The real advantage of the 28-200 is the size. I bought it on a whim really, based on some positive reviews. But when started using it, realized how convenient it really is. I carry my whole "system" (one camera and this lens) in the little messenger bag I used to carry my m4/3 gear in. And it's surprisingly capable. I had several 'superzooms' before, over, three camera brands. This is the first I would qualify as really good.
yeah thats a huge benefit for sure, i love the smaller size of it and would gladly sacrifice aperture for size for my zoom lenses. if u want aperture throw on a prime lol.
I want to say that I'm super new to photography but your videos have not only been immensely helpful but also very easy to follow. I appreciate how through you are and you address concerns that I have going in and also bring up points that I wouldn't think of because I'm just starting. Again thank you so much for these videos!
This comparison review drew my attention because I have a Tamron 28-200mm 1:3.8-5.6 lens on my Sony A65. I've noticed similar quality as the 28-200mm lens in this video. Thanks for producing this, very happy to have found it.
Hi. Watched this Sunday night (watched 4 reviews tbh!). Ordered on Sunday night. Arrived Monday. Played with it Monday and today. Honestly - it's fantastic!! Really really really happy with it and your review.
Believe it or not, the mistery camera is a Sony a6300 with the SEL50F18 lens and the smallrig 2082 cage with the wooden grip (yep, it's the wooden one). And the dude put a pokemon adapter ring around the lens just to confuse us 🤣 Apart from that, Jay, you rock the casbah, I freaking adore you and your videos. Respect!
Great video again! Could you do a "all in one" lens comparison with 24-105 G vs 28-200 Tamron? Would be interesting to see. I ended up getting the 24-105 for my A7 III based partly on your great video review of the lens.
Great suggestion! I already reviewed the Sony FE 24-105mm G OSS Lens so I have the lab and real world pics already. I can tell you the Sony is sharper in the corners in the lab testing and the the OSS is awesome. Other than that both lenses are very similar in optical quality I would say. Have you watched my 24-105mm review here: czcams.com/video/x-M3aVApVqM/video.html
Hi Jason. Thx for the review. I like your reviews because of the realistic en clear approach. How does the Tamron 28-200 hold up against the Sony 24-240 mm all in one lens? Is there a (big) difference in image quality in real life on a A7IV? Grtz from Belgium.
Had been following J from A7 days and still do enjoy his reviews. Never over the top and always to the point, concise, useful info. Thanks J! BTW, ordered the 28-200 yesterday and my first ever such a super-zoom (apart from Sony 24-105, if that can be called an SZ).
I appreciate that and no I would not call the 24-105mm a super zoom, but it does have a nice useful range no question... The 28-200mm is more of an all in one telephoto zoom lens I guess I would say :) It's got a fantastic range and very good optical quality!
I just got a Sony mirrorless system with a A7R III and Tamrons 28-75 and 70-180 2.8 less than a week ago and already shot a few photo shoots with them. I just love the IQ comming from the sensor and the lenses. Cheers !
Awesome to hear and I totally agree about both the A7R III sensor quality, and the Tamron optical quality. Glad to hear they hold up so well on the higher resolution camera also which I had no doubt. I only had the 24mp sensor to test with myself, but you can still clearly see the amazing optical quality, although not to the same resolution as the A7R of course...
as always, nice review！are you still use your sigma 30 as the main lens when you talk for the opening or conclusions？Or you use 23mm viltrox after you reviewed last month？
Thanks and yes I'm still using the Sigma, although I have been wanting to put up some shelves and slightly change my angle when recording in front of the camera and I was thinking the Viltrox 23mm might be better for the new view I have in mind. I need to put the shelves up though still, but perhaps today I will get it done! My room is a mess currently...
Very comprehensive review. I am looking at both lenses and now I know what to expect from each. Im still on the fence but probably going with the 28-200. It's not really about price. Im planning a photo trip and think the light weight and versatility would best suit me for that. Like you said the fall off is still good and it produces sharp pictures, I may need to crop the edges a bit. P.S. I live in Westchester, I may need to plan a trip to Neversink river park for some photos.
