Other than the weight, this lens is an event photographer's dream. Coupled with the Z9, in DX mode you could also go to 225mm @ f/2.8 and still have 20MP resolution. This would pretty much replace the 24-70, 70-200 combo, and leave the second body for a 14-24mm, and not having to swap lenses at all and cover the range from 14mm to 225mm.
I would actually argue that, given the fact that I can forego a lot of lenses in my bag and just bring this, that the weight is actually not a big deal.
@@MrPawnyouwhat you say is true, but most photographers prefer to compose in the viewfinder and know that what they are looking at is what the image will look like. Maybe it's just me (and the droves of other photographers who also don't crop later and use DX), I just wouldn't feel the same way about a shot if I wasn't composing in the viewfinder, with cropping later I think it would be easy to become lazy and complacent about composition saying "I'll find the right composition later with a crop". Also if you're someone like me who is shooting live sports and uploading live to a server, where another team are picking up the shots and culling/correcting/cropping and then publishing the shots within hours of being taken... imagine the post teams response to shooting FX all day but wanting them to crop down to DX... that would get me removed from my job I think.
@@Cleverconveyencethe real problem with the "weight" is not carrying it to and from events in your bag. As you say, leave behind two and carry this. The problem with the weight is the holding it all day. I shoot with a Z9/Z8 and 85mm 1.2 which is a hair lighter than this. It's like carrying/holding a brick all day. That said, I'm ready to buy this brick 🧱 haha.
Hi Matt - Glad you reviewed this lens, and it is really great to see Tamron finally able to produce for Nikon again. Back in the DSLR days, I had many Tamron lenses and they were GREAT! The 24-70 2.8 G2 and the 70-200 2.8 G2 lenses for Nikon F were staples for me and they provided top of class IQ for about half the price of the OEM lenses at the time. To this day, I still use the Tamron 35mm 1.4 SP lens which is phenomenal and is better than the F mount 35mm 1.4 Nikon lens (and much cheaper). A little known fact is that Tamron is the largest optics manufacturer in the world. They make optics for everything - security cameras, automobiles (the cameras that tell the car if they are too close to something etc), and of course cameras (although lens manufacturing for cameras is really a smaller part of their business). That said, they are top notch optics producers - and they have the capability to make lenses that compete with anyone - as we have seen with their G2 line, 35mm 1.4 SP and now with this lens. This is a lens that I am seriously considering for my event work. I would not use this much for portraiture as given time I would prefer to use primes and with time changing lenses is not an issue. However, for events, and for concerts, this lens seems to be ideal, and as I said I do love Tamron. Speaking of loving Tamron, you might inform your audience that Tamron provides a 6 year warranty on their lenses if you register them when you buy them - I think this is industry leading, but I can say that they definitely stand by their lenses. I took several of their lenses to Iceland in 2018, and some water did get into my 24-70 G2 lens - probably through the telescoping part of the lens, which although sealed is still a potential point of failure (as you have pointed out). Anyway, I sent the lens into Tamron and they sent it back fully repaired and it worked like a charm after that - point is they stand by their products and do so for a full 6 years! My only hesitation on buying this lens is that I already have the 24-70 2.8S and the 70-200 2.8S lenses, and also at weddings I usually use two bodies - one with a 35mm prime and the other an 85mm prime and then I switch one body to the 70-200 just for the ceremony. I thought about keeping this set up the same and possibly getting the Nikon (Tamron) 70-180 2.8 to use at weddings in lieu of the 70-200 2.8 S because it is smaller and lighter to carry and can double as a semi-macro lens for detail shots (it has like a 1:4 macro which isn't bad for wedding details). If I got this lens instead, then I could likely shoot on one body with this lens all day long, which is great (save for the detail work which would require another lens), so I am not sure. Where I think this lens would really shine for me is for shooting concert venues - it is the perfect range for that and with the f/2-2.8 aperture would be able to capture really stunning images. One thing is for sure - for someone that doesn't already have a stable of lenses and wants to get started with pro level gear - this could be the "one lens to rule them all" as you could simply buy this lens and do just about anything with it in the portrait and event space. Sorry this comment got so long - looking forward to your next video on this lens. Hope you are well and that we get a chance to chat again soon! -PD
The specs of this lens are very impressive. If I didn’t already have the 24-70 and 70-180, this would be a great toy. Very interesting and exciting. Thanks Matt. 👍🏻
I really like this lens. If I owned it, I would for sure use it for basketball and volleyball rather than my 70-200 2.8. Thanks so much for reviewing it.
Saw this lens at my local camera store the other day and was extremely intrigued! Didn’t pick it up because I wanted to do some research first and my first thought was “I wonder if Matt Irwin has a video about this one?” I always look for your videos when I’m looking to get a new lens and they never disappoint!
