If you were traveling/hiking long distances, needed a light weight set up, something you can carry around all day handheld and have a diverse focal range starting at a wide 24mm (good for landscapes etc), check out the Nikon 24-120mm F4S. If you wanted a lens that you were going to be using both day and night, interior and exterior (food, flowers, people with nice bokeh) faster sport type action, events, weddings, with a little bit of extra zoom reach, consider the Tamron 35-150mm F2-2.8. You’ll also have the added convenience and cost efficiency of not having to change/buy lenses like primes or wider F stop zoom lenses with the Tamron. The Tamron is definitely a “one and done” lens for wedding and event photographers 📸🙏
This was an interesting comparison of two lenses that are more alike than I would have thought. To me, the Tamron is a sports, portrait, and low-light lens and the Nikon is a landscape and general walk-around lens. You have shown that they can each dip a little bit into the other's domain. I bought the Samyang 35-150 f/2-2.8 for Sony. It's usually only $1399US but B&H had it discounted to $1099US. It was a no-brainer! I'm using it on my APSC a6700 where it has a full frame equivalent field of view of 52.5-225mm! I used it for soccer (futball) photography and it did great! Thanks, Adrian!
I've been looking at making the Tamron 35-150mm my go-to lens. I do a lot of theater and low-light event photography, and use the Tamron f2.8 70-200mm for that, and it's become my go-to/walking around lens. I have the Nikon f4 24-120, but it's just not as good for low-light. Now I've upgraded to the Z9, and moving to the Tamron 35-150mm will actually give me a weight and lens length reduction from the f2.8, still cover all my theater and low light needs, while really opening up the wider angles for me. (And for even wider angle shots I'll either combine multiple photos at 35mm or carry my Sigma 24mm f1.4 art lens.) Your video really helped me make the decision, thank you!
I picked the 24-120mm because of price and less weight. Then I just got the 28-400mm and like that better. I am usually outdoors and love the All-in-One lens. Stabilized and the Quality is excellent. Bring either 14-30mm or the 24mm Prime. Cheers!
For about the same price as the Tamron 35-150mm you can pick up the Nikon 14-30mm f4 and the 24 - 120mm f4. Sure you lose a little of the aperture but gain a lot on the wide end and as far as losing the 30 mm on the high end.....well you can always crop "in" but you can't crop "out". I do like the versatility of the Tamron but the weight and price is a bit of a deterrent. Thanks for all these videos.
My two lens combo is 24-70 f/4 and 70-200 f/2.8. All round, hands down, the 24-120 is the best one lens to have. My preference is landscape so I really prefer what I use, use it in A backpack and if I had the Tamron I would still be using the backpack. The 70-200 is big, heavy, but the extra reach is helpful picking out distant detail, plus phenomenal sharpness, image stabilization and at 2.8 I have good bokeh when needed. The Tamron does team up very well with the 14-30, uses same filter size. My combo also use the same filter size. As always, it is about compromises and how you are willing to compromise. Excellent video.
Totally agree - the Tamron is great for weddings and not having to constantly change lenses and not miss those important moments. Thanks for watching, have an amazing weekend 🙏
@@cpr1087 Great, it gives me more confidence to make the decision to buy this as my do it all lens, portrait, stills and events which becomes a bigger thing in my assignments. Thank you! Enjoy shooting!
Both look fantastic, but as someone who is considering going back to Nikon(ZF) I think for me it would be the Nikon lens, I want to down size and make thinks easier so this one lens could cover most situations for me, although I would probably buy a longer focal length lens too. Thanks for sharing.
Hi Adrian I guess Tamron would be my pick although focal length 35mm is not as wide as Nikon 24mm which is a great lens. I would prefer to have that F2-2.8 and a longer reach, it would make it an all day and night lens. Great review my friend. Have a great week ahead 📸🙏🏼👏
I have recently acquired the 24-120 and I am extremely happy with it as a walk around all day lens. I also have the "cheap" trinity from Nikon if I need the 2.8. I traded in my Z40mm and my afs 20 and 85mm lenses once I got these lenses. I am just an enthusiast and shoot a variety of photos. Everything from Nightscapes to outdoor portraits.
The Nikon 24-120 all the way, like you I have had it for about 18 months and find it superb, sharpness and weight are just perfect. The Tamron is a lovely lens but double the weight and 35mm at the wide end dont make for the best Landscape walk around lens.
Thanks for this great comparison. I have the Nikon Z 24-120mm for my Z8 and love it. Great walk around lens. But I also shoot live theater and church programs. I previously use a 70-200mm f2.8 which was fabulous except for the wide shots. I hate changing lenses mid-performance to get wider shots. This month I decided to exclusively use my 24-120mm for a program. Use was wonderful, except I missed the f2.8 and felt i needed more than f4. After your review, I’m considering getting the Tamron 35-150mm for live performances but keeping the 24-120mm for general walkabouts. The Tamron would give me a little more range on the long end and the wider open f stop for the live performance. I may rent one to see how it works out before I decided. Thanks again.