Subscribed! Even for experienced photogs it's not easy to compare lenses side by side the way you do, so thanks for that. I'm in the process of deciding on a 70-200mm f/2.8 right now, (I own the Sony 24-105mm f/4 and need more reach) and I've been able to narrow it to two options (as the Sony equivalent is not a option at this point in time for me). So I'm torn between adapted vs third party Sony E mount. 1. Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM (adapted to my Sony a7rii) $800-900 with the adapter. 2. Tamron 70-180mm reviewed here. At the end of the day I'll be spending about the same amount of money (a little less going with Canon). However there are other concerns that arise from these 2 lenses such as portability (I do a lot of landscape photography), durability, image stabilization, image quality, adaptation issues, higher resolution sensor... and whatnot. I need help!!! Any input will be greatly appreciated. Kind regards.
2.8 don't need a tri-pod or stabilization I want the 70-180mm But if i buy the 28-200mm I can buy 3 primes samyang $250-18/2.8:145g $250-45/1.8 162g. $329-75/1.8 230g
That's exactly what I did, 28-200 + those three Samyangs. It's crazy what you can cover with a kit that small and cheap. Samyang 18 + Tamron 28-200 for landscape/travel and Samyang 45 and 75 for portraits and when shallow DoF matters.
Gary Brown - Well for some 250US for 18mm Samyang!!-here in Ireland its 400 Euro which is 490US dollars equivalent.... Was thinking about the same set of samyangs but price just mental high...
Great review. Also a very relevant comparison. I have several GM zooms but want a light travel lens that does it all. Owned the 24-105 F4 but added little value since i already own the 24-70GM so I sold it. However this Tamron goes all the way to 200mm and also does 28mm f2.8 is very useful indoors, will pick one up. The size and weight is also great for when you want to keep things small and light.
Thanks a lot for your outstanding review, this is absolutely helpful. However, I’m still hesitated. I want to to have the wide depth of field but I’m worried about the variable aputure which I think won’t be helpful during sports photography cause I will have to adjust the shutter speed and iso every time I zoom in or out. My question is, do you consider the variable aputure as an obstacle in sports photography? Thanks again !
Well, you can set the camera to shutter priority and Auto ISO wen using a variable aperture lens to solve that problem. However, yes I constant aperture is often better I agree, but with technology we can work around this depending on our budget and desired weight of a lens for example. The f/2.8 aperture lenses tend to be much heavier in general...
Super appreciate this review video! About to chose a lens to travel with along with my a7c and Tamron 17-28. Looks like the 28-200 should work great, especially for the size and price.
Thanks for the review J! been watching your a7c reviews since I got it. Question, would the 70-180mm to do good for sports photography using a7c? I can't but a new body. Or do you have any suggestions for sports lens except for g masters :D
@@LUITESLIFE Thanks Luite! I was not planning on changing the body. I went with the 70-180mm and loving it so far. Cheers! Do you have any pages I can see some of your shots? #newbiehere
Nice comparison! I’ve used the 28-200 on an a7ii for 3:years with solid results. I just upgraded to an a7iii and notice a significant increase in its performance. I need a faster lense for basketball photography in high school gyms, so I definitely am planning to add the 70-180.
The fact that you are comparing a superzoom with a 2.8 70-200 lens and the main differences are based on aperture is insane. When you consider the price and weight it becomes crazier. I have both lenses and for landscape photos I usually us the 17-28 and 28-200 combo. These are my most used lenses and very happy with them.
Thanks for the comments Sam ;) My videos tend to be for those newer to photography and lot of viewers are not aware of what exactly the faster aperture and heavier lens gets you in the real world. I get requests to do reviews like this all the time believe it or not. For many it's nice to see the actual difference between lenses like this. Understandable, if you are knowledgeable and experienced with various lenses this video might seem a bit obvious, but again to those that are new to lenses and what aperture means, etc.... this type of review is hopefully helpful. That was my intention anyway ;) All the best, Jay
Thank you for a great review. The camera you asked in the video (26:36) seems to be a Sony 6000 series in a SmallRig cage. The lens with a red ring and a hood remains ... unidentified... Could the red portion be a lens adapter?
