Great to hear! I bought Both lenses about a year ago, and since then the Tamron became my all in one travel lens, due to the size, range, and most importantly the image quality.
An excellent review, with which I wholly agree. I own the Tamron 28-200 and have been impressed with its IQ. My only reservation is that it and the A7Riii are a little heavy for an 80-year-old to tote around all day. Only a little, though.
@Henry Kisor, check out the Sony 70-350mm G APS-C lens on the R III; you still get a very large image with that sensor, and the crop mode yields a very useable 105-525mm. It is a superb lens and light as a feather. I have not used it on my A7iv but I have a spare Rii body, not as good as the Riii but the results are still outstanding. I'm 70, and I hear you on weight!
Great review. I got the Tamron 28-200 myself and I'm really happy with it. Can't believe the Sony 24-240 is actually more expensive 🤔 I mostly do landscape photography and for me the Tamron is almost perfect. I will probably get the Tamron 17-28 and then my lens collection is more or less complete. I also considered the Sony 24-105, which seems great, but the extra (almost) 100mm reach with the Tamron made it an easy choice for me.
Although I have the 24-105, I didn't have the chance to test it side by side with the Tamron 28-200mm. But from the images I can tell that both lenses make good image quality!
@@OmaGhomrawi I've seen a few comparisons of the 24-105 and the 28-200, and based on those it seems the Sony might be a tad sharper, but not by a lot. Looks like it handles CA a little better at the wide end too. It's a great lens, for sure!
I do nature/ landscape too and have both of those Tamron lenses. I like them, they are light and the 17-28 is pretty sharp still in the corners/ edges of the photos. However I'm not really sure that the 28-200 will cut it for making large photos print for selling. Looking into other lenses.
@@e.g.1218 A super zoom is a compromise for sure. If I were to sell prints to clients I would probably aim for crazy expensive lenses, just to be sure I have the absolute best conditions for my photography. But the Tamron 28-200 is surprisingly sharp and I wouldn't hesitate to put pretty large prints from it on the wall. I doubt anyone would notice the limitations of the lens. How large are the prints you're selling?
I use my 24-240 on a my A7ii and a6400. The 24-240mm with its wider focal length plus OSS works well on my a6400 which do not have in-body stabilization.
Sony might be about to release a new 24-105 f4. Going by what thay have been foing with lenses recently, the new zoom might turn out to be great. It will probably be twice the price of the Tamron 28-200. 28mm at the wide end sometimes not wide enough. I wish Tamron does something like a 24-135 f2.8 - f4.5 VC VXD.
Thank you for this very clear review... I was just about to get the Sony 24-240 - just for the range... HA! That would have been a mistake - Going for the Tamron 28-200 thanks to you... Just bought my first full frame - and this will be my first lens!
The Sony 24-240mm is sharp and in APS-C 36-360. With OSS great for travel on a IBIS no sticks required. On a Sony f/# not a worry for High ISO's have less noise. Lastly today is a digital world and software in post is the image maker even for old point and shoot 5MP cameras. And what is never ever said about getting good blur/bokeh/subject DOF and separation is small center focus point on subject no matter the f/ you will get it great. Bottom line not all are pros just getting the image with a range of 24-360 how many lenses do you not need to carry. In one early morning you can do some semi wide milky way, blue hour and sunrise landscape then some golden hour lastly some birding and critters searching for food. Wide f/'s are so filmdays only because back then it was hand held days and a need for a fast SS. A lens is forever do not be in the rush for $'s can not be added for a future purchase, just save a little longer and camera makers lenses are better in the long run. Remember the old Canon 50-500mm and 60-600mm and without IBIS but OSS a bazooka of a lens for travel with one lens not a big bag!
Thank you for your excellent review! My camera is the sony a7, the first, which doesn't have image stabilization. I only use it to take photos without a tripod. Would you recommend the Tamron lens without image stabilization in this case? Thank you!!
Shukran Oma for this great comparison! I thought to buy the Sony lense due to its wider focal length, but now I consider the Tamron. Marseleme from Bremen to Dubai.
great review! i will buy the new tamron then! it seems to be great for travel. Did u test the new tamron 70-300 vs the sony 70-300 OSS? it would be nice a video test like this one! thanks
I trust TAMRON, because I tested/owned 3 Tamron lenses and the image quality is really good. Didn't have the chance to check the 70-300 yet. Shall do that in the future.