The Nikkor 24-200 isn't f4 throughout the zoom range though. It's f4-f6.3 and it rapidly drops off when zooming in. On the other hand, in contrast to both the Tamron 35-150 and the Nikkor 24-120, the 24-200 does have VR which comes in handy especially on the long end.
I’m waiting on delivery of the Nikon 24-120f4 today. For a walkabout lens mostly in urban areas it seems like the most sensible option. I’ve always shot 2.8’s in the past but the Z lenses are considerably sharper and brighter even at f4, and for the money saved I can afford to add other lenses to my kit.
It would be good to see full body portraits at 120 f/4 vs 150 2.8. And landscape at 150. (I enjoy telephoto land/cityscapes). I think there is a case for having both. 24-120 for outside and deeper apertures. And 35-150 for events and people (I’m a wedding shooter).
I've used my 24-120 f4 for a couple of years. So often I wanted a faster lens, but I really don't want to hump the extra weight. I'm thinking that the 35-150 would be great for a wedding or events. I just added a 20mm Viltrox for getting faster and wider, and it is light and cheap.
Nice review…good insights on their pros and cons. For me, the Nikon 24-120 is my ‘One and Done’ option. I prefer that range and lighter weight is a big factor.
Thank you for a detailed comparison, I think I'll keep my 24-120 for the lighter weight and the 24 mm wide end. It's really a great one and done travel lens and really sharp. Maybe I'll complement it with some faster prime lens for the shallow depth of field and night time shooting later on.
As a relative beginner amateur on a budget, I have the 24-120 f4 and the 40 f2, which certainly isn't the most excellent prime available, but it gives me option to shoot available light indoors and I like the natural appearance of the 40 mm focal length. To me, it's pretty much the perfect combo and it doesn't break the bank or the shoulder.
The 24-120mm has been my go to travel lens now since I got it late last year. I'll get the 35-150mm just in time for a long trip to the pacific northwest. Shoot fit in my zoom slot easily for the backpack or Pelican. Excited to give it an extended try in the field. The 14-30mm, 24-120mm and 100-400mm have pretty much been my travel bag now since last December and have served me well. The trinity doesn't get the same action they used to.
Just as a supplement to Adrian’s excellent comparison. There is a Tamron F2.8-4 version of the 35-150 released in 2019 for about half the price of the F2-2.8. So if viewers want the range, let’s face it, it is excellent, but without the cost and the carry weight of a F2-2.8 then that might be a viable option. For Nikon users, I think it only comes in F mount so maybe a detraction for some but for those lucky enough to have the D750/850/780 then it’s not a problem. Great travel,shots Adrian! Cheers
Have Nikon Z8 bought the 24-120mm f 4. Top to walk around. Sharp landscape lens. I programed the video button to DX mode. Now I have 180mm when I need unexpected. Also, I have a Tamron F mount 15-30mm f 2,8 with a 150mm filter holder. A heck of weight. Will change to 14-30mm Nikon or 14-24 mm. After I carry only one filter system with me. Always with me a Nikon 20mm f 1,8 super light. 90% is landscape. 20% wildlife. With the Tamron 35-180mm is useless for wildlife anyway. Not wide enough for landscape. Why I have to buy this super heavy lens? I still have about 8 more lenses, and I take the right one for what I need. When Tamron would have a 20-150 mm even only on f 4, I would buy. For me the Tamron 35-180 mm is useless. Will invest the money in a 14-24 mm Nikon lens.
Hello Adrian: I have the Nikon Z 24-120 mm f4 and the older version of the TAMRON 35-150 mm f2.8-4 for my F mount bodies and I can use it on my Z9 with my FTZ II adapter. I was actually rather shocked that the newer Z version of this lens costs 2.5 X the older version and if I'm not mistaken, that price point makes this newer version one of the most expensive if not the most expensive TAMRON lens ever. It makes me wonder if the performance and utility justifies the price. As always, an outstanding review, especially for comparative use purposes.
I just switch last month to Nikon Z8 and chose the Tamaron over the slower Nikkor 24-120. The S line for a kit discount was tempting but too slow for weddings and events. I also got the 14-24 2.8 S to compliment it! Both are awesome lenses!
Thank you Adrian for another good video comparison. For me it is hard to argue the value of the Nikon lens in this case. Half the price, half the weight for only one stop. I tend to shoot in my lens in its widest setting and the difference between 120 and 150 is very little, nothing a little cropping can't handle. If and when I go mirrorless, the 24-120 will be the lens for me. Again, thank you for doing the comparison.