Great video with relevant details! I saw in your another video that you used Sony 70-350 (APSC). Which lens do you think has a better image quality and bokeh between Sony 70-350 and Tamron 70-180? Ignoring the difference in range 180-350 of course ;) for a multi purpose use-case of portraits, street, landscape, wildlife.
i remember when I had bought the a7iii last year along with the 17-28, i was planning to get the 24-240. I didnt get it because it wasnt in stock that day. Totally dont regret it after 28-200 came...!!! :-)
Have the 28-300 on my list to go with my future A7IV as a travel lens (1 lens setup). Coming from a Fuji 55-200 (which is tack sharp across the aperture range), do you know if I’ll experience some picture quality loss? Thank you.
Based on my testing the 28-300mm was very sharp across the board. When comparing to the Fuji lens I have no idea unfortunately, because I never used it. I don't think you will experience picture quality loss considering this is a full frame lens on an incredible full frame camera. Be sure to check out the lab testing section of this review for those sharpness tests you would want to see for yourself.
Yeah, that was the problem with this video, because they are both awesome, but for different reasons. For the best quality possible I would go with the 70-180mm f/2.8 though for sure ;)
That would be pretty awesome, but the 17-70mm is designed for the crop factor APS-C E-Mount cameras and the 70-180mm is a full frame E-Mount Lens. Now both can be used on a APS-C Sony camera with no issue, but the 17-70mm will only work good in crop factor mode on a full frame camera.
I use both these lenses on my a7iii. The 28-200 is a great all around: range, weight. The 70-180 is better for indoor sports where light maybe in short supply
I appreciate the review suggestion Jon and I'll see what I can do ;) I really want to review the new Sony A7C and FE 28-60mm F4-5.6 standard zoom lens next, but I will certainly keep that in mind! Jay
You do such a great job at looking at the comparison factually and without the major fluffy over rated reviewers. while its fun to watch fluff -- I love your work. I was on the fence about these lenses -- Although 90% of reviews confirm what you pointed out -- the difference is that you give a quantitative reason -- others give a high level reasoning. Keep it going... I am looking at the 17-28 as well to complete the trilogy. I already own the 28-75 after giving up on the weight of my Sony's. Tamron also has great customer service. If you ever get around to comparing the 16-35 to 17-28 that would be helpful.
Thank you very much Cold :) I really appreciate the kind words and that is exactly what I try and do. Although my videos don't get the same views as the fluffy ones, I feel they do provide a more realistic presentation of what you are actually getting with various gear. All the best, Jay
Well, it really depends on what you are shooting and at what distance. The 70-180mm has the advantage of a constant f/2.8 aperture while the 28-200mm is a variable aperture as you zoom. However, the 28-200mm has a much wider zoom range which may be better for your purposes.. Overall I would say the 70-180mm puts out better image quality, but it is a bit harder to film with do to the higher focal range requiring a really steady hand or tripod for example.
Thank you for a very detailed review on this lenses (Tamron). I already have the 28-75mm F2.8 and might get the 70-180mm F2.8 to match the one that i already have. But, your review showed a lot comparison and it is so tempting to buy the 28-200mm (F-variable) so that i can only bring one lens instead of 2. How i wished though that you showed some comparison in lowlight scenario where to show us some problems with the all-in-one lens. Anyways, two thumbs up to you Sir and waiting for your next review.
Thanks for your reply. Its an E mount. I upgraded my camera to full frame. I figured it out. Mount is bit tighter then previous a55 35mm,Went to camera shop and figured it out about that. Just need to twist more. thank you
Thanks for the video, it's an interesting comparison. But please try to always use picture in focus to do comparisons, otherwise it's confusing. And also, I think for sharpness tests it's better to do the comparisons at the same aperture and ISO.
On my a6100 never seen good quality image above iso 800, and here you got plenty of really good quality images with iso 4000 :O didn't expect that there so huge gap in iso perfmance, I tough it maybe double iso quality, but not 4-5 times better...
Great review as always My guess - Sony a6400 Great shots Own the 28-200. Super nice all arounder The 70-180 on my list Also have the 28-75 2.8. Super nice The 17-28 f2.8 on my list also Awesome burger
Yes I would not get that lens if you already have the 28-200mm. The F/4 at 200mm is an advantage, but still I would not do it myself. The 70-180mm f/2.8 lens would be the way to go for a faster aperture telephoto.