I must be missing it somehow; what camera body are you using? I have an A7iii and ARii, and a few Sony lenses such as the 24-105mm G and the 200-600mm G. I find the Sony low end 24-240mm gives excellent quality, yet I see a lot of reviews slamming it as yours did. Maybe I got a better copy? I also recently bought the 70-350mm G APS-C lens to use as a lightweight walkabout zoom on my full-frame bodies, and it yields excellent results with a massive effective zoom range, albeit in crop mode.
@@OmaGhomrawi, I guess my use for it is only for cruises and vacations, and it's always bright and sunny, and am not supercritical when the photographs are scenes in Greece, etc. It's not worth switching, I'd like to see Sigma bring out a lens in this range to compare. I only have one Sigma, the 14-24mm f/2.8 so I can't speak for any other lens they make but it is a very nice lens.
I understand the similarities but people who are considering the Tamron, never did considere this Sony but the 24-105 or even trying to avoid to travel with both tamron’s 28-75/70-180, my bet is that who own those two tamy never ever will considere the sony 24-240 to replace them on a trip. If 28-200 didn’t exist people will prefer to carrie both Tamron than this piece of s... Sony. This 24-240 was always well know to be a less than average performer lens. I’m trying to say, maybe you should do a 24-105 vs 28-200. Gracias!
Does your 28-200 copy zoom creep down easily from 200mm to 135mm ish when pointing/shooting up? I have to hold the zoom ring to prevent it from creeping.
I have the Sony lens. It is versatile, but honestly I am very disappointed with the image quality overall. Almost all images are very soft and some out of focus often
This is a biased review. He never talked about the 24mm starting point and wide images rather than 28mm 24mm is SO much wider and in landscape you need higher Aperture. So giving 24-240mm range would make the lens heavy as those just 4mm makes a HUGE difference IRL.
Absolutely do not buy the Sony 24-200mm for photography. I made this mistake back in 2013 when I bought the A7II. It's an awful lens that's not sharp at all. If you're shooting video, then maybe you will like the soft blurry look.
I can't say this is a fair review because the Sony shots are 1/6 or 1/25 speed, while the Tamron is 1/100 or 1/160...
Excellent comparison! Best lens comparison that I’ve seen so far on UA-cam, gets right to the point.
Great to hear! I bought Both lenses about a year ago, and since then the Tamron became my all in one travel lens, due to the size, range, and most importantly the image quality.
An excellent review, with which I wholly agree. I own the Tamron 28-200 and have been impressed with its IQ. My only reservation is that it and the A7Riii are a little heavy for an 80-year-old to tote around all day. Only a little, though.
I am glad you watched my video. Probably the a7c work better for you since it is smaller and ligher.
@@OmaGhomrawi Right. But I have the A7rIII and am not in a position to have more than one camera body.
@@henrykisor4813 there's lighter lens options, APSC lenses works great with your camera in crop mode.
@Henry Kisor, check out the Sony 70-350mm G APS-C lens on the R III; you still get a very large image with that sensor, and the crop mode yields a very useable 105-525mm. It is a superb lens and light as a feather. I have not used it on my A7iv but I have a spare Rii body, not as good as the Riii but the results are still outstanding. I'm 70, and I hear you on weight!
Keep it up bro. One of the best lens comparisons, straight to the point. Congrats!
Great review. I got the Tamron 28-200 myself and I'm really happy with it. Can't believe the Sony 24-240 is actually more expensive 🤔 I mostly do landscape photography and for me the Tamron is almost perfect. I will probably get the Tamron 17-28 and then my lens collection is more or less complete. I also considered the Sony 24-105, which seems great, but the extra (almost) 100mm reach with the Tamron made it an easy choice for me.
Although I have the 24-105, I didn't have the chance to test it side by side with the Tamron 28-200mm.
But from the images I can tell that both lenses make good image quality!