As a parade, low light events, dance photographer I´m mostly shooting between 2.8 and 1.8. The Tarmon would be the one to go. Also I`m awaiting for the Z35mm 1.2 which will complete trio with Z 14-24 2.8S and Z 70-200 2.8. I think I will need a third camera 🥲
The long-end bokeh comparison (IMO) clearly gives it to the Nikon in your example, but I wonder what the images look like in non-closeup situations... like 3 meters of subject distance, for example. I think that for head / upper body portraits one would already be that far away when shooting at the tele end. Anyway, the 35-150 is just punishingly heavy for my puny arms - and while it would be great to use the same 82mm filter for my Tamron 150-500 and this Tamron, I think that for the foreseeable future I'm going to be OK with the Nikon 17-28 , Nikon 24-120 , Tamron 150-500 budget trinity and a couple of different sized filters. (And the 40 f2 as a small street / casual walkaround option for when size and weight are really crucial.) Don't get me wrong - the 35-150 is a superb piece of glass, a marvel of optical engineering. It just happens to really shine in very specific situations, and the downsides of it make me not want to splurge out on it. As a one-and-done, the 24-120 simply makes more sense to me.
Hi Adrian, great lens comparison, buddy! Interesting, my first thought went also more to the 24-120mm lens, as I find that the range is quite interesting. But combined with the 14-30mm the Tamron 35-150mm sounds indeed like a good setup for traveling the world. Thank you for the video and enjoy your weekend, Christian
Thanks for watching Christian. Both lenses are very good. The 24-120mm is better for landscapes and the Tamron better for low light, event and wedding photographers. I didi use the Tamron for landscape but it seemed a bit of overkill for what that lens can do. Have a great weekend buddy cheers 🙏
Thank you very much for this review. I really appreciate it and enlightened my doubts about this two lenses. The Tamron goes very well with a wide lens, the Nikon might need a Telephoto lens and other for night shots… Or if you don’t want to change lenses and have a lighter camera, you can use the nikon z dx 12-28mm. Once again, thanks for your review.
Thanks for this. When I upgrade to the Z-system I'll get the 24-120. Based on my needs it's the better option due to it being wider, lighter and less expensive.
For a one lens only I'd go with the Nikon 24-120 (or 24-200 even) - The Tamron is just too heavy and too narrow as a one lens solution; though I'm looking to add it to my lineup down the road, as I need a fast option to compliment my 24-200, for that the Tamron is perfect and just the kind of lens I hoped to see coming to Z-mount!
Great comparison, i already own the 24-120 so that range is redundant for me especially since i already have primes including the 105mm macro. If i didnt already own lenses though this would be a good all rounder, but for a longer range with lighter weight the 70-180mm 2.8 would be a better option for me if i need the extra length on a trip.
I had the Nikkor 24-70 f4 and recently traded it in for a 24-120. I did consider getting the 70-180 (and keeping the 24-70) instead, but the "Nikon" (really Tamron) 70-180 doesn't have VR, while the newer version which was recently released for Sony E *does* have it. So I went with the 24-120 instead and I'm very very happy with that lens and I got it at a massive bargain.
@@CC3GROUNDZERO you can't go wrong with the 24-120mm best in class. I ordered the 70-180mm and cancelled it after making a similar decision. Still the only option for a compact wide tele zoom though. I may order it again at some point, but right now I am having more fun exploring manual focus lenses again. Voigtlander has put out some awesome lenses for Z mount that is going to be my new travel system with the ZF soon as I get my ZF in next week.
A Nikon 14-30 with the tamron 35-150 is a killer combo for sure. The 35-150 replaces sonmany lenses. The 24-120 is grt for travel sure but when it comes to versatility the tamron is better. For things like capturing any occasions or concerts of your children the tamron wins hand down.
Great run down and samples of the differences. Both seem like amazing lenses. It all comes down to what you need it for I guess. Loved the travel pics too.
This was an excellent breakdown. I have the older 35-150, and have been pining for the new one, but.....man, that 24-120 is actually really pleasant. Hm
the 24-120 is already quite big for reportage, so the 35-150 is monstrous in comparison. But above all, a trans-standard zoom starting at 35mm isn't really universal. It's a special lens, but for reportage, the wide-angle must be really lacking. Strange optic who might find a market?
Great review. They seem to me to have different uses, indoors or landscape. Even as a travel lens, the choice seems to be if you need a wider view or reach. Good point about combining the Tamron with the 14-30.
Cheers for the review i got one of those shoulder straps a while back, i snapped the bolt in half, screwing it into the bottom of the camera, fingers only so be careful
Awesome comparison vid man! I like the way you gave ideas for lenses to accompany the Tamron. Brilliant! Those travel shots of yours are incredible. How in the world did you get a shot of St Marks Square empty of tourists? Bravo!
Adrian thank you for posting this! I'm planning to purchase one of these two lenses in the next month or so. I am very appreciative you created this comparison! New sub!
These both look great lenses Adrian but I think for travel i would go with the Nikon. Looks a fantastic lens in a really small package. Great review mate👍
Thanks Scott. Yes the Nikon for travel is definitely a go. The Tamron is an exceptional one and done lens for event, wedding and portrait photographers though. Have a great weekend mate cheers 🍻 👍🙏
The big price of the tamron isn't great for most people compared to the nikon's but i think it would be another story if we get the samyang 35-150 F2-2.8 since it's nearly as good as the tamron, just a little heavier, for like 30% cheaper. I mean... 1299€ for the nikon vs 1349€ for the samyang... now we are talking :) I'd probably still go for the nikon for the lower weight and size + the better " macro " shots you wan get with it but for all those who absolutly wants better bokeh and low light the samyang would be pretty interresting too !