@@Jason_Hermann appreciate the speedy response. I’m looking for a 2nd lens to have in my bag… I’m thinking maybe a lower mm for wide angles. I’m eyeing the sigma 16mm f1.4. Have you had experience with a lens like this
Good video but shouldn't the comparison be with all things equal? The shutter speed, f-stop and ISO should all be identical and fixed between the two lenses, then you would have a direct comparison using common focal lengths. The 28-200 @101mm, 1/10 sec f:4.5 ISO 100 is not an equal comparison with the 70-180 @ 101mm, 1/25 sec f:2.8 ISO 100. The 70-180 should have been set to f:4.5 also, which likely would have yielded an even sharper image. Likewise, with the band photos, all settings should have had identical shutter speed, aperture and ISO. Only then would you have a fair, equal and true comparison of the two lenses.
Both have their own place, and just because the focal lengths overlap, one shouldnt feel that the other one isnt needed. The 70-180 cant give the versatility, size, weight and price of 28-200 and the 28-200 cant beat the background blur, bokeh, af speed and overall IQ of 70-180..!!
@@Jason_Hermann for landscape photography stopped down on a tripod to f5.6 f8 or f11, at 135mm up to 180mm, which lens would give better image quality? Thanks
The real advantage of the 28-200 is the size. I bought it on a whim really, based on some positive reviews. But when started using it, realized how convenient it really is. I carry my whole "system" (one camera and this lens) in the little messenger bag I used to carry my m4/3 gear in. And it's surprisingly capable. I had several 'superzooms' before, over, three camera brands. This is the first I would qualify as really good.
I really appreciate you sharing your experience and I totally agree with what you said!
yeah thats a huge benefit for sure, i love the smaller size of it and would gladly sacrifice aperture for size for my zoom lenses. if u want aperture throw on a prime lol.
I want to say that I'm super new to photography but your videos have not only been immensely helpful but also very easy to follow. I appreciate how through you are and you address concerns that I have going in and also bring up points that I wouldn't think of because I'm just starting. Again thank you so much for these videos!
This comparison review drew my attention because I have a Tamron 28-200mm 1:3.8-5.6 lens on my Sony A65. I've noticed similar quality as the 28-200mm lens in this video. Thanks for producing this, very happy to have found it.
Yours is the channel that I go to for anything Sony. Thanks for your work
Great review.. I've watched at least 100 reviews in last week and yours is defiantly one of the best..
Appreciate that George ;) If you don't mind sharing what is it about my review that makes you think that? Thanks, Jay
Nice review, would love to see your comparison of Tamron 70-180 f2.8 vs Tamron 70-300.
Hi. Watched this Sunday night (watched 4 reviews tbh!). Ordered on Sunday night. Arrived Monday. Played with it Monday and today. Honestly - it's fantastic!! Really really really happy with it and your review.
Great to hear Lee, and thanks for the comments :) Which lens did you end up getting?
I really enjoyed the way you made comparisons :) Your set is amazing... thanks and I await for more of these great videos. Best regards from Uruguay.
Thank you Daniela for the very kind comments ;)
Great review, very useful comparison, definitely helpful for on the budget shopping. Thank you very much. 👍
Glad it was helpful and thank you for the comments Richard :)
Really happy with the 28-200mm on my A7RIII. Insanely versatile with center sharpness that allows for impressive cropping.
Awesome to hear Brent :) Thanks you for sharing your experience with the impressive 28-200mm!
im still on my basic a6000 but thats the exact setup i plan on working towards, glad to hear youre happy with it! cant wait to have mine 😁
Believe it or not, the mistery camera is a Sony a6300 with the SEL50F18 lens and the smallrig 2082 cage with the wooden grip (yep, it's the wooden one). And the dude put a pokemon adapter ring around the lens just to confuse us 🤣 Apart from that, Jay, you rock the casbah, I freaking adore you and your videos. Respect!
Thank you for the great review.
This is a great comparison, thank you!
Great review, as always! Thx a lot! Please keep on!!
Thanks for watching and will do ;)
Amazing review. Thanks
really great infor...thank you jason
Nice comparison vid. Useful. Thanks.
