Hahaha love the added humor. One small request: keep the lenses on the same "side" throughout the video to make it easier to know which one we're looking at (without having to read the label). Super helpful video, thank you!!
Was thinking the same thing man. Different times of day when they are shot - shadows are present on one where it isn't on the other. Time of day is varied based on the shadow height on the red brick of the college at 2:56. Cant rely on this test unfortunately.
Came to say the same thing. Soft light will make it look softer lol. Harsh light has more contrast. Idk either way as I don’t own either lens but every other test on CZcams disagrees with this guys. Also my eyes do as well. Even in this test the very far corner looks clearly sharper even with lower light (probably because the lower corner has some sun hitting the tree). Same with the bokeh test. He says the sigma is busy when looking in a busy area on the sigma and says the tamron isn’t while looking at a less busy area.. this guy makes me laugh both with his jokes and his poor testing methods lol.
Did you take the pictures of the two lenses at different time of the day? Most of the comparisons are not apple to apple comparison eg. in sharpness, bokeh and CA.
I was looking forward to some comparisons of these two as I was looking to get a travel zoom to use instead of my beefy Sigma, but... I hope you are open to a little constructive criticism here... please delete if not. Honestly, I cannot see how you are able to determine anything from your tests here... sharpness tests are taken at different times during the day, uncontrolled, and the Tamron really looks "milky" by comparison to the Sigma. Its not clear what the point of focus is on the series of images you've taken, which only determines sharpness at 1 distance in a use case that will almost never be used in real life. If you want to get more useful results, a flat-to-camera subject is the best way to test edge to edge sharpness and you have to do the tests in quick succession as lighting can change apparent sharpness... or control the lighting with an indoor test with charts. If you don't believe me regarding lighting changing apparent sharpness, shoot during a cloudy day and then shoot during bald sun. Totally different images. You also need to test at least 3 distances... close up, mid range, and far to get an idea of the rendering. Some lenses are optimized for mid range or close ups and can suffer in some situations but not others. The AF test is under different conditions for the two lenses. The bokeh tests are showing, as examples of the different bokeh rendering, two different areas. Even if you are correct in your assessment of the bokeh characteristics, the examples cannot show this to us for obvious reasons. The CA/Loca tests... we are looking at different things here and I am not sure how you are coming to your conclusion. The Sigma clearly looks not just slightly better in the images shown here, but MUCH better and its one of the best characteristics of the zoom, that along with its sharpness fall off (nice for headshots wide open) and saturation. When CA's are nearly absent or not distracting on one, but clearly visible in the other, there's an obvious difference there and it means a lot when you are shooting video and want nice out of focus backgrounds without CAs. Anyways, this kind of continues through the tests. I know its really hard to do these and its time consuming, that's why I simply do not do tests like these. I don't have the time or patience to do it in a way that's not subjective. Thank you for the content!
I'm fine with the criticism, they were taken months apart, we had major mist in the air, and I did the comparison to the best of my ability with loaner gear. it would be nice to have open access to every piece of gear, unfortunately I dont, so I tried to get a standardized test going without resorting to test charts. I even checked the exif to get timing down, but it completely flew by my mind that sunset times were changing, and my inner landscaper tendencies failed me for yt testing, it's simply not a good time to test things because of the time crunch. The garden issue with bokeh/CA/Loca was partially an editing mistake (lack of mirroring) as well as timing, plants grow. and lastly, the sigma was an afterthought, I was requested by a user, and I fulfilled the request months later lol, I tested a lot of 35mm lenses and havent had the time to create the videos. getting any company to send a small youtuber like me gear on exact dates is hard. Thanks for watching.
The Tamron has SERIOUS blue tent, van and leaf artifacts at 5:39. 😂 On a serious note: The video is really good, but as others have said, the lighting is quite different in the comparisons, and as every photo/video-grapher knows, LIGHTING IS EVERYTHING. With these tests, you absolutely MUST isolate the variables, otherwise you're making wrong conclusions which will impact the lives of people that trust your reviews. This is more and more true, now that so many youtubers deceive their viewers with affiliate programs / secretly sponsored videos. Just to show you what I mean: "You say the Tamron is sharper 5:23 but I see favorable lighting for the Tamron and better colors in the Sigma, so are you getting money from Tamron to make it look better?" I'm not saying this is true, but I hope it's clear what I mean. Really good video overall, you obviously put a lot of effort into it and I thank you very much for it, but the tests alone are not reliable.