Very good vid. I have the Nikon 24-120 F4S on a Z6 II and very happy with it but always checking on what is around. This kit is my upper weight and size limits so Tamron is not for me. I am predominately Street and this plus a spare battery are ''it''.Cheers.
Great review as always, but I don't know why these two lenses are always compared against each other. They really are for different uses and price brackets?
Hi. I have 2 questions.. 1) Which one would be the best for portrait photography..?? 2) in tamron lens can we set and have the constant aperture e.g., f/4 throughout 35mm to 135mm (to use in videography)..??
Hi Adrian. I will by the nikon z6ii with 24-120f4 but interesting about Tamron 35-150 2.8 I will use this lens take photos human models. Most I take photos more natural lights without flash. So what do you advise for me to buy? 😊
Just got my 35-150 today. Can’t connect to lens software. Did you have problems? Did you customize your button? Thanks. Will have to wait til Monday to call Tamron. As far as travel. Definitely take my Nikon. Bought the Tamron for indoor sports.
Thanks for watching. It's a bit too hard to know exactly what's going on without actually being there in person. I customized the button inside the camera to do what I needed it to do, so did not have to connect to internet. Best thing to do is chat to Tamron support and they should be able to sort it for you.
Great comparison mate. The Nikon is amazing too imo at that price even if it’s not as versatile as the Tamron. It’s pretty compact & the image quality is really good! 👍👍
Totally agree mate. They’re both good. Just boils down to what you need the lens for. Weddings, events = Tamron. Travel, hiking = Nikon. Have a great weekend Peter 🙏
Thanks Adrian - that was helpful. I think the type of photography I do, I'd be going for the Nikon one. I'll certainly keep that in mind for the time when I might switch across to a Nikon system. I keep looking . . . . .. one day maybe.
If you were traveling/hiking long distances, needed a light weight set up, something you can carry around all day handheld and have a diverse focal range starting at a wide 24mm (good for landscapes etc), check out the Nikon 24-120mm F4S. If you wanted a lens that you were going to be using both day and night, interior and exterior (food, flowers, people with nice bokeh) faster sport type action, events, weddings, with a little bit of extra zoom reach, consider the Tamron 35-150mm F2-2.8. You’ll also have the added convenience and cost efficiency of not having to change/buy lenses like primes or wider F stop zoom lenses with the Tamron. The Tamron is definitely a “one and done” lens for wedding and event photographers 📸🙏
This was an interesting comparison of two lenses that are more alike than I would have thought. To me, the Tamron is a sports, portrait, and low-light lens and the Nikon is a landscape and general walk-around lens. You have shown that they can each dip a little bit into the other's domain. I bought the Samyang 35-150 f/2-2.8 for Sony. It's usually only $1399US but B&H had it discounted to $1099US. It was a no-brainer! I'm using it on my APSC a6700 where it has a full frame equivalent field of view of 52.5-225mm! I used it for soccer (futball) photography and it did great! Thanks, Adrian!
Cheers Phil, they are both great lenses and it was hard to do this video. Have a great weekend buddy 🙏
I've been looking at making the Tamron 35-150mm my go-to lens. I do a lot of theater and low-light event photography, and use the Tamron f2.8 70-200mm for that, and it's become my go-to/walking around lens. I have the Nikon f4 24-120, but it's just not as good for low-light. Now I've upgraded to the Z9, and moving to the Tamron 35-150mm will actually give me a weight and lens length reduction from the f2.8, still cover all my theater and low light needs, while really opening up the wider angles for me. (And for even wider angle shots I'll either combine multiple photos at 35mm or carry my Sigma 24mm f1.4 art lens.) Your video really helped me make the decision, thank you!
I picked the 24-120mm because of price and less weight. Then I just got the 28-400mm and like that better. I am usually outdoors and love the All-in-One lens. Stabilized and the Quality is excellent. Bring either 14-30mm or the 24mm Prime. Cheers!
For about the same price as the Tamron 35-150mm you can pick up the Nikon 14-30mm f4 and the 24 - 120mm f4. Sure you lose a little of the aperture but gain a lot on the wide end and as far as losing the 30 mm on the high end.....well you can always crop "in" but you can't crop "out". I do like the versatility of the Tamron but the weight and price is a bit of a deterrent. Thanks for all these videos.
Thanks for watching Tony. Have a great weekend cheers 🙏
I have the Tamron lens and it's my go to for shooting weddings and fashion shows. It works great one lens to cover everything.
My two lens combo is 24-70 f/4 and 70-200 f/2.8. All round, hands down, the 24-120 is the best one lens to have. My preference is landscape so I really prefer what I use, use it in A backpack and if I had the Tamron I would still be using the backpack. The 70-200 is big, heavy, but the extra reach is helpful picking out distant detail, plus phenomenal sharpness, image stabilization and at 2.8 I have good bokeh when needed.
The Tamron does team up very well with the 14-30, uses same filter size. My combo also use the same filter size.