Thanks for watching ;)
26:38 it's a Sony crop mirrorless camera in the a6000 range, with a cage attachment and a Sony 50mm f1.8 apsc lens
Great video again! Could you do a "all in one" lens comparison with 24-105 G vs 28-200 Tamron? Would be interesting to see. I ended up getting the 24-105 for my A7 III based partly on your great video review of the lens.
Great suggestion! I already reviewed the Sony FE 24-105mm G OSS Lens so I have the lab and real world pics already. I can tell you the Sony is sharper in the corners in the lab testing and the the OSS is awesome. Other than that both lenses are very similar in optical quality I would say. Have you watched my 24-105mm review here: czcams.com/video/x-M3aVApVqM/video.html
Hi Jason. Thx for the review. I like your reviews because of the realistic en clear approach. How does the Tamron 28-200 hold up against the Sony 24-240 mm all in one lens? Is there a (big) difference in image quality in real life on a A7IV? Grtz from Belgium.
You just made my decision a little tougher but I’m still leaning to the 70-180 😅
Thank you, this was wonderful and helped me tons to know which lens to go for.
You're very welcome!
Thanks Jason, did you miss any VC/OSS on the 28-200mm at ttthe longer ocal lenghts?
Brilliant review.
Had been following J from A7 days and still do enjoy his reviews. Never over the top and always to the point, concise, useful info. Thanks J! BTW, ordered the 28-200 yesterday and my first ever such a super-zoom (apart from Sony 24-105, if that can be called an SZ).
I appreciate that and no I would not call the 24-105mm a super zoom, but it does have a nice useful range no question... The 28-200mm is more of an all in one telephoto zoom lens I guess I would say :) It's got a fantastic range and very good optical quality!
I just got a Sony mirrorless system with a A7R III and Tamrons 28-75 and 70-180 2.8 less than a week ago and already shot a few photo shoots with them. I just love the IQ comming from the sensor and the lenses. Cheers !
Awesome to hear and I totally agree about both the A7R III sensor quality, and the Tamron optical quality. Glad to hear they hold up so well on the higher resolution camera also which I had no doubt. I only had the 24mp sensor to test with myself, but you can still clearly see the amazing optical quality, although not to the same resolution as the A7R of course...
as always, nice review！are you still use your sigma 30 as the main lens when you talk for the opening or conclusions？Or you use 23mm viltrox after you reviewed last month？
Thanks and yes I'm still using the Sigma, although I have been wanting to put up some shelves and slightly change my angle when recording in front of the camera and I was thinking the Viltrox 23mm might be better for the new view I have in mind. I need to put the shelves up though still, but perhaps today I will get it done! My room is a mess currently...
Very comprehensive review. I am looking at both lenses and now I know what to expect from each. Im still on the fence but probably going with the 28-200. It's not really about price. Im planning a photo trip and think the light weight and versatility would best suit me for that. Like you said the fall off is still good and it produces sharp pictures, I may need to crop the edges a bit. P.S. I live in Westchester, I may need to plan a trip to Neversink river park for some photos.
Subscribed!
Even for experienced photogs it's not easy to compare lenses side by side the way you do, so thanks for that.
I'm in the process of deciding on a 70-200mm f/2.8 right now, (I own the Sony 24-105mm f/4 and need more reach) and I've been able to narrow it to two options (as the Sony equivalent is not a option at this point in time for me). So I'm torn between adapted vs third party Sony E mount.
1. Canon 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS USM (adapted to my Sony a7rii) $800-900 with the adapter.
2. Tamron 70-180mm reviewed here.
At the end of the day I'll be spending about the same amount of money (a little less going with Canon). However there are other concerns that arise from these 2 lenses such as portability (I do a lot of landscape photography), durability, image stabilization, image quality, adaptation issues, higher resolution sensor... and whatnot. I need help!!!
Any input will be greatly appreciated.
Kind regards.
2.8 don't need a tri-pod or stabilization
I want the 70-180mm
But if i buy the 28-200mm
I can buy 3 primes samyang
$250-18/2.8:145g
$250-45/1.8 162g.