Great, fun review! I use an a7iii and have both their 70-180 and 20 primes. I’ve used a Sigma 16-35 and was very impressed with its quality,but the weight was an issue over a full day of shooting. I think the Tamron 28. - 75 fits my needs very well and will be ordering it. Thanks again for a great honest review
i want the sigma 24mm 1.4 and the 18-35 and the 24-70 and the 70-200 all from sigma i love what i'm hearing from them so i want to start getting these camera lenses. i really like what i see so i want to know how good sigma art series is
I would buy the Tamron for image quality, compactness and weight. Then get the Viltrox 24mm f1.8 for 24mm wide. You don't need to buy both at the same time.
I have so many problems with the inconsistencies of this review… lighting is different, bokeh tests at different focal lengths… that isn’t going to be comparable there isn’t a constant variable… come on…
Thanks for sharing．Very helpful review. Is it true Sigma has addressed the dust issue and solved it? If so since when and how do I know if one I'm buying is dust-proof copy? I am leaning toward Tamron 28-75 G2 precisely because of Sigma's dust issues.
Awesome review and funny as f***! Definitely my fave CZcamsr. I shoot as a hobbyist and the weight of the Sigma makes me take my camera out less. Definitely makes me think about picking up the Tamron G2 for everyday shots.
Despite the Tamron winning in most respects it's a hard pill to swallow not having 24mm indoors. I'm often unable to back up. The question do you put the money you saved into an inexpensive 24mm prime to supplement or is it better to live with the small deficiencies of the Sigma and not have the hassle of swapping lenses.
@@mjphotos There's a lot of ways to go. I have a party/dance event coming up and it be ideal to have a lens to do everything. Capture wide and medium to establish the party then jump in from a distance and to get reaction shots of people who are unaware you're filming them. I'm looking at the Sony 24-105 f/4 slower older lens by has great range for event work where its about getting the shot not the image quality.
There are many reviews that say that the Sigma is actually sharper and better quality than the Tamron and also 24mm instead of 28mm. That has been my experience. I had the G2 Tamron...the Sigma has better colors and seems a tad sharper, so maybe the presenter of this video just got a bad copy...happens sometimes.
@@martin9410 I've since bought the Sigma 24-70 and been happy with it. I can't speak to it's sharpness but it can't be bad because I don't noticed anything. I use it to mostly film video edu doc work where I'm running and gunning. The only thing that matters is if I got the shot. Unlike in these type of reviews no client is going to know or care as long as you got the shots you needed. I will say that it is a heavy lens. When I have to hand holding it for 3-4 hrs you notice the weight. But the 24 is equally important, I run it in active stab that crops in further. I'm constantly punching to get the close up then pulling all the way out for context. The lens lives on my camera couldn't be happier. I'm sure I could have also made the 28-70 work too.
I compared both lenses, the same day, within minutes of each other, same settings, focused on the same things. The Tamron was sharper over all and also in the center, plus, much better AF for sports. I do event photography.
@@josh6499 You are the one lying. I haven’t even posted any of my photos, you couldn’t have seen any of them. Plus you don’t know me. Get a life. None of my personal photos are of football or soccer fields. Unless you’ve hacked my computer, you haven’t seen them.
Good reivew! It really sucks the Tamron isn't a 24mm like wtf did they think but doing 28-70mm... it's obvious 90% of people would rather have that extra low-end than upper-end. But considering it's also softer at F2.8 which is where many people will want to use the lens otherwise they wouldn't pay for a large aperture, it's another deal breaker for Tamron. It sucks also it isn't stabilized as I loved my (Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 G2) for Canon EF which I was using with a RF adapter. Best lens out there and somehow the only one with a stabilizer, while none at Sony have any.
