The Tamron 17-28 paired with the A7C is an amazing combo for me so far. I considered the 16-35 f4, but used the savings to pick up the Peak Design Travel Tripod instead. I already have the 24-105 f4 G lens so the 17-28 f2.8 pairs nicely with it, and I really appreciate the lighter weight of the Tamron.
This is it. The title. This is the video I needed to watch. Because previously i wanted to buy 16-35 f4 but now as I heard about Tamron 17-28, I wanna buy this. I haven’t watched this video but that’s what I came for, to see the difference and all. You were amazed by the number of people subscribed to you, this is the reason. Because you are coming up with things which people want to watch, you create quality content with good sense of humour. This is why I subscribed you recently. Good day dude. Thanks for this all
Great vid Peter. My thinking is that if f4 is unusable in a low light situation, then f2.8 won’t make much of a difference either. A fast prime would be the better bet. The extra zoom range and the IS on the Sony however are critical for run and gun video shooters.
Thanks, good video. I got Tamron few weeks ago and really feel limited by focal diaposon if 17-28 as you mentioned. Now use mainly for photo and it gives very good picture. Paired it with Tamron 28-75 and this set gives good coverage, but for both lences 28 boarder feels limiting when zooming in the street. Despite of it, like Tamron for performance and outstanding ratio price/quality. Availability of these two Tamron lences was tipping point to buy 7aiii because original lenses were too expencive for just hobby, but Tamron provided good option. Going to extend lences park with few manual lences both on wider and longer lengths for non critical to speed aplications and than will feel better equiped.
Had the tamron first but swapped it with the zeiss, the 16-35mm focal length was the deciding factor for me. The 28mm limit for the tamron was a bit lacking for me to be called versatile. It's all about preferences really, both lenses are great, you just have to know what you need more in terms of the shoots you do.
Awesome comparison video! You've inspired me to make my own, but comparing the 17-28 vs the 12-24. I've sold the 16-35 since owning the Tamron since my copy of the 17-28 is THAT much better. Looking forward to your next video :)
Great video! If i may add, the filter size for the tamron is the same with the 17-28 and 28-75 which helps save you on filter cost and less stuff to carry
I actually traded my 16-35 f4 in to get my new tamron 17-28. I am with you though, I really liked the sony/zeiss. The reason why i made the trade was because I primarily shoot still frame and I found the tamron to be sharper. Since i am shooting still frame on tripod (landscape/realestate, ect..) i found that the added sharpness of the Tamron was worth sacrificing the IS of the Sony/zeiss. Also, another advantage about the Tamron that nobody seems to mention is the nano coating on the lens along with the aperture blades that create a beautiful sunburst when shooting into the sun or bright lights. Using the Sunburst in my compositions is the main reason that compelled me to switch.
Thanks Scott, that note about the sun stars caught my attention. I'm looking at this comparison for landscape and travel, and so I'm thinking that the added light gathering offsets the IS to some degree? I'll be using a tripod near to home, but not necessarily when traveling... so that is where I'm stuck at the moment.
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35 Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough? And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
I prefer solid build quality of Sony as I purchase lens for years of use and F2.8 Vs F4 is not a much difference for a UWA lens for me .16 to 35mm is a better zoom range for composition from 28 to 35mm without changing lens.
I have 10-18mm for my APS-C (crop) Canon. For the full-frame, I would go with 16-35 because of stabilization and focal range. Speed for sure is important as well, but secondary for me because you can fix this by lighting inside and do not have such a problem outside during the day at all.
The OSS makes such a huge difference for me when i'm shooting video. It might not be noticable at the vider end but when you start to move the camera/get walking shot it really shows!
Peter, I was thinking to purchase the Tamron 17-28 for the extra "f" but your video helped me to keep my Sony Zeiss 16-35 f4. Only one thing Peter, I will never lend you one of my lenses to do a comparison.... YOU ARE DANGEROUS!! ( I've spent the entire time whilst watching your presentation waiting for you to drop one of them) Thanks again Clem
i recently bought the tamron and have set out to reshoot some of the same shoots ive taken with the 16-35 gm and i am absolutely blown away by the tamron. im not gonna say that it is better or as good because that isnt important. what ive found though is that i am completely satisfied with the purchase. and for the price i feel like it is everything i need.
Nice video. I'm curious, does that Sony A7 M3 compensate for the lack of lens OSS? Also a friendly suggestion, please mention the stuff explicitly by their names, it's hard to keep track of "this" and "that" and what lens is in what hand especially if I'm not actually looking at my screen ;)
Hello from Kyiv Ukraine. Hi. I am a Sony shooter. I shoot fashion models , portraiture and build portfolios. I now have the tamron 17 to 28mm and I think this lens is just excellent. The OSS does not make a difference because my cameras all have IBIS and I do not see any difference. Even on your comparison footage side by side I did not notice a difference. For me the 17mm v 16mm and no OSS has not really effected my decision to buy. It is a good lens. I own a lot of Sony lenses and third party lenses for Sony FE. My Sony lenses. 35mm F1.8. 55mm F1.8. 85mm F1.8. 50mm Plannar f1.4. 90mm F2.8 Macro. Samyang 35mm F1.4. 45mm F1.8. 85mm F1.4. Tamron 28 to 75mm F2.8. 17 to 28mm F2.8. Cameras A9. A7 RIII A7 III. Future plans: Tamron are releasing a 70 to 180mm F2.8 FE this October so I am waiting to see before I buy the Sony version. I have heard that Samyang are working on a 135mm F1.8 so I am also waiting to see before I buy the Sony version. I buy my lenses when I visit relatives in England from this online shop E-Infinity. Always stock and best prices.