$329-75/1.8 230g
That's exactly what I did, 28-200 + those three Samyangs. It's crazy what you can cover with a kit that small and cheap. Samyang 18 + Tamron 28-200 for landscape/travel and Samyang 45 and 75 for portraits and when shallow DoF matters.
A great way to go for sure Gary ;)
Gary Brown - Well for some 250US for 18mm Samyang!!-here in Ireland its 400 Euro which is 490US dollars equivalent.... Was thinking about the same set of samyangs but price just mental high...
Great review. Also a very relevant comparison. I have several GM zooms but want a light travel lens that does it all. Owned the 24-105 F4 but added little value since i already own the 24-70GM so I sold it. However this Tamron goes all the way to 200mm and also does 28mm f2.8 is very useful indoors, will pick one up. The size and weight is also great for when you want to keep things small and light.
I totally agree with everything you said Ender and thank you very much for the kind words about the review ;) Jay
Thanks a lot for your outstanding review, this is absolutely helpful. However, I’m still hesitated. I want to to have the wide depth of field but I’m worried about the variable aputure which I think won’t be helpful during sports photography cause I will have to adjust the shutter speed and iso every time I zoom in or out. My question is, do you consider the variable aputure as an obstacle in sports photography?
Thanks again !
Well, you can set the camera to shutter priority and Auto ISO wen using a variable aperture lens to solve that problem. However, yes I constant aperture is often better I agree, but with technology we can work around this depending on our budget and desired weight of a lens for example. The f/2.8 aperture lenses tend to be much heavier in general...
My budget might have to be stretched now; very impressive results and thank you for including the Tamron here.
My pleasure and best of luck with your decision.
Super appreciate this review video! About to chose a lens to travel with along with my a7c and Tamron 17-28. Looks like the 28-200 should work great, especially for the size and price.
Glad it was helpful!
I am thinking of the same set up plus maybe a fast prime like the Sony/Zeiss 55f1.8 - would cover almost every travel situation, I think.
Thanks For the review 👍👍👍👍👍
My pleasure! Thanks for the comments Michael ;)
Thanks for the review J! been watching your a7c reviews since I got it. Question, would the 70-180mm to do good for sports photography using a7c? I can't but a new body. Or do you have any suggestions for sports lens except for g masters :D
The Tamron 70-180mm lens one of the best options for the money Francis, and I would recommend that ;)
@@LUITESLIFE Thanks Luite! I was not planning on changing the body. I went with the 70-180mm and loving it so far. Cheers! Do you have any pages I can see some of your shots? #newbiehere
Nice comparison! I’ve used the 28-200 on an a7ii for 3:years with solid results. I just upgraded to an a7iii and notice a significant increase in its performance. I need a faster lense for basketball photography in high school gyms, so I definitely am planning to add the 70-180.
Thanks for sharing!
The fact that you are comparing a superzoom with a 2.8 70-200 lens and the main differences are based on aperture is insane. When you consider the price and weight it becomes crazier. I have both lenses and for landscape photos I usually us the 17-28 and 28-200 combo. These are my most used lenses and very happy with them.
Thanks for the comments Sam ;) My videos tend to be for those newer to photography and lot of viewers are not aware of what exactly the faster aperture and heavier lens gets you in the real world. I get requests to do reviews like this all the time believe it or not. For many it's nice to see the actual difference between lenses like this. Understandable, if you are knowledgeable and experienced with various lenses this video might seem a bit obvious, but again to those that are new to lenses and what aperture means, etc.... this type of review is hopefully helpful. That was my intention anyway ;) All the best, Jay
Which one is the best for videos mate?
Thank you for a great review.
The camera you asked in the video (26:36) seems to be a Sony 6000 series in a SmallRig cage. The lens with a red ring and a hood remains ... unidentified... Could the red portion be a lens adapter?
Good eye ;) Looks like it could be that!
Great video with relevant details!
I saw in your another video that you used Sony 70-350 (APSC). Which lens do you think has a better image quality and bokeh between Sony 70-350 and Tamron 70-180? Ignoring the difference in range 180-350 of course ;) for a multi purpose use-case of portraits, street, landscape, wildlife.