Because building a wider lens requires substantially more glass and increases the zoom magnification from a mere 2.53 to almost 3x. Thus, any 24-70 is substantially bigger. Seeing as Sony has a stake in Tamron, it makes sense for Tamron to produce GMaster alternatives, rather than direct competition. The lack of optical stabilization is most likely due to the reliability of IBIS at shorter focal lengths.
@@acouragefann Still even if Sony's IBIS is reliable enough, wouldn't it be even better to combine both internal AND optical stabilization for even more FStops of stabilization? More cannot be worse and I don't think one override the other as I think Canon was bragging that if you'd combine both on their R6 it would be a lot more and better than just optical IS. I just bought the Sigma and a A7IV so I guess I'll see if it's as reliable as my R6 + Tamron.
@@PanzerIV88 Yes, but it would also increase both size and weight (and cost) as you need gyroscopic sensors inside the lens to correct the shake - which is against the main selling point of the 28-75mm vs the 24-70s. The question is in which situations more than 4-5 stops of compensation are necessary as landscape photographers using ND filters will usually carry a tripod and not do multisecond exposures by hand and moving subjects are not affected by any lens or sensor stabilization, rendering shutter speeds of 1/50th or below effectively useless when one wishes to at least have a semblance of freezing action.
Love my Sigma Art 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN and love its outstanding image quality, and for this longtime worldwide award winning pro, having that 24mm of the Sigma vs the 28mm of the Tamron is much more important than having 75mm at the far end. A deal-breaker for me. I have used the Sigma in very dusty and sandy conditions around the world and never have had any dust issues. I sold my gen one Sony 24-70mm f2.8 GM to get the Sigma and it is much sharper overall and faster focusing. I have other Tamron lenses like the Tamron 17-28mm f2..8 and love it, but find no need to switch to the Tamron 28-75mm G2 at all for use with my A1, A7RIV, A7SIII. Cheers
hard to deny the versatility of a 24-70, I have two of them still!!! when I’m out with multiple lenses, I can go with the lesser range lighter standard zooms, I still have the sigma 28-70 in particular and use it more, but as a single lens, the 24-70 comes in clutch for sure.
Having had both lenses, I actually find the Sigma a much better lens and sharper in the corners. Better colors too. Most reviewers say that the Sigma is better.
Hey I just got the R2 the second generation of this lens - and it does not respect the setting I input in your camera for AF track sensitivity & AF Drive Speed in video - if i set to 'slow 'on my 24-105 it gives me a slow smooth focus pull - on the tamron 28-75 R2 - it does the same sloppy low budget video camera looking focus stutter jumping in video no matter what the setting. Is the first generation 28-75 like this? Thanks! is there a firmware update coming to fix this?ull - on the tamron 28-75 R2 - does the sigma respond to the values you input for track sens and Af drive speed?. Is the first generation 28-75 respond to these inputs?
I got myself viltrox 24mm f1.8 and sony 85mm f1.8, any advice?? Should i get 24-70mm sigma or 28-75mm tamron? I usuallu use for wedding photography. Any advice?
Loved the video -- and the droll sense of humor! I own the Tamron 28-75, 28-200 and the Sony 24G. They are all great and match up well to my Sony A7 iii. I really appreciate the Tamron uses 67mm for it's filter sizes. When I consider the cost of 82mm filters vs 67, that is a significant consideration. Thanks again. Great work! Liked and subscribed. I assume that you are somewhere in California from the palm trees??
Agree with comments about tests; AF tests in this video were done on different days; but, you can see a better comparison for AF in the Sigma *28-70* comparison video; here's the link czcams.com/video/f9xYOb8YbXw/video.html Thanks Guy with Camera for your work!
While many of your comments are valuable and you're a great personality, this image quality comparison test is simply an absolutely invalid and useless comparison. Comparing lenses in "real-world" scenarios with huge differences in exposure results in having the camera influencing the performance rather than limiting it to the lens performance. Saying "will compare 24-28 anyway" is again absolutely silly because if you can physically zoom more in, you retain the full sensor resolution at a closer magnification, placing one lens at a disadvantage. Furthermore, lighting conditions matter again because of the effect of light on contrast and sharpness. The whole image quality comparison is just completely invalid and misleading. If you don't have the chance to compare lenses at the same time, then you have to find something you can shoot every time the same regardless of the lighting conditions. Its for this exact reason why people shoot test charts and brick walls. But there are better options. Like a corner in a room in your apartment that is organized the same always with the windows closed, or an indoor parking lot, or an indoor stadium or event venue (fully lit). Options exist.