Вот так коллекцию собрал) А я вот в раздумьях, 17-28 или 16-35. Немного смущает всего 28мм на длинном конце у тамрона, можно ли им нормально снимать на длинном хоть с намеком на боке?
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35 Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough? And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
@@vasilykomanovsky4234 I think the 17 to 28 is an excellent choice. I have the 28 to 75 also and now I also have the 70 to 180 which means I can go from 17 to 180 at 2.8 across the 3 lenses. I think these 3 lenses are excellent
Wondering the same!!! Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35 Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough? And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
@@v.v.c.videophotography5688 not sure if it was on this video, but i did not swap my 16-35 because it is interestingly more stabilized than 17-28. However a7c may reducr that difference via a softwaree like Catalyst. No experience about it though. For me fl range matters more.
Let me comment first. I'll watch the video later because I know you would have nailed it. Thanks by the way as I said I'm gonna buy one of these lenses super soon.
I'm torn between the two! I have a kit zoom and 50mm 1.8 on an a7iii. The 16-35mm focal length and the oss sound sooo good but the image quality of the 17-28 and the faster aperture really makes me question which way is the correct option! I like to vlog and shoot street photography and environmental portraits too. Someone help lol!
Go with 17-28. Everyone says that anything above 30mm on the 16-35 does not look nearly as sharp. Between 16mm vs f/2.8, I think f/2.8 would be more useful. That's my opinion anyways.
Which lens should I get as a first time Sony user for near all purpose, no vlogging, many people recommend Tammy 28-200. but its not wide enough for me or Sonny 24-105, but I heard it does not render well and I am looking for superior image quality. Was thinking 17-28 +new Sigma 105mm Macro Art for macros and portraits, what would you recommend?
I have bought Tamrons in the past and twice I had to send it back and got a replacement and there are quality differences but once you get a quality inspected Tamron they are a joy to take pictures with. That was a couple of years ago now Sony has bought a 15% steak in Tamron and have given a few suggestions to help so I will be keeping my eye on the new 2021 lenses from Tamron.
It's hard decision. Sometimes i need a wide angle lens, so 16-35 or 17-28 but lighter. For estable shoots the f/2.8 aperture doesn't matter, cause i need about f/5.6 or darker aperture to show all in focus. But for weddings it might be a big deal
There was either no difference or maybe even a touch better on the Tamron lens when comparing the stabilisation test. I don't know if I was just missing something though haha.
problem is, he only walked slowly. Nice would have been to see a comparison of slow walking vs regular speed vs running. Maybe even with a gimbal. Since OSS is actually the selling point for me I would have loved to see the Tamron perform in that area more thoroughly. But that's personal preference I guess. Most YTB videos are below 10min mark.
Coming in a bit late, but I have just bought the Zeiss for that little bit extra, although they say that size doesn't matter, it's what you do with it !! Cheers mate from " Down Under ".
I have liked before watching. I make notes of these videos so that i can implement a few of such awesome shots (though I shoot on phone). Way inspirational.
Buying the Tamron. I already have the sony 24mm 1.8. I am just looking for more options for indoor real estate photography I don't really need image stabilization. Great video.
Very nice video comparison! I'm gonna go for Tamron. OSS doens't matter that much as people think. For professional purposes like real estate, cars photo/video Sony would be a wiser choice. And for filming purposes (not a Vlog style) where depth of field matters, f2.8 helps. I think both lenses are great it's just a matter of preference - what you need it for)
Great Video, i own the 28-75 and now considering the 17-28 mainly for shooting cars using the rig. Would love your thoughts on it especially the image stabilization in this case
I'd say that the 17-28 is really lose to the 20mm and i'd probably choose the 17-28 if i had to choose. But then again, it all depends on how much you need the brighter aperture!
Ahhhh been waiting to see this Tamron Review and comparison. You hit everything! I'm really annoyed that it's not 16mm because I feel like I can notice the difference. But honestly for the weight, apurtue and sharpness it's a bargain. The OSS didn't seem like a big issue I think the camera sensor did well. Awesome review bro!🙏🏽
The Sony 16-35mm is the first full frame lens I've ever bought along with an A7III. Only bought a few hours ago but already know it was the right decision.
Ive been thinking of buying THIS for my a7iii, at what price did you buy it for and do you think its worth it for the price you got it for? Please share your thoughts.
@@THELIFEOFCB I like the 17-28 for astro, or any time I want to carry less weight. The image quality is a little better on the 17-28 in terms of edge to edge sharpness, auto focus is about the same on both. I like the 16-35 better for landscapes because of the greater zoom range. I end up changing lenses too often when I use the 17-28 for landscapes, and I don't like doing that with my Sony cameras because the sensor gets dusty so easily. What kind of shooting do you do?