@@OmaGhomrawi I've seen a few comparisons of the 24-105 and the 28-200, and based on those it seems the Sony might be a tad sharper, but not by a lot. Looks like it handles CA a little better at the wide end too. It's a great lens, for sure!
I do nature/ landscape too and have both of those Tamron lenses. I like them, they are light and the 17-28 is pretty sharp still in the corners/ edges of the photos. However I'm not really sure that the 28-200 will cut it for making large photos print for selling. Looking into other lenses.
@@e.g.1218 A super zoom is a compromise for sure. If I were to sell prints to clients I would probably aim for crazy expensive lenses, just to be sure I have the absolute best conditions for my photography. But the Tamron 28-200 is surprisingly sharp and I wouldn't hesitate to put pretty large prints from it on the wall. I doubt anyone would notice the limitations of the lens. How large are the prints you're selling?
I use my 24-240 on a my A7ii and a6400. The 24-240mm with its wider focal length plus OSS works well on my a6400 which do not have in-body stabilization.
6400 and 24-240 are good zoom combination!
Excellent comparison video. I was considering the Sony, but your video actually helped to change my mind.
AMAZING VIDEO!!!! The best head to head comparison I've seen
Excellant comparison, Oma- the Tamron zoom, along with the Tamron 17-28 f2.8 would make a nifty two lens travel kit!
I completely recommend that. And actually this will be my future travel setup
@@OmaGhomrawi on an a7c in a peak design 6l, perfect :D
Good one Omar! Everything you need to know about these Len's. Plus done expertly and quick. Bravo
Glad you find helpful 😊
Sony might be about to release a new 24-105 f4. Going by what thay have been foing with lenses recently, the new zoom might turn out to be great. It will probably be twice the price of the Tamron 28-200.
28mm at the wide end sometimes not wide enough.
I wish Tamron does something like a 24-135 f2.8 - f4.5 VC VXD.
Thank you for this very clear review... I was just about to get the Sony 24-240 - just for the range... HA! That would have been a mistake - Going for the Tamron 28-200 thanks to you... Just bought my first full frame - and this will be my first lens!
verditct !
Dude, your studio lighting is perfect
Incredible review, brother! I'm just buying a new Tamaron based on this video. Thanks a lot!
The Sony 24-240mm is sharp and in APS-C 36-360. With OSS great for travel on a IBIS no sticks required. On a Sony f/# not a worry for High ISO's have less noise. Lastly today is a digital world and software in post is the image maker even for old point and shoot 5MP cameras. And what is never ever said about getting good blur/bokeh/subject DOF and separation is small center focus point on subject no matter the f/ you will get it great. Bottom line not all are pros just getting the image with a range of 24-360 how many lenses do you not need to carry. In one early morning you can do some semi wide milky way, blue hour and sunrise landscape then some golden hour lastly some birding and critters searching for food. Wide f/'s are so filmdays only because back then it was hand held days and a need for a fast SS. A lens is forever do not be in the rush for $'s can not be added for a future purchase, just save a little longer and camera makers lenses are better in the long run. Remember the old Canon 50-500mm and 60-600mm and without IBIS but OSS a bazooka of a lens for travel with one lens not a big bag!
nearly got me pushed to buy the sony 24-240 by an seller of a camera shop, luuckily i found your video thx
Thank you for your excellent review! My camera is the sony a7, the first, which doesn't have image stabilization. I only use it to take photos without a tripod. Would you recommend the Tamron lens without image stabilization in this case? Thank you!!
If you already use the a7 camera on a tripod, I would definitely recommend the Tamron 28-200mm.. it has better image quality at a lower price.
Thank you Oma! Good video
Excellent review, very helpful!
Great review.it helps me decide which lens will be my firs lens
Very helpful. Thank you!
Shukran Oma for this great comparison! I thought to buy the Sony lense due to its wider focal length, but now I consider the Tamron. Marseleme from Bremen to Dubai.
Glad you find the video helpful! Well this Tamron lens became my all in one lens for travel
great review! i will buy the new tamron then! it seems to be great for travel. Did u test the new tamron 70-300 vs the sony 70-300 OSS? it would be nice a video test like this one! thanks
I trust TAMRON, because I tested/owned 3 Tamron lenses and the image quality is really good.