@@ivananthonybrillianta3479 Actually my personal tests were reliable. I used both lenses the same day, with the same settings, focused on the same objects, using the same camera. You said "both pictures." I took many pictures and you haven't seen even one of my test samples. So there are not "both pictures." You must be referring to the CZcams reviewer, not to me.
Why do you always make yourself look bad when you ask for likes? That’s makes the viewer not want to hit a like. As you’re asking for likes with your flaws. You upload great content and no reason to say that. Just my 2 cents
It has the opposite effect on average, actually. People are more likely to subscribe, give a like, or do what you say in general if you ask. Look up data on this
@@dna8269 well I know for a fact I’ve subscribed to people when they mentioned it. I’ll support peoples content. Which don’t get me wrong, I’ve seen couple a videos of yours and have liked them. I was just saying how you express yourself for subs. Just my 2 cents brotha. Wish you the best
there service is a bit...... like self service 🤣, I've had multiple warranty claims with them over many years, and you basically fill a form and send it, a bit antiquated.
Hmm weird. This is the only video I found that shows Tamron being better than Sigma. Is there a possibility that you got bad Sigma copy or really good Tamron copy?
Can you please double check the parfocal nature of the Tamron 28-75 G2 by using manual and AF separatelly? I saw a review by The Hybrid Shooter of this lens and his copy was parfocal for some reason. Please help, I want to buy parfocal lens and I'm stuck with this tamron and sigma 24-70 and don't know what to do.
sorry, dont have it anymore (loaner from tamron), it was tested with af initially on the wide end, then locked off mf. I notice some lenses behave better when zoomed in all the way, focus, lock, then pull out and start the movement.
Hahaha love the added humor. One small request: keep the lenses on the same "side" throughout the video to make it easier to know which one we're looking at (without having to read the label). Super helpful video, thank you!!
It would have been helpful to see them compared in the same lighting conditions at the same time of day.
Yes, and this makes the comparison to be of no use.
the light conditions in your two tests are huge different
Was thinking the same thing man. Different times of day when they are shot - shadows are present on one where it isn't on the other. Time of day is varied based on the shadow height on the red brick of the college at 2:56.
Cant rely on this test unfortunately.
Came to say the same thing. Soft light will make it look softer lol. Harsh light has more contrast. Idk either way as I don’t own either lens but every other test on CZcams disagrees with this guys. Also my eyes do as well. Even in this test the very far corner looks clearly sharper even with lower light (probably because the lower corner has some sun hitting the tree). Same with the bokeh test. He says the sigma is busy when looking in a busy area on the sigma and says the tamron isn’t while looking at a less busy area.. this guy makes me laugh both with his jokes and his poor testing methods lol.
Red flag was there as soon as I saw Velcro on his camera body
stupid review with different light
jajajaja..... the tamron is superior.
As a slowly aging male myself your “my hair isn’t coming back” joke made me burst out laughing
Did you take the pictures of the two lenses at different time of the day? Most of the comparisons are not apple to apple comparison eg. in sharpness, bokeh and CA.
Yes he did, on tamron the field is a soccer one & on sigma you see the foodball field xD
Please compare the pictures that taken in almost similar time with different lenses
I was looking forward to some comparisons of these two as I was looking to get a travel zoom to use instead of my beefy Sigma, but... I hope you are open to a little constructive criticism here... please delete if not.
Honestly, I cannot see how you are able to determine anything from your tests here... sharpness tests are taken at different times during the day, uncontrolled, and the Tamron really looks "milky" by comparison to the Sigma. Its not clear what the point of focus is on the series of images you've taken, which only determines sharpness at 1 distance in a use case that will almost never be used in real life. If you want to get more useful results, a flat-to-camera subject is the best way to test edge to edge sharpness and you have to do the tests in quick succession as lighting can change apparent sharpness... or control the lighting with an indoor test with charts. If you don't believe me regarding lighting changing apparent sharpness, shoot during a cloudy day and then shoot during bald sun. Totally different images. You also need to test at least 3 distances... close up, mid range, and far to get an idea of the rendering. Some lenses are optimized for mid range or close ups and can suffer in some situations but not others.