Amazing video, Starting to VLOG and couldn’t decide on the Tamron or the Zeiss, but with the Zeiss OSS it was a no brained since I don’t have the steady hands😪
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35 Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough? And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
Hi Peter, I like your your contents and what you do. I am wondering if you recorded the OSS test on the same camera brand. It seams to me that the Zeiss wich has image stabilization shakes more than Tameron without OSS. Regards,
Peter, absolutely agree that the 16-35 is the best for video both A7III and a6400. Love the sharpness of tamron at F11 too. I shot a convention in my last video with both. The F4 is great but I did have some issues in dark areas that were shot at 120 FPS. I recommend if it isn’t close up, 60 FPS is best for both in low light for slow motion
I sold my 16-35 and switched to the 17-28 so I can use just one and filter with the tamron 28-75. I do miss the OSS while shooting handheld video, but not regret the switching. Cheers
@@THELIFEOFCB I sold it to my local camera shop and order the 17-28 at the same place. I do like that the zoom is internally and not like the 16-35. I think the 17-28 is better for photos, and when paired with the 28-75. If you don’t use the Tamron 28-75, and shoot more video handheld, stick with the 16-35 IMO.
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35 Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough? And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
I am really looking at the 16 to 35 mm lens. It looks really good. Not having the oss in the a6400 makes the decision a little easier. Want to make sure that I am thinking about my eventual jump to full frame.
@@PeterLindgren1 I know you said that the tamron looks sharper but that oss is so helpful. I would sacrifice the sharpness too in favor of the extra stability.
@@BrianTheCameraGuy you will sacrifice sharpness and quality because that f4 in low light you will push the iso but it's true the stabilization help a lot
@@NAM3L3555 very true but I am current using the standard kit lens which is 3.5 to f5.6. f4 all the way through would be a great improvement. Plus it is just better glass.
I've watched lots of these videos now and not one reviewer shoots action photos, or mentions action photography. I tired of seeing reviewers (not you Peter) say the AF is 'blistering' when they are shooting a wedding - something painfully slow! Still on a quest to find real world tests in the field in all weathers.
No man, i notice it too. There not a huge difference in my eyes. Although there's a slight 1mm difference between 16 and 17. It doesnt bother me through.
Nice video! I've own both Tamron 28-75 and 17-28 since the days they launched. I like 17-28 more, because using it feels like using primes, sharp yet not versatile. From what I've seen and read, I'm thinking the 17-28 at 28mm end with 1.25 crop (35mm F3.5 equiv.) could be as sharp as full resolution 16-35 F4 at 35mm end.
@@afrank3029 I think the focal length is more importany for you. Even though some lenses are better than other lenses optically, it doesn't mean "the better" lenses are suitable fot your phtotography works. Sony 24 GM is much better lens than 35 ZA, but generally 35 ZA is much more useful lens because of its focal length. I think the same story goes on the 17-28 and 28-75.
The 16-35 is a sleeper. Its rendering (at least my copy) rivals some primes I have. There is a lot of micro contrast that contributes to the pop people desire in high end lenses. F4 is meaningless to me, 5.6 or higher is only a boon for the beautiful details this lens can capture. I have a couple Tamron zooms that render nicely with good colors, but they don't render as well as the Zeiss.
the Zeiss is for me. the much wider range makes the lens way more useful. as much as I like the larger aperture, I gotta say the 16-35mm has a waaaay more practical range. It's worth $1000 to me (refurbished on amazon or eBay).
I got the Tammy a few weeks ago and I'm very happy with it. I have been very happy with their 28-75 for nearly one year so I got it as extension for wide angle shots. My adapted Canon 16-35 2.8 L II isn't that great below 24mm in it's edges. So the 17-28 is a pretty good choice and fullfilds my needs best. I'm not missing the 1mm on the low end, but I'm really happy about the aperture of 2.8, the small formfactor, the same filtersize of 67mm and the inner-focal-mechanism. And btw. the money factor is not to be despised...:-))
@@PeterLindgren1 In Germany there is a difference of about 20% between the two - and fortunately I got the Tammy for another 15% less. 1/3 below the direct competitioners is a remarkable amount that supported the choice once more. (and btw. the Sony GM is 2,5 times up to this...)
I have 16-35 f4 in my bag all the time. I do more video over photos. I like the solid build of the Zeiss, put on a rubber ring to prevent the paint scratch. Have 24GM f1.4 in my bag at all time for photos purposes with creamy bokeh. So I am happy with my purchase and I would not trade in for Tamrom as 16mm really makes a HUGE different in photos/videos.
Great video at the right time. I bought the 16-35 f4 on eBay for a low price. I've been wondering if I should sell it to get the Tamron. I think I'll keep the f4. Thanks man!