The IQ on both lenses is great, but the f/2.8 on the Tamron gives it next level bokeh for portraits in particular I would say.
i remember when I had bought the a7iii last year along with the 17-28, i was planning to get the 24-240. I didnt get it because it wasnt in stock that day. Totally dont regret it after 28-200 came...!!! :-)
Oh yeah, the 28-200mm has better optical quality for sure, although no OSS and less overall range when compared to the 24-240mm...
Have the 28-300 on my list to go with my future A7IV as a travel lens (1 lens setup). Coming from a Fuji 55-200 (which is tack sharp across the aperture range), do you know if I’ll experience some picture quality loss? Thank you.
Based on my testing the 28-300mm was very sharp across the board. When comparing to the Fuji lens I have no idea unfortunately, because I never used it. I don't think you will experience picture quality loss considering this is a full frame lens on an incredible full frame camera. Be sure to check out the lab testing section of this review for those sharpness tests you would want to see for yourself.
excellent video. thnx
You are welcome!
Great video!
Thanks!
Nice pixel peep session, thanks. I don't think you made the decision any easier lol.
Yeah, that was the problem with this video, because they are both awesome, but for different reasons. For the best quality possible I would go with the 70-180mm f/2.8 though for sure ;)
Does the eye detection auto focus work on the A6600 with the Tamron 70-180 ?
Yes, it should work Randy the lens supports it ;)
which would you recommend for capturing f1 (speeding cars) images, thanks
I would recommend the 70-180mm f/2.8 for that Julie ;)
I have a a6400, how would it do with the tamron 28 to 200 ( no stabilization) ?
It will work fine with no stabilization, but you might need to raise the shutter speed in some situations if hand holding is all. Not a big deal...
What are your thoughts on using the tamron 17-70 and the 70-180 as a duo?
That would be pretty awesome, but the 17-70mm is designed for the crop factor APS-C E-Mount cameras and the 70-180mm is a full frame E-Mount Lens. Now both can be used on a APS-C Sony camera with no issue, but the 17-70mm will only work good in crop factor mode on a full frame camera.
I use both these lenses on my a7iii. The 28-200 is a great all around: range, weight.
The 70-180 is better for indoor sports where light maybe in short supply
Awesome combo to have!!
Thanks for this test !
Would you rather get this Tamron or the Sony G 24-105mm f4.0 ?
I would go with the Tamron for the extra reach and faster max aperture ;)
@@Jason_Hermann thanks for the advice, will give a try
Already bought the Samyang 35mm f1.8 FE
On preorder
Hope to see your review of it
I appreciate the review suggestion Jon and I'll see what I can do ;) I really want to review the new Sony A7C and FE 28-60mm F4-5.6 standard zoom lens next, but I will certainly keep that in mind! Jay
Pretty useful. But money Wil determine what lens I'll buy.
That burger looks really good!! haha. Makes me hungry as hell... Great video BTW. Looking forward owning the 28-200 ;)
Thanks for the comments and the burger was delicious ;)
@@Jason_Hermann Damn!! Haha!!
You do such a great job at looking at the comparison factually and without the major fluffy over rated reviewers. while its fun to watch fluff -- I love your work. I was on the fence about these lenses -- Although 90% of reviews confirm what you pointed out -- the difference is that you give a quantitative reason -- others give a high level reasoning. Keep it going... I am looking at the 17-28 as well to complete the trilogy. I already own the 28-75 after giving up on the weight of my Sony's. Tamron also has great customer service. If you ever get around to comparing the 16-35 to 17-28 that would be helpful.
Thank you very much Cold :) I really appreciate the kind words and that is exactly what I try and do. Although my videos don't get the same views as the fluffy ones, I feel they do provide a more realistic presentation of what you are actually getting with various gear. All the best, Jay
@@Jason_Hermann Dont kid yourself - those guys never show their work -- its just mostly fun to watch - hardly get anything concrete from them.
While shooting videos which ones are better?
Well, it really depends on what you are shooting and at what distance. The 70-180mm has the advantage of a constant f/2.8 aperture while the 28-200mm is a variable aperture as you zoom. However, the 28-200mm has a much wider zoom range which may be better for your purposes.. Overall I would say the 70-180mm puts out better image quality, but it is a bit harder to film with do to the higher focal range requiring a really steady hand or tripod for example.