The AF test is under different conditions for the two lenses.
The bokeh tests are showing, as examples of the different bokeh rendering, two different areas. Even if you are correct in your assessment of the bokeh characteristics, the examples cannot show this to us for obvious reasons.
The CA/Loca tests... we are looking at different things here and I am not sure how you are coming to your conclusion. The Sigma clearly looks not just slightly better in the images shown here, but MUCH better and its one of the best characteristics of the zoom, that along with its sharpness fall off (nice for headshots wide open) and saturation. When CA's are nearly absent or not distracting on one, but clearly visible in the other, there's an obvious difference there and it means a lot when you are shooting video and want nice out of focus backgrounds without CAs.
Anyways, this kind of continues through the tests. I know its really hard to do these and its time consuming, that's why I simply do not do tests like these. I don't have the time or patience to do it in a way that's not subjective. Thank you for the content!
I'm fine with the criticism, they were taken months apart, we had major mist in the air, and I did the comparison to the best of my ability with loaner gear. it would be nice to have open access to every piece of gear, unfortunately I dont, so I tried to get a standardized test going without resorting to test charts. I even checked the exif to get timing down, but it completely flew by my mind that sunset times were changing, and my inner landscaper tendencies failed me for yt testing, it's simply not a good time to test things because of the time crunch. The garden issue with bokeh/CA/Loca was partially an editing mistake (lack of mirroring) as well as timing, plants grow. and lastly, the sigma was an afterthought, I was requested by a user, and I fulfilled the request months later lol, I tested a lot of 35mm lenses and havent had the time to create the videos. getting any company to send a small youtuber like me gear on exact dates is hard. Thanks for watching.
The Tamron has SERIOUS blue tent, van and leaf artifacts at 5:39. 😂
On a serious note: The video is really good, but as others have said, the lighting is quite different in the comparisons, and as every photo/video-grapher knows, LIGHTING IS EVERYTHING. With these tests, you absolutely MUST isolate the variables, otherwise you're making wrong conclusions which will impact the lives of people that trust your reviews. This is more and more true, now that so many youtubers deceive their viewers with affiliate programs / secretly sponsored videos. Just to show you what I mean: "You say the Tamron is sharper 5:23 but I see favorable lighting for the Tamron and better colors in the Sigma, so are you getting money from Tamron to make it look better?" I'm not saying this is true, but I hope it's clear what I mean.
Really good video overall, you obviously put a lot of effort into it and I thank you very much for it, but the tests alone are not reliable.
Great, fun review!
I use an a7iii and have both their 70-180 and 20 primes. I’ve used a Sigma 16-35 and was very impressed with its quality,but the weight was an issue over a full day of shooting. I think the Tamron 28. - 75 fits my needs very well and will be ordering it. Thanks again for a great honest review
The Review i was looking for! Love your Humor, keep the great work up!
Loved the video with extra decent addon humors
Thank you. Now add the Sigma 28-70/2.8 DG DN Contemporary to your comparison. It’s smaller and weighs even less at 470g. Nice and small.
done here czcams.com/video/f9xYOb8YbXw/video.html
Ha ha. I hit the like at " My face was inherited, it was not my choice" 😂
i want the sigma 24mm 1.4 and the 18-35 and the 24-70 and the 70-200 all from sigma i love what i'm hearing from them so i want to start getting these camera lenses. i really like what i see so i want to know how good sigma art series is
The gymnasium text consistently looks sharper to me from all focal lengths shown
I would buy the Tamron for image quality, compactness and weight. Then get the Viltrox 24mm f1.8 for 24mm wide. You don't need to buy both at the same time.
Totally agree. Personally I'm going to can get another zoom lens like 17-28 f2.8 from Tamron or 16-28 f.28 from Sigma in addition to this 28-75 lens
Great Suggestion.