@@MattIrwinPhotography yeah pls test a comparison between these 2 lenses in detail. You trade wide-end for brighter aperture. Unless this one smokes the 24-120 on image quality it's going to be a tough decision for most, if IQ is far superior it becomes a whole different game
@@Comalv I was just reading some articles regarding this lens vs the 24-120 f4 but it was being compared to the tamron for the sony E mount. Id assume the lenses are exactly the same just this one is for the z mount, although they have a small difference in size/weight. The conclusion there is that the 24-120 is still sharper and lighter. Since I do landscapes I dont need the wide aperture and the wider focal range of 24mm is more usefull to me as well. Nonethless this tamron seems to be amazing for events, outdoors and even street phtography. People were also saying the 24-120 f4 focus faster but once again this was being compared to the Tamron Sony E version
WOOHOO! My Tamron 70-200 F mount that I’ve had for almost 16 years is on the way out. And I was considering an F mount Nikon to couple with the FTZII adapter for my Z5…but THIS is it! Thanks for this. Goes to break piggy bank
This lens is exciting. I wish it was announced a long time ago, as I’ve already invested in the trinity. If I was deciding on 24-70 && 70-200 vs this Tamron, I think this Tamron would be a very strong candidate. As always, super great videos and reviews.
Good job as always Matt, I have the Nikon 24-120 f4 but if I didn't have it I would seriously consider this lens. It's nice for folks to have more choices. Can't wait for your follow up video. - Jeff
I am so looking forward to getting this lens. If only they could do 28mm at the wide end! But still 35-150mm is an amazing range and at 2-2.8, who can complain? This is honestly a must have lens!
@@stefanwagener haha, I hear you. But I honestly mostly use 28-200 as a preferred focal range, so if this was a 28-150 it would have replaced everything in my bag except the the 14mm. Walking around with only one bright zoom that has excellent IQ is the best thing for travel.
I like this lens so far, however, I have never bought zoom that is extended externally, in 40 years. This one may be the exception. Can’t wait to see how it performs!
Very late to the party, but certainly a welcome guest, and good to see that Sony's mount size does not affect the quality, and that the weight is not a problem for Nikon users, so it is a winner for all systems that now get this option!
I loved the 35-150 f2.8-f4 on the F mount as a replacement of my 24-120 F4 on the F mount, but primarily because it was so much sharper than my copy of the 24-120. However, I think I prefer the range of 24-120, so now that I have the excellent 24-120 S lens, I think I’ll wait and see if this lens goes on sale… I love the size/weight/quality of the 24-120 but I’m not a pro or event photographer, so I can live without f2-2.8.
Good day Matt, Sure. The Tamron could be a contender for night time video and some stills. A 24-70mm f/2.8 S lens would cover most of my needs as low light stills walkabout lens. It's something I'm looking at for my new Z6 II.
I would have liked this zoom range for young kids when they running and playing inside and outside and inside and outside. But once Tamron released the f/2.8-4 version 4 years ago for Nikon F-Mount my kids were more grown up and this zoom range became less practical and also less suited for other occasions like landscape, city and travel shooting. But nevertheless for the latter scenarios I would prefer the more compact and significantly lighter 2.8-4 version over the much heavier and bulkier new 2-2.8 version. But yes, for family events and having young kids the new version makes a lot of sense and I would buy it in heartbeat.
It was once again great to see your video. I’m seriously considering buying this lens, but I have concerns… The weight… I believe that with my Z6ii it would create a combo with almost 2kg… I love Street and Travel photography and carrying all day, sometimes walking over 20km, this kind of weight makes us think about it… I have the Nikon Z 24-120mmm and make the suggestion to compare this two lenses. Thank you very much and I’ll be waiting for the next one!
Always love your videos Matt. I was struggling regarding my next lens was thinking about the Nikon 180 to 600 and also the 85 1.2 but after watching this review the range of 35 to 150 with an aperture of 2.0 to 2.8 was just two irresistible. They say it's heavy but I could see myself taking this to Mexico or Rome and absolutely taking some great shots with my Z9 again thank you for your video. I have a tameron 70 to 200 G2 and I like it very much but I later bought the Nikon version I also have a timer on 35 mm 1.4 and I love that lens. Tamron makes some great glass.
Very Interested and Excited! Thinking, since I have the Nikon 14-30 f4 and 14-24 f2.8, if this lens is as sharp, colors are as good and durability cks out, I may replace my 24-120 f4 and have no need for a 70-180/200 in my kit! What do you think? Look forward to you comparison review!!!
Interesting lens, Tamron certainly come up with the goods. I still have the F mount 18=400 which was my go-to lens for a long time. If I hadn't just bought the Nikkor 24-120, I might have considered this, although it is over £600 more expensive.
I think I’ll stay with the trinity (14-24mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8). Manufacturers seem to pull out all the stops on build quality and IQ on these lenses. No compromises.
I have had the holy trinity previously on F mount and yes the IQ was high, but I also had problems with two of them. The 70-200 vignetted a LOT on my D3 rendering it almost useless for me. I picked it up 5 years later to stick it on a DX body and it was dead as a dodo. My 17-35 squeaked after 6 months, but Nikon said it was "normal" and many other 17-35mm squeak when focusing. I've since switched to Z and don't own any of the Trinity in Z.