As always, it is about compromises and how you are willing to compromise. Excellent video.
for me as a wedding photographer that f2-2.8 helps me a lot. 35mm seems to me the widest focal length that does not create distortions
Totally agree - the Tamron is great for weddings and not having to constantly change lenses and not miss those important moments. Thanks for watching, have an amazing weekend 🙏
@@cpr1087 How good isvthe af speed of 35-150 for fast moving subjects, like dancer?
@@WE_reviews The auto focus is fast enough to photograph people dancing.
@@cpr1087 Great, it gives me more confidence to make the decision to buy this as my do it all lens, portrait, stills and events which becomes a bigger thing in my assignments. Thank you! Enjoy shooting!
Both look fantastic, but as someone who is considering going back to Nikon(ZF) I think for me it would be the Nikon lens, I want to down size and make thinks easier so this one lens could cover most situations for me, although I would probably buy a longer focal length lens too. Thanks for sharing.
Thanks so much for watching John. Have a great weekend mate cheers 🍻 🙏
Hi Adrian I guess Tamron would be my pick although focal length 35mm is not as wide as Nikon 24mm which is a great lens. I would prefer to have that F2-2.8 and a longer reach, it would make it an all day and night lens. Great review my friend. Have a great week ahead 📸🙏🏼👏
Thanks so much for watching my friend. Have a great day ahead. Cheers 🙏📸
If you don't shoot landscape at all, the answer seems pretty clear. What a beauty Tamron has constructed
Thanks for watching. Yes can vouch the Tamron really is a great lens. Perfect for wedding and event photographers. Have a great weekend cheers 🙏
I have recently acquired the 24-120 and I am extremely happy with it as a walk around all day lens. I also have the "cheap" trinity from Nikon if I need the 2.8. I traded in my Z40mm and my afs 20 and 85mm lenses once I got these lenses. I am just an enthusiast and shoot a variety of photos. Everything from Nightscapes to outdoor portraits.
The Nikon 24-120 all the way, like you I have had it for about 18 months and find it superb, sharpness and weight are just perfect.
The Tamron is a lovely lens but double the weight and 35mm at the wide end dont make for the best Landscape walk around lens.
Thanks for this great comparison. I have the Nikon Z 24-120mm for my Z8 and love it. Great walk around lens. But I also shoot live theater and church programs. I previously use a 70-200mm f2.8 which was fabulous except for the wide shots. I hate changing lenses mid-performance to get wider shots. This month I decided to exclusively use my 24-120mm for a program. Use was wonderful, except I missed the f2.8 and felt i needed more than f4. After your review, I’m considering getting the Tamron 35-150mm for live performances but keeping the 24-120mm for general walkabouts. The Tamron would give me a little more range on the long end and the wider open f stop for the live performance. I may rent one to see how it works out before I decided. Thanks again.
I just love how you approach these kinds of comparison videos. It is just fun to watch.
Thank you for watching David, much appreciated. Have a great weekend over there, cheers 🍻 🙏
Good comparison of these two, but another versatile contender for landscape and travel is 24-200 f4. I love the images I get from it.
Many thanks for watching. Have an awesome weekend cheers 🍻
The Nikkor 24-200 isn't f4 throughout the zoom range though. It's f4-f6.3 and it rapidly drops off when zooming in. On the other hand, in contrast to both the Tamron 35-150 and the Nikkor 24-120, the 24-200 does have VR which comes in handy especially on the long end.
I’m waiting on delivery of the Nikon 24-120f4 today. For a walkabout lens mostly in urban areas it seems like the most sensible option. I’ve always shot 2.8’s in the past but the Z lenses are considerably sharper and brighter even at f4, and for the money saved I can afford to add other lenses to my kit.
It would be good to see full body portraits at 120 f/4 vs 150 2.8. And landscape at 150. (I enjoy telephoto land/cityscapes). I think there is a case for having both. 24-120 for outside and deeper apertures. And 35-150 for events and people (I’m a wedding shooter).
Thanks for watching, cheers 🙏
I've used my 24-120 f4 for a couple of years. So often I wanted a faster lens, but I really don't want to hump the extra weight. I'm thinking that the 35-150 would be great for a wedding or events. I just added a 20mm Viltrox for getting faster and wider, and it is light and cheap.
Nice review…good insights on their pros and cons. For me, the Nikon 24-120 is my ‘One and Done’ option. I prefer that range and lighter weight is a big factor.
Many thanks for watching, cheers 🙏
Thank you for a detailed comparison, I think I'll keep my 24-120 for the lighter weight and the 24 mm wide end. It's really a great one and done travel lens and really sharp. Maybe I'll complement it with some faster prime lens for the shallow depth of field and night time shooting later on.
Thanks so much for watching and commenting. Really appreciated. Have a fantastic weekend 🙏📸
As a relative beginner amateur on a budget, I have the 24-120 f4 and the 40 f2, which certainly isn't the most excellent prime available, but it gives me option to shoot available light indoors and I like the natural appearance of the 40 mm focal length. To me, it's pretty much the perfect combo and it doesn't break the bank or the shoulder.