I have so many problems with the inconsistencies of this review… lighting is different, bokeh tests at different focal lengths… that isn’t going to be comparable there isn’t a constant variable… come on…
Thanks for sharing．Very helpful review. Is it true Sigma has addressed the dust issue and solved it? If so since when and how do I know if one I'm buying is dust-proof copy? I am leaning toward Tamron 28-75 G2 precisely because of Sigma's dust issues.
There are still many issues with the dust in sigma 24-70, even the newer ones
@@joshlevy4199True, I second that!
Awesome review and funny as f***! Definitely my fave CZcamsr. I shoot as a hobbyist and the weight of the Sigma makes me take my camera out less. Definitely makes me think about picking up the Tamron G2 for everyday shots.
Tamron is sharper, with better AF.
Despite the Tamron winning in most respects it's a hard pill to swallow not having 24mm indoors. I'm often unable to back up. The question do you put the money you saved into an inexpensive 24mm prime to supplement or is it better to live with the small deficiencies of the Sigma and not have the hassle of swapping lenses.
If I want wider I use the 12-24 sigma instead.
@@mjphotos There's a lot of ways to go. I have a party/dance event coming up and it be ideal to have a lens to do everything. Capture wide and medium to establish the party then jump in from a distance and to get reaction shots of people who are unaware you're filming them. I'm looking at the Sony 24-105 f/4 slower older lens by has great range for event work where its about getting the shot not the image quality.
There are many reviews that say that the Sigma is actually sharper and better quality than the Tamron and also 24mm instead of 28mm. That has been my experience. I had the G2 Tamron...the Sigma has better colors and seems a tad sharper, so maybe the presenter of this video just got a bad copy...happens sometimes.
@@martin9410 I've since bought the Sigma 24-70 and been happy with it. I can't speak to it's sharpness but it can't be bad because I don't noticed anything. I use it to mostly film video edu doc work where I'm running and gunning. The only thing that matters is if I got the shot. Unlike in these type of reviews no client is going to know or care as long as you got the shots you needed. I will say that it is a heavy lens. When I have to hand holding it for 3-4 hrs you notice the weight. But the 24 is equally important, I run it in active stab that crops in further. I'm constantly punching to get the close up then pulling all the way out for context. The lens lives on my camera couldn't be happier. I'm sure I could have also made the 28-70 work too.
The sharpness comparison pictures have different lighting conditions... Pretty worthless for comparison.
I compared both lenses, the same day, within minutes of each other, same settings, focused on the same things. The Tamron was sharper over all and also in the center, plus, much better AF for sports. I do event photography.
@@josh6499 You are the one lying. I haven’t even posted any of my photos, you couldn’t have seen any of them. Plus you don’t know me. Get a life. None of my personal photos are of football or soccer fields. Unless you’ve hacked my computer, you haven’t seen them.
This is the best and funniest camera channel :D
I like ur sense of humor hahaha, quality material as well!
I appreciate that!
Good reivew! It really sucks the Tamron isn't a 24mm like wtf did they think but doing 28-70mm... it's obvious 90% of people would rather have that extra low-end than upper-end. But considering it's also softer at F2.8 which is where many people will want to use the lens otherwise they wouldn't pay for a large aperture, it's another deal breaker for Tamron. It sucks also it isn't stabilized as I loved my (Tamron 24-70mm F2.8 G2) for Canon EF which I was using with a RF adapter. Best lens out there and somehow the only one with a stabilizer, while none at Sony have any.
Because building a wider lens requires substantially more glass and increases the zoom magnification from a mere 2.53 to almost 3x. Thus, any 24-70 is substantially bigger. Seeing as Sony has a stake in Tamron, it makes sense for Tamron to produce GMaster alternatives, rather than direct competition. The lack of optical stabilization is most likely due to the reliability of IBIS at shorter focal lengths.
@@acouragefann Still even if Sony's IBIS is reliable enough, wouldn't it be even better to combine both internal AND optical stabilization for even more FStops of stabilization? More cannot be worse and I don't think one override the other as I think Canon was bragging that if you'd combine both on their R6 it would be a lot more and better than just optical IS.