Funny, I was just thinking that the f4 is the MUCH better comparison. Seems like everyone is pitting this against the 2.8, but the f4 seems like a much closer comparison to me. Nice
@@PeterLindgren1 In your comparison, I see barely any difference between the stability on the OSS lens and the the Tamron. Up close, or just in your use, do you feel like the OSS on the f4 is noticeably better? I don't care about the f4 vs 2.8 too much; handheld stability is near the upper end of my concerns. Thoughts?
I have the 1728 already, but i have to say that the new sigma 1424 Art for sony e which is more sharper than 1728 not a level. This is super extremely sharp on center to edge at f2.8 wide open.
the Zeiss appears more floaty and more stable but only marginally. I own the tamron 17-28 and 16-35GM, I like both. If I’m taking the lens and camera into inclement weather I take the tamron. If family events then GM. All around walk around the 17-28 is light but lacks the reach of the 16-35 if you want to do quick medium portraits
Hey bud, I am trying to decide between the Tamron and the 16-35GM. If you could only have 1 which do you recommend only for the range of 16-24mm? Most important for me is sharpness across frame, colors, and video AF performance. Does the tamron AF feel slower for video? Thank you in advance for your help.
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35 Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough? And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
Great video. Helped with my selection for my UA-cam channel. Thank you
which one did you go with?
Chris Hermo Sony Zeiss for the native-ness
G-Kid The Tamron is native to the Sony. Did you miss that part?
The Tamron 17-28 paired with the A7C is an amazing combo for me so far. I considered the 16-35 f4, but used the savings to pick up the Peak Design Travel Tripod instead. I already have the 24-105 f4 G lens so the 17-28 f2.8 pairs nicely with it, and I really appreciate the lighter weight of the Tamron.
This is it. The title.
This is the video I needed to watch. Because previously i wanted to buy 16-35 f4 but now as I heard about Tamron 17-28, I wanna buy this. I haven’t watched this video but that’s what I came for, to see the difference and all.
You were amazed by the number of people subscribed to you, this is the reason. Because you are coming up with things which people want to watch, you create quality content with good sense of humour. This is why I subscribed you recently.
Good day dude. Thanks for this all
Congratulations on 40,000 subscribers Peter great work
Thanks David! Been going insanely fast!
Wait what he gained 210k subscribers within half a year?
Great vid Peter. My thinking is that if f4 is unusable in a low light situation, then f2.8 won’t make much of a difference either. A fast prime would be the better bet. The extra zoom range and the IS on the Sony however are critical for run and gun video shooters.
I don't know. 2.8 has saved my bacon many a times when f4 would have been a no-go.
@@RogerOThornhill yeah one full stop of light can make a difference.
Paired with an a7siii for video I’m not fussed with the f4 anymore
Have you compared the Tamron17-28 to the Sony 20mm f1.8? Any thoughts?
Thanks, good video. I got Tamron few weeks ago and really feel limited by focal diaposon if 17-28 as you mentioned. Now use mainly for photo and it gives very good picture. Paired it with Tamron 28-75 and this set gives good coverage, but for both lences 28 boarder feels limiting when zooming in the street. Despite of it, like Tamron for performance and outstanding ratio price/quality. Availability of these two Tamron lences was tipping point to buy 7aiii because original lenses were too expencive for just hobby, but Tamron provided good option. Going to extend lences park with few manual lences both on wider and longer lengths for non critical to speed aplications and than will feel better equiped.
Thank you very much!
bought a tamron 3 hours ago and this is lens what i need. 2.8 - better for me. Now, waiting for 75-180 2.8.
Good job!
I am waiting the telephoto lens too. You sure it is 75- 180?
@@beisongquanwen6242 yes!
Oops, I think it will be a 70-180!
Unlike 17-28mm and 28-75mm, both of which I love, the lack of VC will be a real problem for 70-180mm.
Bro let’s talk about the elephant in the room! Where is New Zealand on your world map??
Middle earth doesn't appear in modern world maps
Ha! Good eye.
you must be a photographer..
Also no Iceland
YOOOO TRUTH, put us on the map boiiiii
Browsing lenses and found this video. Quite the throwback!
Had the tamron first but swapped it with the zeiss, the 16-35mm focal length was the deciding factor for me. The 28mm limit for the tamron was a bit lacking for me to be called versatile.
It's all about preferences really, both lenses are great, you just have to know what you need more in terms of the shoots you do.
Awesome comparison video! You've inspired me to make my own, but comparing the 17-28 vs the 12-24. I've sold the 16-35 since owning the Tamron since my copy of the 17-28 is THAT much better. Looking forward to your next video :)
Awesome man, glad i can inspire someone!
I just ordered the 16-35mm f4 and I‘m excited 🥰 I mainly wanted this for architecture shots when travelling to get everything in the frame. 😊
In 2022 which ultrawide would you suggest for Sony a7iv? More fore videos but also a little bit for photos
Great video! If i may add, the filter size for the tamron is the same with the 17-28 and 28-75 which helps save you on filter cost and less stuff to carry
I actually traded my 16-35 f4 in to get my new tamron 17-28. I am with you though, I really liked the sony/zeiss. The reason why i made the trade was because I primarily shoot still frame and I found the tamron to be sharper. Since i am shooting still frame on tripod (landscape/realestate, ect..) i found that the added sharpness of the Tamron was worth sacrificing the IS of the Sony/zeiss. Also, another advantage about the Tamron that nobody seems to mention is the nano coating on the lens along with the aperture blades that create a beautiful sunburst when shooting into the sun or bright lights. Using the Sunburst in my compositions is the main reason that compelled me to switch.
