I'm flabbergasted by the optical performance of this super zoom lens and will strongly consider purchasing it. Tamron has magically found the sweet spot with the latest round of zoom lens offerings. Well done as always Dustin Abbott, thank you for your dedication to lens review excellence.
Thanks, Carl. I too was completely surprised by the performance. I had hoped that it would be something like the 35-150mm, and, other than the bokeh not being quite as nice, that's the case.
@@bioliv1 not much of an issue up to 105 mm if you have a body with built in IBIS. For landscape most serious shooters would use a tripod anyway. And you gain a full stop in the wide end which makes this lens quite useful for indoor shooting and moderate low light as well.
Ive seen some Asian guy comparing them, didnt understand a word but there were plain examples - from what I've seen this Tamron is the same as 24-105 in like 2/3 of the frame counting from center, but loses when it comes to corner sharpness.
Wow man what a review, must take a lot of prep work to get your notes sorted, along with sample images & with sample comparisons from other lens too. Thank you Mr Abbott, Lens is now on my wish list!
21:00 Wow hahaha that's absolutely crazy. Loving the cat shot at 27:00. Amazing lens from Tamron, at first I wasn't a big fan of the decision to start at 28mm instead of 24, but looking at the IQ and light gathering performance, I'd say it was the smart move. There's now a "duality" option too: 17-28 + 28-200.
Man those shots are enough to convince the strength in image quality. Super zoom are mostly known for being lightweight & compact with compromise in image quality. But damn this lens is performance is awesome.
Hi Dustin, I remember that I bought the Sony 24-240mm as my first lens after I switched to Sony, and then I read Dustin's review of it in which he absoluted hated that lens! After I read Dustin's review of the lens I sold it. This lens is the complete opposite in that he praises the performance of this lens. Thanks for reading. Mathew
Really impressive results & a great job by Tamron - love how they have been pushing optical quality of zoom lens' designs forward! A nice travel or beginners Zoom option , although I think for some - better bokeh & ca found in more traditional zoom lens' may be preferable. Awesome work as always Dustin
2.5 stops improvement on the IBIS is a little underwhelming, but Sony's calculated minimum shutter speeds only go down to 2 stops slower than the reciprocal rule (AFAIK, the "slower" setting), so it's actually a perfect match for that when shooting static subjects! And thanks for doing the testing to arrive at that number-it's incredibly useful to know.
Hi Jed, it has only been with these last two Tamron zooms that I've really noticed how that IBIS isn't as effective with telephoto lenses. Up to 135mm or so it works fine.
@@DustinAbbottTWI please don't change what you are doing! Your channel is one of the few sources on RUclips of camera reviews that are both comprehensive and unbiased.
Awesome review! I have the older A-mount version of the Tamron 28-200mm (A03) and I echo your review! It was so cheap, that I didn't expect it to perform as well as this lens does. This lens is honestly sharp!
Thank you very much for this great and really professional review! 🙏👍 Now I know that I did everything right by buying this new lens. By the way, I was very happy to see the old „Zehn Deutsche Mark“ bank note. Greetings from Germany! 🇩🇪 📸
Dustin, your reviews just keep redefining "definitive" - hah! You nail every key performance point balancing the results with users and applications. Thank you. I do notice one trait that keeps popping up with Canon reviews on R cameras/lenses especially and this is the only item I think you might add to future reviews - very few reviewers pick up on this color tilt but it makes me nuts. Your shots of the money, especially the blue bills, shows a pronounced red tint injection on Canon, even shifting yellow a little on the white paper vs the Tamron which leans towards a blue tint overall. I know it is hard to discern if it is the camera or lens but could you test this issue adapting the Canon lens to your Sony bodies to figure out who the culprit is here? I owned Canon over 30 years and every body/lens had the red bias which is flattering for most humans and sunsets but really creates problems on product photography with lots of blues/blacks. Thus my move to Sony for more color accuracy. I would love to see this in the future.
The RF 24-240 is a very bad performer for color accuracy. That was actually shot on a Canon EOS R, where typically I find the colors very good. I complained about the really warm colors in my review of the 24-240, and had to create a custom profile to get them reasonably good. I don't think Sony colors are more accurate overall, but certainly the Tamron is much more neutral than the RF lens.