I just bought the Sigma and a A7IV so I guess I'll see if it's as reliable as my R6 + Tamron.
@@PanzerIV88 Yes, but it would also increase both size and weight (and cost) as you need gyroscopic sensors inside the lens to correct the shake - which is against the main selling point of the 28-75mm vs the 24-70s. The question is in which situations more than 4-5 stops of compensation are necessary as landscape photographers using ND filters will usually carry a tripod and not do multisecond exposures by hand and moving subjects are not affected by any lens or sensor stabilization, rendering shutter speeds of 1/50th or below effectively useless when one wishes to at least have a semblance of freezing action.
Nah I have a 24mm, the 28-75mm works for me
@@liceafilms thank you I needed to hear that
Love your reviews keep them up
Dude I never give likes, you are the guy with camera version of Bobby Lee, earned one!
Love my Sigma Art 24-70mm f2.8 DG DN and love its outstanding image quality, and for this longtime worldwide award winning pro, having that 24mm of the Sigma vs the 28mm of the Tamron is much more important than having 75mm at the far end. A deal-breaker for me. I have used the Sigma in very dusty and sandy conditions around the world and never have had any dust issues. I sold my gen one Sony 24-70mm f2.8 GM to get the Sigma and it is much sharper overall and faster focusing. I have other Tamron lenses like the Tamron 17-28mm f2..8 and love it, but find no need to switch to the Tamron 28-75mm G2 at all for use with my A1, A7RIV, A7SIII. Cheers
i want the sigma so i'm getting the 24-70 i heard it's sooooooooo good so help me choose the better camera lens
hard to deny the versatility of a 24-70, I have two of them still!!! when I’m out with multiple lenses, I can go with the lesser range lighter standard zooms, I still have the sigma 28-70 in particular and use it more, but as a single lens, the 24-70 comes in clutch for sure.
@@CharlieVN so i need to buy one right cause i'm hearing a lot of good things about that lens from sigma and tamron
Having had both lenses, I actually find the Sigma a much better lens and sharper in the corners. Better colors too. Most reviewers say that the Sigma is better.
@@martin9410 Is your Sigma newer? I want to buy one and hope it's better than this Tamron and hope it is parfocal
Great review, if the Tamron is 24-70, while keeping everything else the same, I will buy it immediately. (and I don't have a camera yet)
I love your sense of humour
Hey I just got the R2 the second generation of this lens - and it does not respect the setting I input in your camera for AF track sensitivity & AF Drive Speed in video - if i set to 'slow 'on my 24-105 it gives me a slow smooth focus pull - on the tamron 28-75 R2 - it does the same sloppy low budget video camera looking focus stutter jumping in video no matter what the setting. Is the first generation 28-75 like this? Thanks! is there a firmware update coming to fix this?ull - on the tamron 28-75 R2 - does the sigma respond to the values you input for track sens and Af drive speed?. Is the first generation 28-75 respond to these inputs?
I was so confused when i saw el co. You’re a local!
your comedy made me laugh! I think i’m in the market for the Tamron 24-70 f2.8, the Sigma was too heavy and unwieldy
Le Sigma 24 70 Est plus lourd c'est vrai, mais la qualité est exceptionnelle
You've got a like from me for the humor! Uh! haha
Size matters. I got the 28-200🙃 ... and the 17-28
I got myself viltrox 24mm f1.8 and sony 85mm f1.8, any advice?? Should i get 24-70mm sigma or 28-75mm tamron? I usuallu use for wedding photography. Any advice?
Same Here
It's all that camera equipment, I mean the more lenses I buy the balder I am getting
Loved the video -- and the droll sense of humor! I own the Tamron 28-75, 28-200 and the Sony 24G. They are all great and match up well to my Sony A7 iii. I really appreciate the Tamron uses 67mm for it's filter sizes. When I consider the cost of 82mm filters vs 67, that is a significant consideration. Thanks again. Great work! Liked and subscribed. I assume that you are somewhere in California from the palm trees??
thanks for the sub, southern california
Thank for unbias honest review
The dry humor is great lol
"being close is like almost winning the lottery". Hilarious.