Great vid and while you are excited and I get it - there is no way am I giving up my smaller/lighter 24-120/4S or the awesome 24-70/70-200 f/2.8 S pairing. The lens is ideal from someone looking to trade up from a 24-70/4 or possibly 24-120/4S -- but it will depend on pricing as well - it is currently at £1,799 here in the UK so far from cheap.
Looks like a great all round lens .. Tamron has been really good with interesting wide aperture lenses ! many have been very tempting ! .. eg the 60mm F2 macro. I have both the F-mount 35mm and 85mm F1.8 VC Tamron lenses.. and they are kind of wonderful !! I also have a Sigma 150 mm F2.8 macro ! so this lens could replace all 3 of them in Z mount ! on my new Zf camera !! So yeah, this new lens is another tempting bit of kit !!
I am with you. I looked at my shots over the last 2 years and almost 6K (25%) were in the 24-34mm range. I don’t want to change lenses that often and when I am doing city and travel shots, it’s not always possible to foot zoom because other things get in the way. For me, the 24-120MM F4 has been a great buy.
If you dont mind the weight then it should be a nice travel Lens. 35mm isnt quite wide enough. And the fast f2/2.8 is nice but I use lighting so a variable aperture lens isn't very attractive... 🦘
I had many Tamron lens over almost a decade (FX Nikon mount) and had numerous issues and a very low value when a sold them… until now, Nikon lens have had no issues, and a quite good resale value… will see with those new lens?
I even had a dog hair in the lens with those extended zoom … less than 1 year old lens… Tamron refuse to fix it under garantie… stated that those lens are not sealed and dust may enter into the lens 🤬🤬 it was may last Tamron!
Just because it's "fast" zoom doesn't mean it's "wedding lens". I still prefer 35mm + 85mm from 1.8 and faster. Everything slower is like photos from a phone 🤷🏻♂️
hoping beyond hope that this will work well in infrared - "super"zoom Z lenses really seem to be quite hit and miss in infrared so far. Just sent back the 24-120, which was great in colour but hotspotted in infrared, and really wasn't that much better than the 24-200 (which also hotspots in infrared) to justify having.
Just shot a cross country meet last night, where I was swapping between a 24-70 2.8S and a 70-200S while trying to jog from one side of the course to the other. This one lens would have made it so much less hassle. Does it handle flare and ghosting as well as the 24-70?
I’m going to sell my 24-70 f2.8 s so I can get this. The size and weight alone makes this the perfect travel and event photography. This lens from wide 35-80 telephoto will cover the 24-70 before hitting its f2.8. Imagine the ability the get more light in than the 24-70. Then you got the rest at 85-150 at 2.8. Couple this lens with your nich prime lens and it’ll be a great lightweight travel photographer’s dream.
@@Michael-Masi-2021 I used to walk all day with 70-200 2.8 on my D800, so having 35-150 is actually an improvement on all angles, including the weight. I meant to buy 70-180 2.8 but I will definitely get 35-150 2-2/8 instead
Is it compatible with the Canon T3i which I use? I already used the cannon glass 24 70 mm. But yeah it'll be interesting to see how the Tamron operates.
Hi Matt, I am experiencing slow startup time when turning the camera on with this lens. I have tested on the Nikon Z8 and on the Nikon Z9 (one of the fastest EVF-turn-on times I know), but it is consistently significantly slower than my other Z lenses, both S-line and otherwise. It is also slower to turn on than F lenses mounted via the FTZ-II adapter. I'm trying to figure out if it's my copy of the lens, or this is normal with this lens?
I'm still undecided as to whether I should get the lens as a Nikon version. Because I've had the Sony version of it for some time and run it on my Z9 using the ETZ21 adapter. I would need to know whether Nikon's own version would benefit me. In any case, I'll be taking it with me on a Schootland trip next week along with my Nikon Z 14-30mm F4. Because it is super sharp, the autofocus is fast and it has a phenomenal focal length range, which is ideal for a trip like this. And for a wider angle for landscape photos I have the 14-30mm.
Does your ETZ21 drain battery on your Z9 even when the camera has been turned off? (mine does, across multiple firmware versions, regardless of whether IBIS has been turned on or off)
@@pkennethv I do not think so. I actually have the Tamron on the Z9 permanently as a standard lens and I haven't noticed that the battery drains unusually so far.
However, I now also have the ETZ21 Pro because my first, the normal ETZ21, had a connection problem with the lens, which unfortunately didn't allow autofocus. But even with that I had no problems with battery discharge etc..
This may be a dumb question,Is it possible to compare it to a Z 24-70mm S lens. I am thinking about getting this to see how much of a hit i would take to get this lens compared to an original Z Lens. Appreciate if anybody could answer this.