This is a really fantastic review, Dustin. Thank you! I had the 24-240mm and it really disappointed me above 150mm. I had some coyote shots from a distance which were unusable ultimately because of how soft it was. So even if it has OSS there is no compensation for lack of sharpness.
Dear Dustin, Viewing your review for the first time. It is very clean, and impressive. Thank you very much, waiting for this type of review to make the purchase decision.
I can’t wait to see what Dustin thinks of the new Tamron 28-300mm F4-7.1 lens compared to the 28-200mm. If the performance is as good I am definitely switching to the new 28-300mm, which aside from the extended focal range has VC. IMO Dustin offers the best reviews out there.
Good that I didn't buy the 24-240mm Canon RF. Now I'll wait for this Tamron to be available for the RF and get this one instead. Thanks again for a great detailed review Mr. Dustin Abbott.
So far I haven't heard any noise from Tamron or Sigma about RF, but I certainly hope it will come. I would prefer this lens to the 24-240 RF, for sure.
Dear Dustin, Thank you very much for this great review we were patiently waiting for. In the review, you said that you use the 28-75 on a daily basis. Will you now switch with this 28-200? Did you make all the tests on your Sony A7R4 body?
I don't consider a 28-75 F2.8 and a 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 lenses competitors, personally. I would use them in two different ways. For video I prefer the wider aperture of the 28-75, as it gives me more options (and more pleasing bokeh). For travel I would definitely consider the 28-200mm. I don't actually own an a7RIV; I did the tests on an a7RIII.
This channel is the most informative, usefull and professional on Yt for photo gear, I really enjoy in every video. Keep it up with great work Dustin, 100k is just a first milestone.
Use the Tamron 28-200 with Sony A7RIV to replace my Canon 77D with Sigma 18-300 combo. The Canon/Sigma combo was much faster focuser (got many more in-focus shots). It takes careful focusing with the Tamron 28-200 to make sure I have it in focus before I shoot. Didn't have to do this with the Canon/Sigma combo. Will go back to Canon as soon as they may an APS-C 32 MP R camera.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Appreciate you comment. I am not a professional so may learn in the long run what I am doing wrong. Am liking the 28-200 a lot and will have to get good with it since I sold all Canon stuff to go Sony.
Thank you for another extremely detailed review, Dustin. As someone who mainly shoots travel and wildlife photography, I think this would make a great two lens combo with the Sony 200-600mm. The focal range you can cover with these two is phenomenal, and IQ of the Tamron here looks surprisingly good as you said!
Have been waiting for Dustin's opinion before deciding whether to get a copy. Suffice to say, Tamron is going to sell a lot of copies of this lens based on the strength of this very helpful review.
Wow! What an incredible review. You covered everything in as fine a detail as the lens resolves. Such a rapid pace to your delivery, there is no chance one's mind can wander yet it's still easy to absorb every detail. Whatever your intake of caffeine, I suggest keeping it right there. Great idea to include a few shots from your son. Gives a sense of how well it would work for the less expert photographer who is likely the specific target audience for this lens. The silence of the af is remarkable! I am not sure Tamron decided to make this lens a 28-200 to specifically avoid the compromises inherent in the Sony's greater range. This sort of range is typical for Tamron, in fact, more abbreviated than the 28-300 type lens they have previously made. I own the first version they made and it is so much weaker than this version I almost never use it. Some have said the lens is only suitable for beginners. You seem to think it may be good for a wider audience than that. True?
@@DustinAbbottTWI I have been looking for a hiking lens as well and this Tamron checks a lot of the boxes indeed. I used to use the 18-135mm on my SL2 APSC DSLR for hiking, but now with the RP and this lens, I basically keep the advantage of APSC compactness and light weight, but I get full frame and the F2.8 aperture on the wide end! Yes I lose IS or VC but its a good compromise that I'm willing to take.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Tamron having access to Sony's af info is such a boon for Sony. Even if and when Tamron figures out the reverse engineering, the lenses will function better on Sony. Sony also gets to have a wider range of lens offerings for a longer period of time keeping their solid lead. I should probably rent a 7iii and 28-75. Get my own hands on experience.
