks
Maybe this tammy is the worst of the 3 but when every gram of weight counts its the 👌 👍
@@MC-yk4wl yes and when you shoot in raw no one will see the difference
Great review, i was hesitating i think i will buy the sony, the double oss with the body and 5.6 in the long end i think is a big advantage for low light and video. Is it sharp enough? Some people say the tamron is sharper
Thanks, yeah it is a big advantage in certain situations such as capturing a flying bird or something.
For me the sharpness is pretty much similar and if you shoot in raw then you can pretty much enhance the image as much as you desire
@@GaryJahman thanks i will get the sony! I am Convinced
@@TheThinFrame have fun with it!
Tamron 70-300 is good enough no more money for lenses...thanks
Yep 💯
Tamron is going to release an even bigger zoom lens this year. Really curious how that's going to be
@@GaryJahman Anymore information on the bigger zoom lens? Maximum focal length?
@@kyle8575 I actually received an email from Tamron with their announcement. It is the 150-500mm F/5-6.7 Di III VC VXD
@@GaryJahman Wow okay that's massive. Thank you for the response!
@@kyle8575 yeah no problem 👍 I hope to get my hands on it soon!
İ need lens for sport photoshooting. But Sony lens is expensive than others. İs Tamron good for sport photoshooting?
Yes, it is possible with the Tamron👍
This is perfect because I'm looking at these 3 lenses for my Sony a6400 camera.
Haha thanks which one are you going to pick?
@@GaryJahman I rented the Tamron lens last weekend and decided that it wasn't going to be "it". Beyond that, I don't know. I like the extra zoom on the Sigma lens (and I want to shoot the moon), but it gives me a larger gap between my normal lens (18-50mm) and my zoom lens.
@@dyhrdmet aah I see well I’m pretty sure that you’ll find the right one 😇
Dude wtf no the other reviews showcase that te tamron is far sharper then the sony here
Could be that my copy is a bit softer, there are some slight deviations between lenses sometimes
Tks you so much. I got Tamron 70-300 today and I love this. It's a good deal 👍
That's great man! Have fun with it
Sharp and good autofocus?
@@HDBnB1 for sure 💯
How’s about the stabilization with ibis on video footage at 300mm? This is my concern. I have a7c.
the Tamron 70-300mm is a scam, 550 bucks for a lens without stabilization.
tamron had a 70-300 years ago (vc di ii pzd) that had good stabilization but only came out for bigger dslr and it cost under 400 bucks when it came out.
i got one from my canon days still and use it on sony with a ef-e adaptor. sadly those adaptors are a buggy mess that drains your battery and makes those lenses perform really bad.
Thanks a lot for taking your time to share your experience! ✌️
What about the image stabilization? which one its better?
Sony, if your camera does not have in body image stabilisation.
But if the camera already has image stabilisation then it does not really matter that much.
Hope this helps!
@@GaryJahmanThanks for that, yeah the fx6 doesn't have image stabilisation, so the sony has better image stabilisation than the sigma?
@@mikeyama7277 yes, just slightly to be honest. So if you got steady hands then the difference is not that big.
So there is a difference, where the Sony is slightly better. I'd say 10% better :D
@@GaryJahman I see, sweet, thanks a lot =)
The reason Sigma and Sony feel better then the Tamron is your paying more than double the price. They weigh more so on a long day's shooting I would pick the Tamron hands down. I don't think paying more the twice the price gives you twice the Len's. That's just my opinion.
So true! 🙏
Thanks for sharing Dave!
@@GaryJahman great video by the way. Top man
Or you can save about $180 and get an extra 50mm with the Sony Alpha 70-350mm F4.5-6.3 G OSS. This is a tough choice between the Sigma and Sony...
Honestly it doesn't matter 🤠
It's all about the photo in the end 🤠🤠
@@GaryJahman So true!
but it is APS-C lens. on FF will work only in crop mode. it is better for lot MP cameras
even 10.5mp will be enough. 4k is 8 mp
Good review-comparison. It would have been to comment about the distortion of the lenses on the top end of the focal range. As I see quite a big difference between the tamron and the sony. Anyway, I tend to perceive the tamron a tad sharper than the sony in the average focal lengths. Thanks anyway. Cheers!
Thanks for sharing your thoughts Sean! Have a wonderful day 👍😃
I'll go with sigma 😁
Have fun with it 👍🤓
Thanks
😊😊😊