Scott Bauer seems like the flare resistance of Tamron is better too.
Hello Scott. Do you have sample images to show me?
Thanks Scott, that note about the sun stars caught my attention. I'm looking at this comparison for landscape and travel, and so I'm thinking that the added light gathering offsets the IS to some degree? I'll be using a tripod near to home, but not necessarily when traveling... so that is where I'm stuck at the moment.
@@stillinthestream no worries, best of luck!
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C
Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35
Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough?
And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
I prefer solid build quality of Sony as I purchase lens for years of use and F2.8 Vs F4 is not a much difference for a UWA lens for me .16 to 35mm is a better zoom range for composition from 28 to 35mm without changing lens.
I have 10-18mm for my APS-C (crop) Canon. For the full-frame, I would go with 16-35 because of stabilization and focal range.
Speed for sure is important as well, but secondary for me because you can fix this by lighting inside and do not have such a problem outside during the day at all.
The OSS makes such a huge difference for me when i'm shooting video. It might not be noticable at the vider end but when you start to move the camera/get walking shot it really shows!
Thinking bout getting the Tamron 17-28 lens for my new sony a7iii my first full frame coming from a Sony a6000
Peter, I was thinking to purchase the Tamron 17-28 for the extra "f" but your video helped me to keep my Sony Zeiss 16-35 f4. Only one thing Peter, I will never lend you one of my lenses to do a comparison.... YOU ARE DANGEROUS!! ( I've spent the entire time whilst watching your presentation waiting for you to drop one of them) Thanks again Clem
Getting the Tamron 17-28 next month. Good video
I bought the Tamron 17-28 and received it a few weeks ago. I love it so far
Russ Was the lens that sharp?
i recently bought the tamron and have set out to reshoot some of the same shoots ive taken with the 16-35 gm and i am absolutely blown away by the tamron. im not gonna say that it is better or as good because that isnt important. what ive found though is that i am completely satisfied with the purchase. and for the price i feel like it is everything i need.
It's definitely the lens to go for instead of the GM, and if you need/want the 2.8 aperture then there's no discussion on what lens to get!
This should be good, been waiting for this Peter, cheers!
Great review! I've been trying to figure out whether to snag this lens up for underwater work.
nice vid man. I own the 1635 f4 for a while now with my a73. I take it out in pouring rain all the time and it is still perfect
Loved the video and comparison. After seeing the shovel in the wall , i got a sinister vibe 😁
Nice video. I'm curious, does that Sony A7 M3 compensate for the lack of lens OSS? Also a friendly suggestion, please mention the stuff explicitly by their names, it's hard to keep track of "this" and "that" and what lens is in what hand especially if I'm not actually looking at my screen ;)
Hello from Kyiv Ukraine. Hi. I am a Sony shooter. I shoot fashion models , portraiture and build portfolios. I
now have the tamron 17 to 28mm and I think this lens is just excellent. The OSS does not make a difference because
my cameras all have IBIS and I do not see any difference. Even on your comparison footage side by side I did not
notice a difference. For me the 17mm v 16mm and no OSS has not really effected my decision to buy. It is a good lens.
I own a lot of Sony lenses and third party lenses for Sony FE. My Sony lenses. 35mm F1.8. 55mm F1.8. 85mm F1.8.
50mm Plannar f1.4. 90mm F2.8 Macro. Samyang 35mm F1.4. 45mm F1.8. 85mm F1.4. Tamron 28 to 75mm F2.8. 17 to 28mm
F2.8. Cameras A9. A7 RIII A7 III. Future plans: Tamron are releasing a 70 to 180mm F2.8 FE this October so I am
waiting to see before I buy the Sony version. I have heard that Samyang are working on a 135mm F1.8 so I am
also waiting to see before I buy the Sony version. I buy my lenses when I visit relatives in England from
this online shop E-Infinity. Always stock and best prices.
Вот так коллекцию собрал) А я вот в раздумьях, 17-28 или 16-35. Немного смущает всего 28мм на длинном конце у тамрона, можно ли им нормально снимать на длинном хоть с намеком на боке?
what could you say about 17-28 Tamron now?
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C
Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35
Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough?
And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
@@BestmobilesInUa Да, но нужно быть близко к объекту.
@@vasilykomanovsky4234 I think the 17 to 28 is an excellent choice. I have the 28 to 75 also and now I also have the 70 to 180 which means I can go from 17 to 180 at 2.8 across the 3 lenses. I think these 3 lenses are excellent
thinking of getting the tamron - mostly for indoor shooting where i don't need to zoom out to 35mm
Does OSS even make a difference on cameras with IBIS? I do shoot video with my 16-35 on a7iii.
Wondering the same!!!
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C
Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35
Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough?