I purchased this Tamron lens and really appreciate the light weight and the versatility. Like the rich color and soft background. The only thing it misses is OSS at the 200mm end, it needs strong lighting to avoid slow speed/shaky hand. I also own 24-240 Sony, which is capable but bulky and heavy, so it’s not balanced to sit on A7C or APSC body. Then the reason to use such long zoom is usually for conscience specially during travel so size and weight matters. Anyhow, I like this Tamron and recommend it. I also purchased 17-28 Tamron, a great supplemental mate. These two lenses pus one 35mm f1.4 Sony are all I need to travel.
Hi Glenn, I'm afraid that it has been too long since I've reviewed the 24-105 to give an objective comparison (I've also changed my testing techniques), but I don't think that the Sony is any sharper. The Tamron is a pretty compelling alternative...and is nearly half the price.
A great comprehensive review, as always. Thanks. Lucky I got the 17-28 f2.8 as my first lens for A7III. These lenses will make such a good combo for travel and video. The 28-200 is basically a fujifilm 18-55 f2.8-f4 plus a telephoto zoom built into it. I mean, It retains F4 until 79mm. Last December when I got the A7III, I was a bit torn between whether to buy the 24-240 or go for the 17-28 and then get the 28-75. The 24-240 just happened to be not in stock at that time. Feeling so lucky 6 months down the line, else this video would have been a 1000 dollars of regret story !! :-)
Extremely useful comparing it with the Sony and to a lesser extent the Canon. The Covid outbreak has delayed my purchase of a new lens, luckily it turns out. Thanks for the detailed review and by the way love your lake.
Thank you for the comparison, not many people have done an in depth review on the SEL24240, and your review, by far, was the best one. I was new to photography a year ago and wish I knew back then about the Sony 24-240 when the camera shop had recommended it to me. I was disappointed after trying all types of shots, it was too late and I shelved it. I finally got to trade my Sony 24-240mm for a Tamron 28-75mm and the difference is just night and day. The Sony lens was just a very bland lens as you've shown. Tamron is just so worth it for the price and performance, there isn't a day I don't have it in my bag.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Not sure you need to. That lens is now several years old and there are performance reviews on DXO and other sites. You've done a great comparison here already. Better to just compare it to the Tamron 28-75 and 70-200 as others have requested. I'd like to see that too, though I am not interested in either of these two because of price and limited range. What I am really interested is how this 28-200 holds up. It seems like it will do okay, it won't beat them obviously, but should hold its own based on the image results you showed here.
I know it’s a diff type/class of lens (constant 2.8 standard vs super), but comparisons against the 28-75mm would be helpful too. Because they’re in the same price and size range.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yeah, much diff lenses... but, there are many people thinking about trading their current 28-75mm for the 28-200mm; or, deciding which to get, if they haven't got the 28-75mm already. I personally switched from the 28-75mm to the 28-200mm.
Dustin Abbott ...noticed a lot of people also wonder how the FE 24-105 f4 compares to it. Would be a great test: 28-200mm vs 28-75mm vs FE 24-105mm vs ...any other lenses many others may want to see compared, that I don’t know about.
I think for full frame cameras the Tamron 35-150mm f/2.8-4 VC is much better, especially as a travel lens. Yes, it's a bit shorter range but still plenty but an extra stop for even more bokeh and image stabilization makes it far more useful for travel considering that for such an activity, you not only need range, but a low aperture for low light and stabilization if there's VERY low light. IF ONLY Tamron re-released this lens for mirrorless camera, especially Z mount. I got an Olympus 12-100mm f/4 and I'm having second thoughts... but switching over would mean I'd have to pay a lot more for this setup than my Olympus.... and a lot of extra weight. Plus an the FTZ adapter.
Hi Dustin, great review. How does the image quality of this lens compare with the Tamron 70-180mm? I own the Tamron 28-75mm. Which one do you advise me to buy?