Thanks for ur videos very useful infect I’m glad u have made this video,was thinking to buy Sony coz of this lens, i have z8 for events I need to use cameras now with this lens q cameras is sufficient especially i do events.
It's an interesting lens, but it's not for me. I disagree on this being an allrounder. 35mm is just too long for me to consider it that. If it started from 28mm, that would be better, and at that point, I could see myself getting it. I prefer a lens that starts at 24mm but with it going out to 150mm, you don't always need a telezoom. So you could pair it up with an ultra wide zoom instead. And if you get a telezoom, it could even be the new 180-600. But I like traveling and versatility is key there. With that in mind, The 24-120/4 still takes the cake for me. Plus the 14-30, and a telezoom. But that telezoom is what I'm having trouble deciding on. Which is part of why I'm still using a DSLR with the AF-P 70-300.
Same here. This 35-150 is neither wide nor long enough, at a large size and heavy. Traveling and versatility it is NOT, at least not for that purpose. I use the 14-30 and AF-P 70-300 as well, with a 50 MC in the gap. It's interesting to see so many people being excited about this lens, despite it being quite limited in range, and being big and heavy. It's not so bad on the long end, but no real wide. 24-120 is much better in this way. Yup, a stop slower, but smaller, have the weight, half the price, and wide to 24mm. For travel and versatility way more suitable IMO. That said I can see it being for wedding folks indeed, and yes, we're all different. For me this could be interesting only for one purpose, those city walks, low light, mostly street scenes and people, no architecture. My go-to for this are 85mm 1.8 and 28mm 2.8 (hopefully to be replaced by a 1.8 at one point...😃) currently. I've been toying with the idea of getting the 28-70mm f2.8 for this purpose. It does both, the 28 and light tele, size and weight and price are all fine. Didn't get it yet, as I'm sure if Nikon launches a 28mm 1.8 I will want it (28 is my fav focal length for that purpose), but I could see it work. Quite interesting as a single lens setup for that specific purpose. Now how about that 35-150 instead? Better tele, but I would really miss the 28. Plus it's a klotz by comparison, twice the weight, and bigger. Double the price. Hmmm. 🤔 Nah.
Why? What for? Ok, f2.0 at wide angle, f2.8 at the other end, but who needs that today with a 35-150 zoom? The new Nikkor 24-120 f4 (through) on the other hand has the better WW range. Optically out of the question and costs only the half price. Are the one, in the WW range two aperture stops and the 30mm more zoom worth the 2000, - €? Not for me! Not, because the very good Sensor into the Z Nikon's ;-)
Other than the weight, this lens is an event photographer's dream. Coupled with the Z9, in DX mode you could also go to 225mm @ f/2.8 and still have 20MP resolution. This would pretty much replace the 24-70, 70-200 combo, and leave the second body for a 14-24mm, and not having to swap lenses at all and cover the range from 14mm to 225mm.
But why would you do that ? You can crop later for better results no use for going dx mode .
I have this lens on my A7RIII - I use the 16-35 2.8 and the 35-150 2-2.8 almost exclusively now
I would actually argue that, given the fact that I can forego a lot of lenses in my bag and just bring this, that the weight is actually not a big deal.
@@MrPawnyouwhat you say is true, but most photographers prefer to compose in the viewfinder and know that what they are looking at is what the image will look like.
Maybe it's just me (and the droves of other photographers who also don't crop later and use DX), I just wouldn't feel the same way about a shot if I wasn't composing in the viewfinder, with cropping later I think it would be easy to become lazy and complacent about composition saying "I'll find the right composition later with a crop".
Also if you're someone like me who is shooting live sports and uploading live to a server, where another team are picking up the shots and culling/correcting/cropping and then publishing the shots within hours of being taken... imagine the post teams response to shooting FX all day but wanting them to crop down to DX... that would get me removed from my job I think.
@@Cleverconveyencethe real problem with the "weight" is not carrying it to and from events in your bag. As you say, leave behind two and carry this.
The problem with the weight is the holding it all day. I shoot with a Z9/Z8 and 85mm 1.2 which is a hair lighter than this. It's like carrying/holding a brick all day.
That said, I'm ready to buy this brick 🧱 haha.
Hi Matt - Glad you reviewed this lens, and it is really great to see Tamron finally able to produce for Nikon again.
Back in the DSLR days, I had many Tamron lenses and they were GREAT! The 24-70 2.8 G2 and the 70-200 2.8 G2 lenses for Nikon F were staples for me and they provided top of class IQ for about half the price of the OEM lenses at the time.
To this day, I still use the Tamron 35mm 1.4 SP lens which is phenomenal and is better than the F mount 35mm 1.4 Nikon lens (and much cheaper).
A little known fact is that Tamron is the largest optics manufacturer in the world. They make optics for everything - security cameras, automobiles (the cameras that tell the car if they are too close to something etc), and of course cameras (although lens manufacturing for cameras is really a smaller part of their business).