My Face was inherited, it was not my choice - Wise words - Not liking this video after that is plain cruel!
I find this review not very useful. What you say contradicts what you show. I could not make up my mind using this review.Thanks anyway
Came for the comparison. Subbed for the jokes!
How can you compare under different conditions 🤦🏽♂️
Thx the tamron it is for my Sony a7iv
tamron is the best i!!!
most other reviews found the sigma are sharper.
you should have taken the photos same time.
Agree with comments about tests; AF tests in this video were done on different days; but, you can see a better comparison for AF in the Sigma *28-70* comparison video; here's the link czcams.com/video/f9xYOb8YbXw/video.html
Thanks Guy with Camera for your work!
Autofocus test is very light, nothing about photo
Cool video, and really helpful information. Thanks for sharing it with us man! 👍🏼
PS. Jesus Loves You! 🔥
Tamron.
While many of your comments are valuable and you're a great personality, this image quality comparison test is simply an absolutely invalid and useless comparison. Comparing lenses in "real-world" scenarios with huge differences in exposure results in having the camera influencing the performance rather than limiting it to the lens performance. Saying "will compare 24-28 anyway" is again absolutely silly because if you can physically zoom more in, you retain the full sensor resolution at a closer magnification, placing one lens at a disadvantage. Furthermore, lighting conditions matter again because of the effect of light on contrast and sharpness. The whole image quality comparison is just completely invalid and misleading. If you don't have the chance to compare lenses at the same time, then you have to find something you can shoot every time the same regardless of the lighting conditions. Its for this exact reason why people shoot test charts and brick walls. But there are better options. Like a corner in a room in your apartment that is organized the same always with the windows closed, or an indoor parking lot, or an indoor stadium or event venue (fully lit). Options exist.
😂😂 amazing Humor👍🏼👍🏼
1:28
what kind of pointless comparison is that?! Sigma in the sun Tamron in the shadow...or otherwise
Love the jokes man
Usless video. how cna compare different scenes?
Your hair is coming out of a brilliant head .. so yes i accept it
Bokeh tamron wtf
El Co!
I've been outted 😂
This is apple to orange comparison
Yet they are both fruit! The Tamron in my tests was much sharper, with better AF for event photography
@@martin9410 both pictures taken on different time of the day, so the data is not reliable.
@@ivananthonybrillianta3479 Actually my personal tests were reliable. I used both lenses the same day, with the same settings, focused on the same objects, using the same camera. You said "both pictures." I took many pictures and you haven't seen even one of my test samples. So there are not "both pictures." You must be referring to the CZcams reviewer, not to me.
@@martin9410 My bad, i tought you were the youtuber
Why do you always make yourself look bad when you ask for likes? That’s makes the viewer not want to hit a like. As you’re asking for likes with your flaws. You upload great content and no reason to say that. Just my 2 cents
It has the opposite effect on average, actually. People are more likely to subscribe, give a like, or do what you say in general if you ask. Look up data on this
@@dna8269 well I know for a fact I’ve subscribed to people when they mentioned it. I’ll support peoples content. Which don’t get me wrong, I’ve seen couple a videos of yours and have liked them. I was just saying how you express yourself for subs. Just my 2 cents brotha. Wish you the best
Neither, no zoom Lenses !
😆
Tamron has bad mechanics, and aftersell service is bull***, bad combination if you ask. I had to trash a 24-70 g2.
there service is a bit...... like self service 🤣, I've had multiple warranty claims with them over many years, and you basically fill a form and send it, a bit antiquated.
Japanese style customer service
Hmm weird. This is the only video I found that shows Tamron being better than Sigma. Is there a possibility that you got bad Sigma copy or really good Tamron copy?
Can you please double check the parfocal nature of the Tamron 28-75 G2 by using manual and AF separatelly? I saw a review by The Hybrid Shooter of this lens and his copy was parfocal for some reason. Please help, I want to buy parfocal lens and I'm stuck with this tamron and sigma 24-70 and don't know what to do.
sorry, dont have it anymore (loaner from tamron), it was tested with af initially on the wide end, then locked off mf. I notice some lenses behave better when zoomed in all the way, focus, lock, then pull out and start the movement.