That really depends on what you want to do with the lens. To me this lens is not a replacement for a 70-180mm, which I use for events and portraits. I view the 28-200mm more as a travel option or all-in-one.
I bought the Sony A7Rll to use with old vintage lenses and small short focus lengths from Samyang (and Sony) which I do have. l never intended to buy myself a superzoom lens. Had a couple oldies 18-200 for aps-c, but those were not very sharp. But this one seems to shine as a travelling companion. I was going to buy the 28-75, but I about to change my mind. Thanks for a substansial, detailed review, Dustin. Which yours always are. You inspire me alot with reviews of «cheap» gear, though this is not cheap at all, for my pensioner wallet anyway. I bought my Samyang 45 (1,8) thanks to you, and just love that little lens.
Hi David, I will do a comparison video with those lenses, but I don't see this as a replacement for those...unless your photography never requires a faster maximum aperture.
Hi Dustin. I reallly like your reviews. Clear, trustfull en to the point. I keep struggling with a choice between the Tamrom 28-200 and the Sony 24-105. I like to shoot nature, animals in nature, portraits and all kind of events. I shoot almost always in good light conditions. If you, as a photographer with such a profile, have to choose between those lenses, witch one should you choose? And if picture quality is important? The price isn’t a big deal here in Belgium, with the current cashback on the Sony lenses the difference is more or less 200 dollar. Greetz. Geert
Ultimately I guess it comes down to whether you prefer the constant aperture to the additional zoom range. I’m traveling with the 28-200mm right now and continue to be impressed by how well it does as a travel/walk around lens.
In that case i go for the Tamron. If there is no difference in picture quality and the difference on 105mm is only 0,5 aperture, i choose the focal lenght. Thanks Dustin.
Would love to see a comparison between the Tamron 28-75 and this 28-200. Even though they are not direct competitors, I would be very interested to know if I can use this lens instead of a 28-85 + 200m prime for my hikes without sacrificing too much image quality on the wide end.
Hi Dustin, thanks very much for the review again. Love your detailed reviews. Just wondering though... is it just me, or does this lens actually seem better than even Tamron's individual lenses covering that range separately. Am very surprised by what I'm seeing, especially when compared to Sony's similarly ranged lense!!!
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you so much! Will have a quick look now! Just seems from this vid that it's certainly unexpectedly good. I'm almost tempted in getting it as an all in one, as I usually shoot with primes anyway, so will be a good compliment to the rest of the collection.
Question, hopefully you are still "available" After understanding your explanation, very technical and complete (btw, from my point of view) At this point I do not have a camera w a lens, Im still debating about what lens to buy and this seems to be a good option. My question: Aperture Mode on a Variable Zoom Lens What would be the result by setting Aperture Mode to F2.8 and zoom in? Does the lens specs overrule the camera setting? Is there a trick to do that? As you understand I am looking for to keep the maximum aperture along the zoom range. Thank you
hi dustin after all these tests what do you think is the best all in one zoom lens in this class for sony system? i mean something in the range of 20-300mm this type of range... 35-150 is too tight on the wide end i think
Dear sir what a wonderful review! Excellent! One question please, i am with the kit lens 28-70 in Sony A7iii, if I switch to this Tamron 28-200, you believe that i can see some improvement in sharpness? (except of course the obvious focal range)
Hi Dustin I just purchased the Tamron 28-200 after seeing your review. I have a first generation A7 and noticed that steady shot is not permitted on this lens. I’m wondering why and am concerned since image stabilization is in camera. Was this a bad purchase in my case. The handheld shots are not sharp and rather disappointing :( I love my A7 and don’t have the budget to upgrade my camera right now...HELP!!
I'm afraid I can't really help other than to recommend you reach out to Tamron. You're the first to mention this problem to me, so it may be that a firmware update could solve the problem.
Good review as always. Dustin do you do Nikon gear review? would be nice to see a comparison between the Tamron 28-200 Vs. the Nikon Z 24-200 F4-6.3 VR. The Nikon also received a lot of rave about its optical performance as well. I am not a fan of these type of super zoom, but based on what I saw from your review of this lens, it may not be a bad one for those " me too" travel snap shots.