That said, they are top notch optics producers - and they have the capability to make lenses that compete with anyone - as we have seen with their G2 line, 35mm 1.4 SP and now with this lens.
This is a lens that I am seriously considering for my event work. I would not use this much for portraiture as given time I would prefer to use primes and with time changing lenses is not an issue. However, for events, and for concerts, this lens seems to be ideal, and as I said I do love Tamron.
Speaking of loving Tamron, you might inform your audience that Tamron provides a 6 year warranty on their lenses if you register them when you buy them - I think this is industry leading, but I can say that they definitely stand by their lenses. I took several of their lenses to Iceland in 2018, and some water did get into my 24-70 G2 lens - probably through the telescoping part of the lens, which although sealed is still a potential point of failure (as you have pointed out). Anyway, I sent the lens into Tamron and they sent it back fully repaired and it worked like a charm after that - point is they stand by their products and do so for a full 6 years!
My only hesitation on buying this lens is that I already have the 24-70 2.8S and the 70-200 2.8S lenses, and also at weddings I usually use two bodies - one with a 35mm prime and the other an 85mm prime and then I switch one body to the 70-200 just for the ceremony. I thought about keeping this set up the same and possibly getting the Nikon (Tamron) 70-180 2.8 to use at weddings in lieu of the 70-200 2.8 S because it is smaller and lighter to carry and can double as a semi-macro lens for detail shots (it has like a 1:4 macro which isn't bad for wedding details).
If I got this lens instead, then I could likely shoot on one body with this lens all day long, which is great (save for the detail work which would require another lens), so I am not sure.
Where I think this lens would really shine for me is for shooting concert venues - it is the perfect range for that and with the f/2-2.8 aperture would be able to capture really stunning images.
One thing is for sure - for someone that doesn't already have a stable of lenses and wants to get started with pro level gear - this could be the "one lens to rule them all" as you could simply buy this lens and do just about anything with it in the portrait and event space.
Sorry this comment got so long - looking forward to your next video on this lens.
Hope you are well and that we get a chance to chat again soon!
-PD
The Tamron 35mm 1.4 SP is one of the sharpest lenses I own.
Really well said Baron. Thank you.
The 105mm 2.8 S Macro VR would make a decent combo with this, for your details shots.
The specs of this lens are very impressive. If I didn’t already have the 24-70 and 70-180, this would be a great toy. Very interesting and exciting. Thanks Matt. 👍🏻
Pleasure Joe, thanks for watching :)
I really like this lens. If I owned it, I would for sure use it for basketball and volleyball rather than my 70-200 2.8. Thanks so much for reviewing it.
Saw this lens at my local camera store the other day and was extremely intrigued! Didn’t pick it up because I wanted to do some research first and my first thought was “I wonder if Matt Irwin has a video about this one?” I always look for your videos when I’m looking to get a new lens and they never disappoint!
Hmm...wonder how it goes head-to-head with the Z 24-120? Because its a f 2-2.8, I would expect good results in dim light?
I will be testing it out ASAP :)
@@MattIrwinPhotography yeah pls test a comparison between these 2 lenses in detail. You trade wide-end for brighter aperture. Unless this one smokes the 24-120 on image quality it's going to be a tough decision for most, if IQ is far superior it becomes a whole different game
I dont see a scenario where this Lens is sharper than the 24-120 z f4...it is such a sharp lens already@@Comalv
@@ThatNorma same, but you never know
@@Comalv I was just reading some articles regarding this lens vs the 24-120 f4 but it was being compared to the tamron for the sony E mount. Id assume the lenses are exactly the same just this one is for the z mount, although they have a small difference in size/weight. The conclusion there is that the 24-120 is still sharper and lighter. Since I do landscapes I dont need the wide aperture and the wider focal range of 24mm is more usefull to me as well. Nonethless this tamron seems to be amazing for events, outdoors and even street phtography. People were also saying the 24-120 f4 focus faster but once again this was being compared to the Tamron Sony E version
WOOHOO! My Tamron 70-200 F mount that I’ve had for almost 16 years is on the way out. And I was considering an F mount Nikon to couple with the FTZII adapter for my Z5…but THIS is it! Thanks for this. Goes to break piggy bank
I really wanna see this being worked at a concert.
This lens is exciting. I wish it was announced a long time ago, as I’ve already invested in the trinity. If I was deciding on 24-70 && 70-200 vs this Tamron, I think this Tamron would be a very strong candidate.
As always, super great videos and reviews.
Good job as always Matt, I have the Nikon 24-120 f4 but if I didn't have it I would seriously consider this lens. It's nice for folks to have more choices. Can't wait for your follow up video. - Jeff
This lens is on my target list, yes i would consider purchasing the 35 F2-2.8.
I am so looking forward to getting this lens. If only they could do 28mm at the wide end! But still 35-150mm is an amazing range and at 2-2.8, who can complain? This is honestly a must have lens!