Didn't have the chance to check the 70-300 yet. Shall do that in the future.
Nice comparison !!!
I must be missing it somehow; what camera body are you using? I have an A7iii and ARii, and a few Sony lenses such as the 24-105mm G and the 200-600mm G. I find the Sony low end 24-240mm gives excellent quality, yet I see a lot of reviews slamming it as yours did. Maybe I got a better copy? I also recently bought the 70-350mm G APS-C lens to use as a lightweight walkabout zoom on my full-frame bodies, and it yields excellent results with a massive effective zoom range, albeit in crop mode.
Well I'm using the a7 iii camera. The 24-240mm lens is okay but when having it on test side by side with tamron.. Tamron is way better
@@OmaGhomrawi, I guess my use for it is only for cruises and vacations, and it's always bright and sunny, and am not supercritical when the photographs are scenes in Greece, etc. It's not worth switching, I'd like to see Sigma bring out a lens in this range to compare. I only have one Sigma, the 14-24mm f/2.8 so I can't speak for any other lens they make but it is a very nice lens.
I'm a professional and this is a very nice comparison!
Thank you very much.
Very good comparison. Thanks, So I choose Tamron.
ملك تقييم ومقارنة الكاميرات
🌹
Awesome video sir! More from you pls 😊🙏🏼
My pleasure
Good, clear excellent explanation. Thank you very much OMA ( hahahaha in my language oma = grandmother)
You’re German though 😁
My actual name is Omar
please give us a review of Tamron 70-300 mm Sony full frame lens with aps-c without stabilization and full frame bodies.
I will your suggestion into consideration :)
I understand the similarities but people who are considering the Tamron, never did considere this Sony but the 24-105 or even trying to avoid to travel with both tamron’s 28-75/70-180, my bet is that who own those two tamy never ever will considere the sony 24-240 to replace them on a trip. If 28-200 didn’t exist people will prefer to carrie both Tamron than this piece of s... Sony. This 24-240 was always well know to be a less than average performer lens. I’m trying to say, maybe you should do a 24-105 vs 28-200. Gracias!
You have a point, I totally agree with you!
Shall I make that video in the future, I already have the 24-105mm f4
Does your 28-200 copy zoom creep down easily from 200mm to 135mm ish when pointing/shooting up? I have to hold the zoom ring to prevent it from creeping.
NO! it does not creep at tall. I just double-checked it now, it is steady like hell
@@OmaGhomrawi thank you! Mine was a grey market version that did that, I will have to return it, thanks!
very good review!!
I have the Sony lens. It is versatile, but honestly I am very disappointed with the image quality overall.
Almost all images are very soft and some out of focus often
I agree, I felt the same when I bought it as well
An excellent review i will chosse the Tamron thank you
Glad you found it helpful, Tamron is a good one!
I wish this lens had VC. It would have been the perfect lens
Personally this tamron lens became my all in one lens. Best choice for traveling.
Indeed an 85mm f1.8 will never leave my bag as well.
They need to make it 24 to 200 the Tamron
thank god i've bought TAMRON
Sony wins for me
This is a biased review.
He never talked about the 24mm starting point and wide images rather than 28mm
24mm is SO much wider and in landscape you need higher Aperture.
So giving 24-240mm range would make the lens heavy as those just 4mm makes a HUGE difference IRL.
1:40 yeah i am in that community. XD
I love pixel peepers 😆
Come on What’s your Instagram !
@@OmaGhomrawi its @fzeo and nothing fun there.
Really great comparison. That intro was nicely done 👍 postive feedback: should work on you articulate. Sometimes hard ton understand.
Thank you for highlighting that, your feedback is appreciated :)
the old sony is crab, we all know. but wait, sony will bring a new 24-200…❤
Absolutely do not buy the Sony 24-200mm for photography. I made this mistake back in 2013 when I bought the A7II. It's an awful lens that's not sharp at all. If you're shooting video, then maybe you will like the soft blurry look.
too many ads. thumbs down
Thank you for highlighting this.
Do mean youtube ads or my presets ads?
Your feedback is important and helps us to present better videos
Seriously ??