Hi Dustin! I just got this lens! I was pretty impressed until I found out that at 200mm focal length for the long-range shot, the result was unacceptable for me. It seems like a blurry or fuzzy look. Do you have any problem with long-distance shots?
I was originally looking at the 70-180, but was holding off because of the shorter focal length and it was a good chunk of change. Then, this came out! Low light isn’t something l care about, and the bokeh seems great at every focal length. Possibly a better bang for your buck? I hope so!
I always enjoy Dustin's videos. They are informative. What if Tamron launches $500 24-105 f5.6 at size & weight of Sony 16-70 f4 Just being curious & being a little nerdy did some calculations about a FF vs APS-C of same resolution 24 MP. FF is 2.25 times brighter in ISO & 1.5 times in Aperture(f4 in APS-C is f6 in FF) . So if we assume this is true then an f5.6 or f6 zoom is enough for travel photos? But I maybe wrong. Just curious will people buy this: 15-30, 24-105, 100-400, 28-200 all at f/5.6, compact, lightweight affordable travel lens also 200-600 f/6.3
Nice review. This lens seems to push me over the top to consider Sony Fe system. The Tamron KFe lenses seem to really make an argument to go with Sony. This 28-200 may also be a reasonable replacement for the Canon RF 24-105 f4 IS. The Canon 24-240 is not a lens I would consider but the Tamron 28-200 looks like a possibility for me. I expect we will see a Tamron 200-500 Fe (new version) or some other type to go with the 28-200.
I agree on your point that Tamron (and, to a lesser extent, Sigma and Samyang) are making Sony a very attractive platform. And yes, I would love to see a 200-500 from them.
Hi dustin. What is your opinion about Tamron 35-150 2.8-4 VS This Tamron 28-200 2.8-5.6? Which one is a better landscape lens? My main concern is sharpness.
I haven't filmed in dark, dark conditions, but I have filmed with it a fair bit under normal conditions, and it works fine. Your only limitation would be the typical limitation when working with a smaller maximum aperture.
That really depends on what you plan to do with it. If you are going to shoot indoor events, the 70-180 is the better choice, but if you want a versatile travel lens, this is the way to go
Hi Dustin! Thanks for another great review, I have been waiting for this one. How would you compare the 28-200 vs the Tamron 28-75? Considering the good optical performance of the 28-200 and that is only f4 at 75 mm (I think) would I lose much more than one stop of light and a tiny bit of iq in that comparison? I currently own the Tamron 28-75 mm plus the Sony 70-200 f4 but since I am primarily a prime guy and don't use the latter lens much I am considering replacing both of them with the 28-200. That way I could afford the Samyang 75 mm as well :-)
Question for anyone here really. The only thing stopping me from buying this lens is the bokeh. In particular the onion bokeh Dustin talks about. My question is: Would a polarising filter work to cancel this effect out?
I know I kinda missed the mark on what letters mean what when it comes to crop sensor vs full frame, but is this a Full Frame lens that can work on a Crop Sensor body? Or is this a Crop Sensor lens that would need a Full Frame body to be put into crop sensor mode?
Dustin Abbott Thank you man, I always feel embarrassed never knowing if I’m looking at a full frame lens or an aps-c lens when it comes to third-party glass
Hey Dustin, really like your videos. You think this lens would be good for journalism photography. All around for protest, riots something even at lowlights. Correctly using the A7riv+24-70gmii. But I don't wanna risk this amazing lens it:)
At this price point it is fairly reasonable to have this lens AND the Tamron f2.8 trinity, is it not? I think it compliments rather than competes with the trinity, for day trips or casual outings this is the perfect one lens setup. Also I have OCD and must get the 70-180 to complete the f2.8 trinity lol, but really this is such a convenient and interesting lens not to have :D
It has a really, really warm tone to it. I had to create a custom color profile to get the colors neutral for real world use. One of the downsides of the lens.
Let me know your view for using this lense in a camera without an IBIS. I am looking for a zoom lense for my 6400. I am an amateur and need you suggestion for this Tamron piece while comparing with sony 24-240.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks. I found one more tele zoom lense which is Sony G 70-350. For 6400 without IBIS will it be a better choice comparing with Tamron?