The 24-120mm has been my go to travel lens now since I got it late last year. I'll get the 35-150mm just in time for a long trip to the pacific northwest. Shoot fit in my zoom slot easily for the backpack or Pelican. Excited to give it an extended try in the field. The 14-30mm, 24-120mm and 100-400mm have pretty much been my travel bag now since last December and have served me well. The trinity doesn't get the same action they used to.
Cheers Dave thank you so much for watching. The Nikon is a great travel lens for sure. Enjoy your weekend 🙏
Great comparison between the two lenis Adrian. I do like the Tampon lens more. Many thanks for sharing the info and examples. Have a great weekend
Thanks for watching Shaun. Glad you enjoyed the video mate. Have a great weekend cheers 🍻 🙏
Just as a supplement to Adrian’s excellent comparison. There is a Tamron F2.8-4 version of the 35-150 released in 2019 for about half the price of the F2-2.8. So if viewers want the range, let’s face it, it is excellent, but without the cost and the carry weight of a F2-2.8 then that might be a viable option. For Nikon users, I think it only comes in F mount so maybe a detraction for some but for those lucky enough to have the D750/850/780 then it’s not a problem. Great travel,shots Adrian! Cheers
I am pleased Nikon did there 24-120mm F Mount lens in the Z Mount. I am also glad that the Tamron 35-150mm F2-F2.8 is on the Z Mount i would buy both
Me too. Thanks for watching much appreciated 🙏
Have Nikon Z8 bought the 24-120mm f 4. Top to walk around. Sharp landscape lens. I programed the video button to DX mode. Now I have 180mm when I need unexpected. Also, I have a Tamron F mount 15-30mm f 2,8 with a 150mm filter holder. A heck of weight. Will change to 14-30mm Nikon or 14-24 mm. After I carry only one filter system with me. Always with me a Nikon 20mm f 1,8 super light. 90% is landscape. 20% wildlife. With the Tamron 35-180mm is useless for wildlife anyway. Not wide enough for landscape. Why I have to buy this super heavy lens? I still have about 8 more lenses, and I take the right one for what I need. When Tamron would have a 20-150 mm even only on f 4, I would buy. For me the Tamron 35-180 mm is useless. Will invest the money in a 14-24 mm Nikon lens.
Thanks for watching and commenting. Cheers 🙏
Hello Adrian: I have the Nikon Z 24-120 mm f4 and the older version of the TAMRON 35-150 mm f2.8-4 for my F mount bodies and I can use it on my Z9 with my FTZ II adapter. I was actually rather shocked that the newer Z version of this lens costs 2.5 X the older version and if I'm not mistaken, that price point makes this newer version one of the most expensive if not the most expensive TAMRON lens ever. It makes me wonder if the performance and utility justifies the price.
As always, an outstanding review, especially for comparative use purposes.
Many thanks for watching 🙏
I just switch last month to Nikon Z8 and chose the Tamaron over the slower Nikkor 24-120. The S line for a kit discount was tempting but too slow for weddings and events. I also got the 14-24 2.8 S to compliment it! Both are awesome lenses!
@@keithspurlock4732 perfect combo 👍
Thank you Adrian for another good video comparison. For me it is hard to argue the value of the Nikon lens in this case. Half the price, half the weight for only one stop. I tend to shoot in my lens in its widest setting and the difference between 120 and 150 is very little, nothing a little cropping can't handle. If and when I go mirrorless, the 24-120 will be the lens for me. Again, thank you for doing the comparison.
Glad I could help out and happy you enjoyed the video. Yes, I think the Nikon would suit you a bit better. Have an awesome weekend, cheers 🙏
As a parade, low light events, dance photographer I´m mostly shooting between 2.8 and 1.8. The Tarmon would be the one to go. Also I`m awaiting for the Z35mm 1.2 which will complete trio with Z 14-24 2.8S and Z 70-200 2.8. I think I will need a third camera 🥲
I have both. Both are great. So I keep them.both
Yes, good call 🙏
I have the Tamron 35-150mm f2.8-4 EF version adapted to an R6 and I love it!
The long-end bokeh comparison (IMO) clearly gives it to the Nikon in your example, but I wonder what the images look like in non-closeup situations... like 3 meters of subject distance, for example. I think that for head / upper body portraits one would already be that far away when shooting at the tele end.
Anyway, the 35-150 is just punishingly heavy for my puny arms - and while it would be great to use the same 82mm filter for my Tamron 150-500 and this Tamron, I think that for the foreseeable future I'm going to be OK with the Nikon 17-28 , Nikon 24-120 , Tamron 150-500 budget trinity and a couple of different sized filters. (And the 40 f2 as a small street / casual walkaround option for when size and weight are really crucial.)
Don't get me wrong - the 35-150 is a superb piece of glass, a marvel of optical engineering. It just happens to really shine in very specific situations, and the downsides of it make me not want to splurge out on it. As a one-and-done, the 24-120 simply makes more sense to me.
love my results with my 24-120 nikkor lens, very sharp and great versatility. Agree fully with comments on the nikon lens.