And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
@@v.v.c.videophotography5688 not sure if it was on this video, but i did not swap my 16-35 because it is interestingly more stabilized than 17-28. However a7c may reducr that difference via a softwaree like Catalyst. No experience about it though. For me fl range matters more.
thanks for the honest comparison. Not just selling the Tamron to us.
Video still relevant in 2021! Thanks Peter. Getting my 16-35 F4 this week. Second hand for cheaper than the Tamron :)
Let me comment first. I'll watch the video later because I know you would have nailed it. Thanks by the way as I said I'm gonna buy one of these lenses super soon.
Looking for which lens to put on the m2 gimbal so I think the tamron is a better choice for me with the weight difference and zoom style.
Hi Peter, great video! Would be cool to see how the sigma 14-24 2.8 e mount stacks up against the tamron 17-28. 👍🏻
i agree on that:)
I would like to see that review too!
I'm torn between the two! I have a kit zoom and 50mm 1.8 on an a7iii. The 16-35mm focal length and the oss sound sooo good but the image quality of the 17-28 and the faster aperture really makes me question which way is the correct option! I like to vlog and shoot street photography and environmental portraits too. Someone help lol!
Go with 17-28. Everyone says that anything above 30mm on the 16-35 does not look nearly as sharp. Between 16mm vs f/2.8, I think f/2.8 would be more useful. That's my opinion anyways.
Which lens should I get as a first time Sony user for near all purpose, no vlogging, many people recommend Tammy 28-200. but its not wide enough for me or Sonny 24-105, but I heard it does not render well and I am looking for superior image quality. Was thinking 17-28 +new Sigma 105mm Macro Art for macros and portraits, what would you recommend?
Loving your content man! Super GREAT QUALITY and very helpful info. Keep up the good work
I have bought Tamrons in the past and twice I had to send it back and got a replacement and there are quality differences but once you get a quality inspected Tamron they are a joy to take pictures with. That was a couple of years ago now Sony has bought a 15% steak in Tamron and have given a few suggestions to help so I will be keeping my eye on the new 2021 lenses from Tamron.
It's hard decision. Sometimes i need a wide angle lens, so 16-35 or 17-28 but lighter. For estable shoots the f/2.8 aperture doesn't matter, cause i need about f/5.6 or darker aperture to show all in focus. But for weddings it might be a big deal
There was either no difference or maybe even a touch better on the Tamron lens when comparing the stabilisation test. I don't know if I was just missing something though haha.
problem is, he only walked slowly. Nice would have been to see a comparison of slow walking vs regular speed vs running. Maybe even with a gimbal. Since OSS is actually the selling point for me I would have loved to see the Tamron perform in that area more thoroughly. But that's personal preference I guess. Most YTB videos are below 10min mark.
If you really want smooth results you want to go with a gimbal. Totally different animal for cinematic motion.
I will be buying the Tamron due to its sharpness and f/2.8. Thank you for posting this video!
Coming in a bit late, but I have just bought the Zeiss for that little bit extra, although they say that size doesn't matter, it's what you do with it !! Cheers mate from " Down Under ".
Yeah, tamron 17-28mm is my next lens I'm planning on getting.. I like how the barrel doesn't come out so it'll be easier when using a gimbal.
That's the point
yes its a hug difference of sharpness, but with our eyes not client. So I'm still prefer the zeiss one for the extra zoom!
🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥 nice unboxing and comparison
pretty much the same price, I'd go for the zeiss for the range and OSS
I have liked before watching.
I make notes of these videos so that i can implement a few of such awesome shots (though I shoot on phone). Way inspirational.
How to change for shutter prior in film mode ?
Great content! Just subscribed.
Best regards from Stockholm!
i dont see the difference in terms of OSS when using A7RIII or A7III. Would love to see it in your future video.
Great review! Really helped me a lot. Keep up the amazing work.
Does this work on crop sensor Sony bod ?
Buying the Tamron. I already have the sony 24mm 1.8. I am just looking for more options for indoor real estate photography I don't really need image stabilization. Great video.
Watching all of your sony lens' comparison, love your vids even if I cant afford them.
Very nice video comparison! I'm gonna go for Tamron. OSS doens't matter that much as people think. For professional purposes like real estate, cars photo/video Sony would be a wiser choice. And for filming purposes (not a Vlog style) where depth of field matters, f2.8 helps. I think both lenses are great it's just a matter of preference - what you need it for)
Great Video, i own the 28-75 and now considering the 17-28 mainly for shooting cars using the rig. Would love your thoughts on it especially the image stabilization in this case
How are these lenses compared to the new Sony 20mm? I’m looking for a lens for mostly architectural and travel photography
I'd say that the 17-28 is really lose to the 20mm and i'd probably choose the 17-28 if i had to choose. But then again, it all depends on how much you need the brighter aperture!
Just got the tamron and it is quite impressive! Did a first impression vid and quite like it. More testing to come!
In the side by side video test the Zeis looked a litle warmer.
what is the best sony gmaster 16-35 2.8 or tamron 17-28 2.8 ??