Excellent review. Dustin, is it possible you have a poor copy of the Sony lens? I've seen some sharper results from this lens...at least in video. The problem with the Tamron is the lack of OIS and given how poor Sony IBIS tends to be, that OIS can become important. I'm more of a video shooter than a stills shooter.
I like new lenses from Tamron. But I do not like waiting for Sigma to have the full visibility on the available lenses (e.g. get Tamron 70-180 or wait for Sigma 70-200?) By the way, great review, as usual :-)
It has actually worked against Sigma to be the second to market with most of these lenses. I was happy for them to be first with the 100-400 DN, as I think a lot of people have bought Tamron before the Sigma options typically arrive.
Wow - I'm wondering should i sell my 70-200 f4 sony and get one of these? I was considering selling anyway (I bought used so won't lose too much money) and going for a tamron 70-180 f2.8, but maybe I don't REALLY need that fast speed on a telephoto...
I'm wondering how the new Tamron 28-200 compares to the 70-300 or 70-200 f4 at the focal lengths that they overlap. The 70-300 was never considered a super sharp lens. The 28-200 focal length is more useful to me than 70-300.
Hello. I have a sony 24-105 f4 lens and a tamron 28-200mm lens. I wanted to sell Tamron and buy Sony 70-200 f4 instead. Is it the right thing to do? Which one is sharper? Sony 70-200 f4 or Tamron 28-200.
I wonder if Sigma or Sony would/could ever come out with a non-budget super zoom--like a big , expensive lens that an event or news photographer could use for most of their shots? Could someone make a professional quality 24-240, constant f/2.0 with IBIS and great AF? I'd put up with the extra expense and weight to always have the right lens in my hand with split-second notice. Or are the physics impossible?
Probably not impossible, but it would be a truly huge lens and expensive lens. Just look at the size of a 200mm F2, and then imagine trying to build a 10x zoom range around that. Something that was F2.8-F4 variable is far more possible, and even that would be large and heavy (and probably cost thousands) Unlikely.
This is the way the world works. It is those ads that provide me with income so that I can continue to deliver a free product to you - a product that costs me time and money.
I was also considering Nikon Z camera. But now I a happy A73 user and there is so many new lenses out there. It is crazy to do a right decision for me...
![Lethal Company Music Video 🎵 "Follow The Orders" [VERSION A]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/QeooZB4Z7RA/mqdefault.jpg)
I'm flabbergasted by the optical performance of this super zoom lens and will strongly consider purchasing it. Tamron has magically found the sweet spot with the latest round of zoom lens offerings. Well done as always Dustin Abbott, thank you for your dedication to lens review excellence.
Thanks, Carl. I too was completely surprised by the performance. I had hoped that it would be something like the 35-150mm, and, other than the bokeh not being quite as nice, that's the case.
Shockingly excellent performance! Another fantastic review, Dustin. Best channel for photographic reviews on RUclips. Thank you for the hard work.
Thank you, David.
I second that. Thanks a lot for taking time to give us all a great review as always.
Been using mine for a few days now and the performance is incredible. Super sharp, feels great too
It's a fairly astonishing lens.
Considering how well this lens performs, I'm actually curious if it can battle the 24-105 f/4 from Sony.
Please find out! No OS though.
Will this change your lens setup? I know you love the 24-105 f/4 from sony
Hej Mads, i'm a big follower of both you and Dustin! Excited to see you interact :)
@@bioliv1 not much of an issue up to 105 mm if you have a body with built in IBIS. For landscape most serious shooters would use a tripod anyway. And you gain a full stop in the wide end which makes this lens quite useful for indoor shooting and moderate low light as well.
Ive seen some Asian guy comparing them, didnt understand a word but there were plain examples - from what I've seen this Tamron is the same as 24-105 in like 2/3 of the frame counting from center, but loses when it comes to corner sharpness.
Wow man what a review, must take a lot of prep work to get your notes sorted, along with sample images & with sample comparisons from other lens too. Thank you Mr Abbott, Lens is now on my wish list!