If it would be 28mm wide then I would complain if only they could do 24mm :)
@@stefanwagener haha, I hear you. But I honestly mostly use 28-200 as a preferred focal range, so if this was a 28-150 it would have replaced everything in my bag except the the 14mm. Walking around with only one bright zoom that has excellent IQ is the best thing for travel.
This is a great working lens that provides so much in one lens. Beats lugging several lenses that this one can replace.
I like this lens so far, however, I have never bought zoom that is extended externally, in 40 years. This one may be the exception. Can’t wait to see how it performs!
Very late to the party, but certainly a welcome guest, and good to see that Sony's mount size does not affect the quality, and that the weight is not a problem for Nikon users, so it is a winner for all systems that now get this option!
Interested to see how it compares to the 24-120 f4 in real world examples. Could it win the heart of your pal Seth Miranda? Cheers Matt.
Been waiting for this review! Been deciding between grabbing this vs 24-70 and 70-180 on my z50.
I loved the 35-150 f2.8-f4 on the F mount as a replacement of my 24-120 F4 on the F mount, but primarily because it was so much sharper than my copy of the 24-120. However, I think I prefer the range of 24-120, so now that I have the excellent 24-120 S lens, I think I’ll wait and see if this lens goes on sale… I love the size/weight/quality of the 24-120 but I’m not a pro or event photographer, so I can live without f2-2.8.
Wow, that's a remarkable aperture range on a zoom. Nice work, Tamron!
It really is!
Good day Matt, Sure. The Tamron could be a contender for night time video and some stills. A 24-70mm f/2.8 S lens would cover most of my needs as low light stills walkabout lens. It's something I'm looking at for my new Z6 II.
I would have liked this zoom range for young kids when they running and playing inside and outside and inside and outside. But once Tamron released the f/2.8-4 version 4 years ago for Nikon F-Mount my kids were more grown up and this zoom range became less practical and also less suited for other occasions like landscape, city and travel shooting. But nevertheless for the latter scenarios I would prefer the more compact and significantly lighter 2.8-4 version over the much heavier and bulkier new 2-2.8 version. But yes, for family events and having young kids the new version makes a lot of sense and I would buy it in heartbeat.
Looks pretty sweet!
I think the 3 position switch is for the image stabilisation.
Mr Matt, You got brilliant view from the home kitchen, straight on the full city ;)
Lol.
I have the Tamron 35-150 F mount lens which is fantastic. I have the 24-120 z nikon now but i do like the 35-150mm range
It was once again great to see your video. I’m seriously considering buying this lens, but I have concerns… The weight… I believe that with my Z6ii it would create a combo with almost 2kg… I love Street and Travel photography and carrying all day, sometimes walking over 20km, this kind of weight makes us think about it… I have the Nikon Z 24-120mmm and make the suggestion to compare this two lenses. Thank you very much and I’ll be waiting for the next one!
Is the lens ring programmable like the Nikon Z ? Am really interested in that as I shoot with lens ring assigned to exposure compensation .
Pre-order day it was announced.
Always love your videos Matt. I was struggling regarding my next lens was thinking about the Nikon 180 to 600 and also the 85 1.2 but after watching this review the range of 35 to 150 with an aperture of 2.0 to 2.8 was just two irresistible. They say it's heavy but I could see myself taking this to Mexico or Rome and absolutely taking some great shots with my Z9 again thank you for your video. I have a tameron 70 to 200 G2 and I like it very much but I later bought the Nikon version I also have a timer on 35 mm 1.4 and I love that lens. Tamron makes some great glass.
Very Interested and Excited! Thinking, since I have the Nikon 14-30 f4 and 14-24 f2.8, if this lens is as sharp, colors are as good and durability cks out, I may replace my 24-120 f4 and
have no need for a 70-180/200 in my kit! What do you think? Look forward to you comparison review!!!
COMING ASAP !!!! : )
@@MattIrwinPhotography Thank You Matt!
Thanks, Matt!
I’ve wanted this lens since they announced it for Sony…now I can finally have it in just a couple more weeks! 😬🙊
Pass the Quickeze. You're giving me GAS😮
Interesting lens, Tamron certainly come up with the goods. I still have the F mount 18=400 which was my go-to lens for a long time. If I hadn't just bought the Nikkor 24-120, I might have considered this, although it is over £600 more expensive.
I wonder how well it would perform as an astro lens at 35mm
I think I’ll stay with the trinity (14-24mm f/2.8, 24-70mm f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8). Manufacturers seem to pull out all the stops on build quality and IQ on these lenses. No compromises.
I have had the holy trinity previously on F mount and yes the IQ was high, but I also had problems with two of them. The 70-200 vignetted a LOT on my D3 rendering it almost useless for me. I picked it up 5 years later to stick it on a DX body and it was dead as a dodo.
My 17-35 squeaked after 6 months, but Nikon said it was "normal" and many other 17-35mm squeak when focusing.
I've since switched to Z and don't own any of the Trinity in Z.