Ahhhh been waiting to see this Tamron Review and comparison. You hit everything! I'm really annoyed that it's not 16mm because I feel like I can notice the difference. But honestly for the weight, apurtue and sharpness it's a bargain. The OSS didn't seem like a big issue I think the camera sensor did well. Awesome review bro!🙏🏽
would you recommend it as a travel lens for a sony a7r3?
@@JJ-vp3bd yes sure why not
Hello Peter! What is your best solution to shoots from above? :)
Just using a tripod!
To hell with lenses - what's the badass shovel on the wall?!
The Sony 16-35mm is the first full frame lens I've ever bought along with an A7III. Only bought a few hours ago but already know it was the right decision.
Ive been thinking of buying THIS for my a7iii, at what price did you buy it for and do you think its worth it for the price you got it for? Please share your thoughts.
Great video. I'm going to buy the Sony A7III and get the Tamron, mainly because i'll be doing more landscape shots on a tripod.
Have both and keeping both. They're both good for different applications. Can't go wrong with either one if you are trying to pick between them.
Which do you like better
@@THELIFEOFCB I like the 17-28 for astro, or any time I want to carry less weight. The image quality is a little better on the 17-28 in terms of edge to edge sharpness, auto focus is about the same on both. I like the 16-35 better for landscapes because of the greater zoom range. I end up changing lenses too often when I use the 17-28 for landscapes, and I don't like doing that with my Sony cameras because the sensor gets dusty so easily. What kind of shooting do you do?
@@ponderingnugget more less vlogging
@@THELIFEOFCB You might like the 17-28 better for weight and the wider 2.8 aperture.
just picked up the 17-28mm to pair with my 28-75mm, thanks for the review!
Amazing video,
Starting to VLOG and couldn’t decide on the Tamron or the Zeiss, but with the Zeiss OSS it was a no brained since I don’t have the steady hands😪
It's "no brainer", not "no brained". Just FYI :)
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C
Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35
Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough?
And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
Hi Peter, I like your your contents and what you do. I am wondering if you recorded the OSS test on the same camera brand. It seams to me that the Zeiss wich has image stabilization shakes more than Tameron without OSS. Regards,
Peter, absolutely agree that the 16-35 is the best for video both A7III and a6400. Love the sharpness of tamron at F11 too. I shot a convention in my last video with both. The F4 is great but I did have some issues in dark areas that were shot at 120 FPS. I recommend if it isn’t close up, 60 FPS is best for both in low light for slow motion
I sold my 16-35 and switched to the 17-28 so I can use just one and filter with the tamron 28-75. I do miss the OSS while shooting handheld video, but not regret the switching. Cheers
I was thinking of doing the same, where did you sell yours and was it worth the trade off? I really want that 2.8
@@THELIFEOFCB I sold it to my local camera shop and order the 17-28 at the same place. I do like that the zoom is internally and not like the 16-35. I think the 17-28 is better for photos, and when paired with the 28-75. If you don’t use the Tamron 28-75, and shoot more video handheld, stick with the 16-35 IMO.
@@longnguyenhong I use the 28-75 tamron for photos mainly and I have the Sony 16-35 for vlogging.
@@longnguyenhong I hear with the tamrons your constantly going to be switching lenses because of the focal lengths
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C
Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35
Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough?
And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
I am really looking at the 16 to 35 mm lens. It looks really good. Not having the oss in the a6400 makes the decision a little easier. Want to make sure that I am thinking about my eventual jump to full frame.
I love it, been using it for all my vlogs/videos the last couple of months and it is awesome!
@@PeterLindgren1 I know you said that the tamron looks sharper but that oss is so helpful. I would sacrifice the sharpness too in favor of the extra stability.
@@BrianTheCameraGuy you will sacrifice sharpness and quality because that f4 in low light you will push the iso but it's true the stabilization help a lot
@@NAM3L3555 very true but I am current using the standard kit lens which is 3.5 to f5.6. f4 all the way through would be a great improvement. Plus it is just better glass.
I don't know if I should get SIGMA 18-35MM F1.8 OR Tamron 17-28mm for my A7III
The Tamron for sure!
The sigma is an APSC lens 😊
Where'd you get that world map light???
I've watched lots of these videos now and not one reviewer shoots action photos, or mentions action photography. I tired of seeing reviewers (not you Peter) say the AF is 'blistering' when they are shooting a wedding - something painfully slow! Still on a quest to find real world tests in the field in all weathers.
Is it just me, or is there no noticeable stability difference between the two lenses in the vlog test?
No man, i notice it too. There not a huge difference in my eyes. Although there's a slight 1mm difference between 16 and 17. It doesnt bother me through.
The difference is the most obvious in the edges of the frame, and when you go up to a tighter focal length and start to move it's really noticable.
I have the 16 - 35 mm it’s a great lens for outdoor shootings but for studio / video I’ll will love to have the aperture that the Tamron has.
Nice video!
I've own both Tamron 28-75 and 17-28 since the days they launched. I like 17-28 more, because using it feels like using primes, sharp yet not versatile. From what I've seen and read, I'm thinking the 17-28 at 28mm end with 1.25 crop (35mm F3.5 equiv.) could be as sharp as full resolution 16-35 F4 at 35mm end.