Thank you for a very detailed review on this lenses (Tamron). I already have the 28-75mm F2.8 and might get the 70-180mm F2.8 to match the one that i already have. But, your review showed a lot comparison and it is so tempting to buy the 28-200mm (F-variable) so that i can only bring one lens instead of 2. How i wished though that you showed some comparison in lowlight scenario where to show us some problems with the all-in-one lens. Anyways, two thumbs up to you Sir and waiting for your next review.
Why 70-200 di lll doesn’t attached to my sony a7iii? Any idea?
I don't think that is an E-Mount Lens? What is the entire lens name? It should also have a mount identifier on it somewhere.
Thanks for your reply.
Its an E mount. I upgraded my camera to full frame.
I figured it out. Mount is bit tighter then previous a55 35mm,Went to camera shop and figured it out about that. Just need to twist more. thank you
Thanks for the video, it's an interesting comparison. But please try to always use picture in focus to do comparisons, otherwise it's confusing. And also, I think for sharpness tests it's better to do the comparisons at the same aperture and ISO.
ok, thanks!
@@Jason_Hermann Sorry, I've realized my comment was rude. I've modified it. Thanks
Maybe one of the best comparsen !!!
Thank you very much Thomas :)
HAUAHAHAHAUHA, love the burguer detailed explanation.
Have the 17-28 with A7III, the 28-200 is a no brainer for me.!!
I hear yeah and it's a killer all-in-one option for sure!
I have BOTH now…
Awesome set!
Review Tamron 18-400mm please
I don't believe they make that lens for Sony cameras yet....
@@Jason_Hermann You are right. That lens is only for Canon and Nikon
On my a6100 never seen good quality image above iso 800, and here you got plenty of really good quality images with iso 4000 :O didn't expect that there so huge gap in iso perfmance, I tough it maybe double iso quality, but not 4-5 times better...
I own the 6400 and a7c, and the FF is better on iso by roughly 2 times, maybe 3, not 4.
Great review as always My guess - Sony a6400
Great shots
Own the 28-200. Super nice all arounder
The 70-180 on my list
Also have the 28-75 2.8. Super nice
The 17-28 f2.8 on my list also
Awesome burger
Thanks Jon! I appreciate your awesome comments and guess on the mystery camera ;)
If I have the Tamron 28-200 mm, would you say getting a Sony 70-200mm f4 be pointless?
Yes I would not get that lens if you already have the 28-200mm. The F/4 at 200mm is an advantage, but still I would not do it myself. The 70-180mm f/2.8 lens would be the way to go for a faster aperture telephoto.
@@Jason_Hermann appreciate the speedy response. I’m looking for a 2nd lens to have in my bag… I’m thinking maybe a lower mm for wide angles. I’m eyeing the sigma 16mm f1.4. Have you had experience with a lens like this
@LYCANS Sure due and it's awesome!! Here is my review: czcams.com/video/SWPO6Qy7ltw/video.html btw, What camera are you using?
Good video but shouldn't the comparison be with all things equal? The shutter speed, f-stop and ISO should all be identical and fixed between the two lenses, then you would have a direct comparison using common focal lengths. The 28-200 @101mm, 1/10 sec f:4.5 ISO 100 is not an equal comparison with the 70-180 @ 101mm, 1/25 sec f:2.8 ISO 100. The 70-180 should have been set to f:4.5 also, which likely would have yielded an even sharper image. Likewise, with the band photos, all settings should have had identical shutter speed, aperture and ISO. Only then would you have a fair, equal and true comparison of the two lenses.
70-180 ..
Both have their own place, and just because the focal lengths overlap, one shouldnt feel that the other one isnt needed.
The 70-180 cant give the versatility, size, weight and price of 28-200 and the 28-200 cant beat the background blur, bokeh, af speed and overall IQ of 70-180..!!
Yes, I agree and that was pretty much my conclusion as well ;)
@@Jason_Hermann for landscape photography stopped down on a tripod to f5.6 f8 or f11, at 135mm up to 180mm, which lens would give better image quality? Thanks
Looks like an A6400 with the eyepiece all the way over on the left like that
Amazing review. Thanks
Thanks for watching!