I use both of the F4 lenses 14-30 and the 24-120mm Nikon Z. Very happy with the results...
For travel, I have a Nikon 24-70 f4 plus a macro 105 f2.8 and a sigma 16mm f1.4. I take an apsc nikon zfc. It works well
Hi Adrian, great lens comparison, buddy! Interesting, my first thought went also more to the 24-120mm lens, as I find that the range is quite interesting. But combined with the 14-30mm the Tamron 35-150mm sounds indeed like a good setup for traveling the world.
Thank you for the video and enjoy your weekend,
Christian
Thanks for watching Christian. Both lenses are very good. The 24-120mm is better for landscapes and the Tamron better for low light, event and wedding photographers. I didi use the Tamron for landscape but it seemed a bit of overkill for what that lens can do. Have a great weekend buddy cheers 🙏
Thank you very much for this review. I really appreciate it and enlightened my doubts about this two lenses. The Tamron goes very well with a wide lens, the Nikon might need a Telephoto lens and other for night shots… Or if you don’t want to change lenses and have a lighter camera, you can use the nikon z dx 12-28mm. Once again, thanks for your review.
Thank you very much for watching and glad you enjoyed the video. Have a great weekend, cheers 🙏
Thanks for this. When I upgrade to the Z-system I'll get the 24-120. Based on my needs it's the better option due to it being wider, lighter and less expensive.
For a one lens only I'd go with the Nikon 24-120 (or 24-200 even) - The Tamron is just too heavy and too narrow as a one lens solution; though I'm looking to add it to my lineup down the road, as I need a fast option to compliment my 24-200, for that the Tamron is perfect and just the kind of lens I hoped to see coming to Z-mount!
The Tamron is a nice fast lens with a very useful zoom range. However at twice the price of the Nikon f4 it is a tough sell for most non-pros.
Great comparison, i already own the 24-120 so that range is redundant for me especially since i already have primes including the 105mm macro. If i didnt already own lenses though this would be a good all rounder, but for a longer range with lighter weight the 70-180mm 2.8 would be a better option for me if i need the extra length on a trip.
I had the Nikkor 24-70 f4 and recently traded it in for a 24-120. I did consider getting the 70-180 (and keeping the 24-70) instead, but the "Nikon" (really Tamron) 70-180 doesn't have VR, while the newer version which was recently released for Sony E *does* have it. So I went with the 24-120 instead and I'm very very happy with that lens and I got it at a massive bargain.
@@CC3GROUNDZERO you can't go wrong with the 24-120mm best in class. I ordered the 70-180mm and cancelled it after making a similar decision. Still the only option for a compact wide tele zoom though. I may order it again at some point, but right now I am having more fun exploring manual focus lenses again. Voigtlander has put out some awesome lenses for Z mount that is going to be my new travel system with the ZF soon as I get my ZF in next week.
I don’t even shoot Nikon and watched this whole video 😂
Thanks so much for watching and commenting I really appreciate it 🙏
A Nikon 14-30 with the tamron 35-150 is a killer combo for sure. The 35-150 replaces sonmany lenses. The 24-120 is grt for travel sure but when it comes to versatility the tamron is better. For things like capturing any occasions or concerts of your children the tamron wins hand down.
Great run down and samples of the differences. Both seem like amazing lenses. It all comes down to what you need it for I guess. Loved the travel pics too.
Thanks for watching. That’s pretty much it, “what you need it for.” Have a great weekend 🙏
My killer combo is the Tamron 35-150 and Tamron 17-35mm lenses on my F mount Nikon camera. I went from from the holy trinity lenses to my dynamic duo.
Nice 👍
This was an excellent breakdown. I have the older 35-150, and have been pining for the new one, but.....man, that 24-120 is actually really pleasant.
Hm
Thanks so much for watching 🙏
the 24-120 is already quite big for reportage, so the 35-150 is monstrous in comparison. But above all, a trans-standard zoom starting at 35mm isn't really universal. It's a special lens, but for reportage, the wide-angle must be really lacking. Strange optic who might find a market?
Great review. They seem to me to have different uses, indoors or landscape. Even as a travel lens, the choice seems to be if you need a wider view or reach. Good point about combining the Tamron with the 14-30.
Thanks for watching 🙏
Adrian, great video and great information. For my type of photography, I would choose Nikon 24-120mm.
Cheers for the review i got one of those shoulder straps a while back, i snapped the bolt in half, screwing it into the bottom of the camera, fingers only so be careful
Great comparison and advice. As I shoot mainly sports, I would be moving towards the Tamron for the wider shots and its f/2-2.8.
Totally agree there. The Tamron would be better for sports, especially indoor sports. Thanks for watching and commenting 🙏
Awesome comparison vid man! I like the way you gave ideas for lenses to accompany the Tamron. Brilliant! Those travel shots of yours are incredible. How in the world did you get a shot of St Marks Square empty of tourists? Bravo!