Great vid and while you are excited and I get it - there is no way am I giving up my smaller/lighter 24-120/4S or the awesome 24-70/70-200 f/2.8 S pairing. The lens is ideal from someone looking to trade up from a 24-70/4 or possibly 24-120/4S -- but it will depend on pricing as well - it is currently at £1,799 here in the UK so far from cheap.
I’m a Sigma fanboy. Just have to wait for their FX Z mount lenses to be announced…
This is the FX Z version of this lens :)
like you said, it's a perfect Swiss knife. Now we have to wait for the final price.
Looks like a great all round lens .. Tamron has been really good with interesting wide aperture lenses ! many have been very tempting ! .. eg the 60mm F2 macro. I have both the F-mount 35mm and 85mm F1.8 VC Tamron lenses.. and they are kind of wonderful !! I also have a Sigma 150 mm F2.8 macro ! so this lens could replace all 3 of them in Z mount ! on my new Zf camera !! So yeah, this new lens is another tempting bit of kit !!
I’d love to see a comparison to Nikon glass 24-120 or 70-200 or 24-70 2.8. See if you sacrifice quality for versatility?
Hmm. Currently have the z 28-75 f2.8 and been thinking about the 70-180 f2.8 ... however maybe ill sell the former and get this instead
“zoomage” 😂 (thank you, Matt)
Nice idea, nice to have the f2-2.8 but personally I prefer this range of "event" / walk about lens to go to 24 at the wide end..
I am with you. I looked at my shots over the last 2 years and almost 6K (25%) were in the 24-34mm range. I don’t want to change lenses that often and when I am doing city and travel shots, it’s not always possible to foot zoom because other things get in the way. For me, the 24-120MM F4 has been a great buy.
If you dont mind the weight then it should be a nice travel Lens.
35mm isnt quite wide enough.
And the fast f2/2.8 is nice but I use lighting so a variable aperture lens isn't very attractive... 🦘
I had many Tamron lens over almost a decade (FX Nikon mount) and had numerous issues and a very low value when a sold them… until now, Nikon lens have had no issues, and a quite good resale value… will see with those new lens?
I even had a dog hair in the lens with those extended zoom … less than 1 year old lens… Tamron refuse to fix it under garantie… stated that those lens are not sealed and dust may enter into the lens 🤬🤬 it was may last Tamron!
Probably going to be Wedding Lens #1 for all non prime Nikon shooters
It might replace my 24-70 and 70-200 F lenses which i use with the FTZ Adapter
Just because it's "fast" zoom doesn't mean it's "wedding lens". I still prefer 35mm + 85mm from 1.8 and faster. Everything slower is like photos from a phone 🤷🏻♂️
hoping beyond hope that this will work well in infrared - "super"zoom Z lenses really seem to be quite hit and miss in infrared so far. Just sent back the 24-120, which was great in colour but hotspotted in infrared, and really wasn't that much better than the 24-200 (which also hotspots in infrared) to justify having.
Just shot a cross country meet last night, where I was swapping between a 24-70 2.8S and a 70-200S while trying to jog from one side of the course to the other. This one lens would have made it so much less hassle.
Does it handle flare and ghosting as well as the 24-70?
I’m going to sell my 24-70 f2.8 s so I can get this. The size and weight alone makes this the perfect travel and event photography. This lens from wide 35-80 telephoto will cover the 24-70 before hitting its f2.8. Imagine the ability the get more light in than the 24-70. Then you got the rest at 85-150 at 2.8. Couple this lens with your nich prime lens and it’ll be a great lightweight travel photographer’s dream.
Yes the total bag weight will be less. But remember this lens is a beast to hold/carry all day. Don't forget to factor that in. Heavy heavy lens.
@@Michael-Masi-2021 that’s nothing compared to carrying my 12 years old daughter on my arms all day.
@@Michael-Masi-2021 I used to walk all day with 70-200 2.8 on my D800, so having 35-150 is actually an improvement on all angles, including the weight. I meant to buy 70-180 2.8 but I will definitely get 35-150 2-2/8 instead
How does the image quality compare to the Nikon 24 to 120mm f4?
Could you do a review on a 1.4 adapter to this one
Good vid. And interesting lens. Don't think it's for me though, very happy with my 24-120 S4. Thanks and stay warm. - Tim
Is it compatible with the Canon T3i which I use? I already used the cannon glass 24 70 mm. But yeah it'll be interesting to see how the Tamron operates.
Any chance if Tamron will later release a 24/28-150mm f2.8? 😅
Hi Matt, I am experiencing slow startup time when turning the camera on with this lens. I have tested on the Nikon Z8 and on the Nikon Z9 (one of the fastest EVF-turn-on times I know), but it is consistently significantly slower than my other Z lenses, both S-line and otherwise. It is also slower to turn on than F lenses mounted via the FTZ-II adapter. I'm trying to figure out if it's my copy of the lens, or this is normal with this lens?