Mr. JAM I have both and somehow I feel that the 17-28 is just not as good and balanced than the 28 -75...
@@afrank3029 I think the focal length is more importany for you. Even though some lenses are better than other lenses optically, it doesn't mean "the better" lenses are suitable fot your phtotography works. Sony 24 GM is much better lens than 35 ZA, but generally 35 ZA is much more useful lens because of its focal length. I think the same story goes on the 17-28 and 28-75.
@@MrJAM-np7go That's true as well, Ill just pointed out a difference what I did notice between the 2 optically :) .
@@afrank3029 Zoom lenses tend to have bigger copy to copy variation, so it might be the reason.
I like the natural feel of your videos, and Sweedish accent here and there. Thank you.
The 16-35 is a sleeper. Its rendering (at least my copy) rivals some primes I have. There is a lot of micro contrast that contributes to the pop people desire in high end lenses. F4 is meaningless to me, 5.6 or higher is only a boon for the beautiful details this lens can capture. I have a couple Tamron zooms that render nicely with good colors, but they don't render as well as the Zeiss.
hey, what talking lenses do u use while filming this video ?
I mean the one on your studio
the Zeiss is for me. the much wider range makes the lens way more useful. as much as I like the larger aperture, I gotta say the 16-35mm has a waaaay more practical range. It's worth $1000 to me (refurbished on amazon or eBay).
Which one would you recommend for interior photography?
I got the Tammy a few weeks ago and I'm very happy with it. I have been very happy with their 28-75 for nearly one year so I got it as extension for wide angle shots. My adapted Canon 16-35 2.8 L II isn't that great below 24mm in it's edges. So the 17-28 is a pretty good choice and fullfilds my needs best. I'm not missing the 1mm on the low end, but I'm really happy about the aperture of 2.8, the small formfactor, the same filtersize of 67mm and the inner-focal-mechanism. And btw. the money factor is not to be despised...:-))
Totally agree with your opinions there. Unfortunately they have almost the same cost here in Sweden!
@@PeterLindgren1 In Germany there is a difference of about 20% between the two - and fortunately I got the Tammy for another 15% less. 1/3 below the direct competitioners is a remarkable amount that supported the choice once more. (and btw. the Sony GM is 2,5 times up to this...)
I have 16-35 f4 in my bag all the time. I do more video over photos. I like the solid build of the Zeiss, put on a rubber ring to prevent the paint scratch. Have 24GM f1.4 in my bag at all time for photos purposes with creamy bokeh. So I am happy with my purchase and I would not trade in for Tamrom as 16mm really makes a HUGE different in photos/videos.
This was actually helpful. Thanks alot!
Great video at the right time. I bought the 16-35 f4 on eBay for a low price. I've been wondering if I should sell it to get the Tamron. I think I'll keep the f4. Thanks man!
Peter i have sony 6400 witch lens good for shooting video?
28 - 75 and 16 - 35 combo is my choice ! =)
planning on the 16-35 f4 for real estate and landscape shots
thank you Peter...because of this video I will buy the Sony Zeiss lens, I need it mostly for video so there we go...thanks m8!
Funny, I was just thinking that the f4 is the MUCH better comparison. Seems like everyone is pitting this against the 2.8, but the f4 seems like a much closer comparison to me. Nice
I think so too, the GM is more than double the Tamron (almost triple). I love both lenses though!
@@PeterLindgren1 In your comparison, I see barely any difference between the stability on the OSS lens and the the Tamron. Up close, or just in your use, do you feel like the OSS on the f4 is noticeably better? I don't care about the f4 vs 2.8 too much; handheld stability is near the upper end of my concerns. Thoughts?
I have the 1728 already, but i have to say that the new sigma 1424 Art for sony e which is more sharper than 1728 not a level. This is super extremely sharp on center to edge at f2.8 wide open.
the Zeiss appears more floaty and more stable but only marginally.
I own the tamron 17-28 and 16-35GM, I like both.
If I’m taking the lens and camera into inclement weather I take the tamron. If family events then GM.
All around walk around the 17-28 is light but lacks the reach of the 16-35 if you want to do quick medium portraits
Hey bud, I am trying to decide between the Tamron and the 16-35GM. If you could only have 1 which do you recommend only for the range of 16-24mm? Most important for me is sharpness across frame, colors, and video AF performance. Does the tamron AF feel slower for video? Thank you in advance for your help.
Yeah, it's more apparent when doing real camera movement rather than doing vlogs and such. Totally agree!
I hate when ppl have their opinion but no footage on there channel...how can you believe them or not
Hey! I’m looking for a vlog lens for my Sony a7C
Can’t decide between Tamron 17-28 and Sony 16-35
Love the fact that the Tamron is f2.8 but.. is the OSS important for vlogging? Isn’t the IBIS enough?
And then there is also the Samyang 18mm f2.8 which is tempting!
I'm in the dilemma tho, on Fuji I shoot mostly with 16 1.4....so buying a 24-70 samyang....or buy 17-28 28-75....I don't know! Hard decision!
Thanks for the info!
Another helpful video. Buying the Tamron
You right it is very hard to say which one is good because both lens do very good job