Haha! I always get up at 4am while everyone is still asleep for those type shots in Venice. Thanks for watching mate cheers 🙏
Very cool @@adrianalfordphotography
Adrian thank you for posting this! I'm planning to purchase one of these two lenses in the next month or so. I am very appreciative you created this comparison! New sub!
Thanks for watching and subbing 🙏
These both look great lenses Adrian but I think for travel i would go with the Nikon. Looks a fantastic lens in a really small package. Great review mate👍
Thanks Scott. Yes the Nikon for travel is definitely a go. The Tamron is an exceptional one and done lens for event, wedding and portrait photographers though. Have a great weekend mate cheers 🍻 👍🙏
The big price of the tamron isn't great for most people compared to the nikon's but i think it would be another story if we get the samyang 35-150 F2-2.8 since it's nearly as good as the tamron, just a little heavier, for like 30% cheaper.
I mean... 1299€ for the nikon vs 1349€ for the samyang... now we are talking :)
I'd probably still go for the nikon for the lower weight and size + the better " macro " shots you wan get with it but for all those who absolutly wants better bokeh and low light the samyang would be pretty interresting too !
Very good vid. I have the Nikon 24-120 F4S on a Z6 II and very happy with it but always checking on what is around. This kit is my upper weight and size limits so Tamron is not for me. I am predominately Street and this plus a spare battery are ''it''.Cheers.
Great review as always, but I don't know why these two lenses are always compared against each other. They really are for different uses and price brackets?
Thanks for watching. I did the comparison as a lot of people/subscribers asked for it.
Another Brilliant Video, Very Helpful And Informative. Many Thanks For Sharing Your Thought's And Knowledge.
Wow, that Nikon @ 120mm minimum focus distance looks so good.
the Nikon and then you go by an awesome prime to pair with it
35mm isn’t wide enough. Often for group photographs need to be just at 24mm.
Both are excellent lenses
I own the Tamron 24-70 F2.8 G2 and Nikon Z 24-120 F4 and wonder if I should keep the Tamron.
That's up to you to decide. I know it's a hard decision.
Love my Nikon 24-120 f4 lens
Hi. I have 2 questions..
1) Which one would be the best for portrait photography..??
2) in tamron lens can we set and have the constant aperture e.g., f/4 throughout 35mm to 135mm (to use in videography)..??
Answers to: 1 - Tamron & 2 - Yes
@@adrianalfordphotography thank you.. 👍🏻
Hi Adrian. I will by the nikon z6ii with 24-120f4 but interesting about Tamron 35-150 2.8 I will use this lens take photos human models. Most I take photos more natural lights without flash. So what do you advise for me to buy? 😊
The Tamron lens is better for portrait photography in natural light 🙏
@@adrianalfordphotography thanks 😊
Just got my 35-150 today. Can’t connect to lens software. Did you have problems? Did you customize your button? Thanks. Will have to wait til Monday to call Tamron. As far as travel. Definitely take my Nikon. Bought the Tamron for indoor sports.
Thanks for watching. It's a bit too hard to know exactly what's going on without actually being there in person. I customized the button inside the camera to do what I needed it to do, so did not have to connect to internet. Best thing to do is chat to Tamron support and they should be able to sort it for you.
How about 14-30, 70-180 f2.8 plus 2X tele converter for your situation then?
😂😂😂 teleconverters! The perfect way to downgrade the image quality from your lenses. I have no “situation” this is a lens comparison video, simple.
Great comparison mate. The Nikon is amazing too imo at that price even if it’s not as versatile as the Tamron. It’s pretty compact & the image quality is really good! 👍👍
Totally agree mate. They’re both good. Just boils down to what you need the lens for. Weddings, events = Tamron. Travel, hiking = Nikon. Have a great weekend Peter 🙏
What lens would you buy if you already had the Nikon z 14-30 f/4 lens?
It would depend on the type of photography I planned to do. Travel and landscape = Nikon. Event, low light, sport. potrait, weddings = Tamron
Thanks Adrian - that was helpful. I think the type of photography I do, I'd be going for the Nikon one. I'll certainly keep that in mind for the time when I might switch across to a Nikon system. I keep looking . . . . .. one day maybe.
Thank you very much Denise. Yes I think with the photography you do the Nikon would be more than enough. Have a great weekend, cheers 🙏
amazing video!!!
35 mm is not wide enough for a general purpose lens. And I don't understand the obsession with blurry images. So it would be the Nikon for me.
Thanks for watching, cheers 🙏
Why wouldn’t Tamron do a 24-105 or 24-120mm f2.8???
Why are you asking me? Shouldn’t you be asking Tamron thr manufacturer?
@@adrianalfordphotography Just asking in general.
I’d rather pair the 35-150 with the 20mm 1.8 Z
Yeah I did mention that 6:41
@@adrianalfordphotography Literally 2 seconds before I posted my comment 😆
I shoot sports, so it’s the Tamron for me
In Latin to English ,
Plena = Full
Does Nikon mean … Full of specs ?
🤔
I'm sorry I have no idea what you're talking about? This video is on the Tamron 35-150 vs Nikon 24-120mm.