I'm still undecided as to whether I should get the lens as a Nikon version. Because I've had the Sony version of it for some time and run it on my Z9 using the ETZ21 adapter. I would need to know whether Nikon's own version would benefit me. In any case, I'll be taking it with me on a Schootland trip next week along with my Nikon Z 14-30mm F4. Because it is super sharp, the autofocus is fast and it has a phenomenal focal length range, which is ideal for a trip like this. And for a wider angle for landscape photos I have the 14-30mm.
Does your ETZ21 drain battery on your Z9 even when the camera has been turned off?
(mine does, across multiple firmware versions, regardless of whether IBIS has been turned on or off)
@@pkennethv I do not think so. I actually have the Tamron on the Z9 permanently as a standard lens and I haven't noticed that the battery drains unusually so far.
However, I now also have the ETZ21 Pro because my first, the normal ETZ21, had a connection problem with the lens, which unfortunately didn't allow autofocus. But even with that I had no problems with battery discharge etc..
@@bcm1964 thank you for your reply🙏
This may be a dumb question,Is it possible to compare it to a Z 24-70mm S lens. I am thinking about getting this to see how much of a hit i would take to get this lens compared to an original Z Lens.
Appreciate if anybody could answer this.
F4 or 2.8? as they are both 'S' lenses :)
2.8 @@MattIrwinPhotography
I wouldn’t have minded a lighter 35-150 f2.8-4.
Thanks for ur videos very useful infect I’m glad u have made this video,was thinking to buy Sony coz of this lens, i have z8 for events I need to use cameras now with this lens q cameras is sufficient especially i do events.
Enjoy the content (always educational) but was wondering how it compares with the extra coatings applied to the Nikon S-level lenses?
check out this vid here ua-cam.com/video/NhBSDntRVy0/v-deo.html where I take it too the field :)
Hey Matt, im torn between this lens and the 24-120 for my Z9. The Nikon is about 800 cheaper but the Tamron has the 2-2.8...ughhh
To me it would be about the 24 and 35.
24 over 35 any time.
I wish Tamron made a 24-70mm for the Z cameras.
Same here
This lens is better than 18-140 z vr ?
It's an interesting lens, but it's not for me. I disagree on this being an allrounder. 35mm is just too long for me to consider it that. If it started from 28mm, that would be better, and at that point, I could see myself getting it. I prefer a lens that starts at 24mm but with it going out to 150mm, you don't always need a telezoom. So you could pair it up with an ultra wide zoom instead. And if you get a telezoom, it could even be the new 180-600.
But I like traveling and versatility is key there. With that in mind, The 24-120/4 still takes the cake for me. Plus the 14-30, and a telezoom. But that telezoom is what I'm having trouble deciding on. Which is part of why I'm still using a DSLR with the AF-P 70-300.
Same here. This 35-150 is neither wide nor long enough, at a large size and heavy. Traveling and versatility it is NOT, at least not for that purpose. I use the 14-30 and AF-P 70-300 as well, with a 50 MC in the gap.
It's interesting to see so many people being excited about this lens, despite it being quite limited in range, and being big and heavy. It's not so bad on the long end, but no real wide. 24-120 is much better in this way. Yup, a stop slower, but smaller, have the weight, half the price, and wide to 24mm. For travel and versatility way more suitable IMO.
That said I can see it being for wedding folks indeed, and yes, we're all different.
For me this could be interesting only for one purpose, those city walks, low light, mostly street scenes and people, no architecture. My go-to for this are 85mm 1.8 and 28mm 2.8 (hopefully to be replaced by a 1.8 at one point...😃) currently. I've been toying with the idea of getting the 28-70mm f2.8 for this purpose. It does both, the 28 and light tele, size and weight and price are all fine. Didn't get it yet, as I'm sure if Nikon launches a 28mm 1.8 I will want it (28 is my fav focal length for that purpose), but I could see it work. Quite interesting as a single lens setup for that specific purpose.
Now how about that 35-150 instead? Better tele, but I would really miss the 28. Plus it's a klotz by comparison, twice the weight, and bigger. Double the price. Hmmm. 🤔
Nah.
When you test for image quality, please test for flaring.
Oh, why do I watch videos about lenses I can't possibly afford?
this is the obvious question - go with the tamron 35-150, or Nikon 24-120 f/4… Matt there is your next video
Why? What for?
Ok, f2.0 at wide angle, f2.8 at the other end, but who needs that today with a 35-150 zoom?
The new Nikkor 24-120 f4 (through) on the other hand has the better WW range. Optically out of the question and costs only the half price. Are the one, in the WW range two aperture stops and the 30mm more zoom worth the 2000, - €? Not for me! Not, because the very good Sensor into the Z Nikon's ;-)
It’s heavy. I rented it for a weekend.
Not a lens for me due to the weight.
Please say awesome less , try using other words, please expand your vocabulary
That’s awesome John, glad you like the lens.
Waiting to hear how concert photographers get on with this lens. Could itvreplace the 24-70 70-200 2.8 combo and halve the weight of my bag?
Thanks for sharing! :)