I definitely don't skip on the prep
21:00 Wow hahaha that's absolutely crazy. Loving the cat shot at 27:00.
Amazing lens from Tamron, at first I wasn't a big fan of the decision to start at 28mm instead of 24, but looking at the IQ and light gathering performance, I'd say it was the smart move. There's now a "duality" option too: 17-28 + 28-200.
Exactly. I think that by eliminating the most difficult focal lengths to engineer, they ended up with a better end product.
Man those shots are enough to convince the strength in image quality.
Super zoom are mostly known for being lightweight & compact with compromise in image quality. But damn this lens is performance is awesome.
||reel |e~~~1
Thanks for the reviews Dustin, you are helping to a lot of people, keep the good work
My pleasure!
Hi Dustin,
I remember that I bought the Sony 24-240mm as my first lens after I switched to Sony, and then I read Dustin's review of it in which he absoluted hated that lens! After I read Dustin's review of the lens I sold it. This lens is the complete opposite in that he praises the performance of this lens.
Thanks for reading.
Mathew
I definitely like this lens much better!
Thank you for a detailed review. Tamron continues to amaze. Their Sony lineup is excellent 👌
They've really got a good strategy on Sony that seems to be paying serious dividends for them.
Really impressive results & a great job by Tamron - love how they have been pushing optical quality of zoom lens' designs forward!
A nice travel or beginners Zoom option , although I think for some - better bokeh & ca found in more traditional zoom lens' may be preferable.
Awesome work as always Dustin
Thanks for watching!
2.5 stops improvement on the IBIS is a little underwhelming, but Sony's calculated minimum shutter speeds only go down to 2 stops slower than the reciprocal rule (AFAIK, the "slower" setting), so it's actually a perfect match for that when shooting static subjects! And thanks for doing the testing to arrive at that number-it's incredibly useful to know.
Hi Jed, it has only been with these last two Tamron zooms that I've really noticed how that IBIS isn't as effective with telephoto lenses. Up to 135mm or so it works fine.
I don't understand why he only has 88k subscribers? Very good quality review!
My channel isnt' very sensational, and that seems to be what drives big numbers on RUclips.
@@DustinAbbottTWI please don't change what you are doing! Your channel is one of the few sources on RUclips of camera reviews that are both comprehensive and unbiased.
Thanks for the very kind feedback, everyone!
Awesome review!
I have the older A-mount version of the Tamron 28-200mm (A03) and I echo your review! It was so cheap, that I didn't expect it to perform as well as this lens does. This lens is honestly sharp!
It definitely is.
YES! I knew you'd be cheerfully surprised. So pleased that you are pleased.
There's no doubt that this lens raised the bar for what's possible with such a lens.
Thank you very much for this great and really professional review! 🙏👍 Now I know that I did everything right by buying this new lens. By the way, I was very happy to see the old „Zehn Deutsche Mark“ bank note. Greetings from Germany! 🇩🇪 📸
Hi Jens - I can't tell you how many Germans check in to say how much they enjoy seeing the old Deutsche Mark.
Dustin, your reviews just keep redefining "definitive" - hah! You nail every key performance point balancing the results with users and applications. Thank you. I do notice one trait that keeps popping up with Canon reviews on R cameras/lenses especially and this is the only item I think you might add to future reviews - very few reviewers pick up on this color tilt but it makes me nuts. Your shots of the money, especially the blue bills, shows a pronounced red tint injection on Canon, even shifting yellow a little on the white paper vs the Tamron which leans towards a blue tint overall. I know it is hard to discern if it is the camera or lens but could you test this issue adapting the Canon lens to your Sony bodies to figure out who the culprit is here? I owned Canon over 30 years and every body/lens had the red bias which is flattering for most humans and sunsets but really creates problems on product photography with lots of blues/blacks. Thus my move to Sony for more color accuracy. I would love to see this in the future.
The RF 24-240 is a very bad performer for color accuracy. That was actually shot on a Canon EOS R, where typically I find the colors very good. I complained about the really warm colors in my review of the 24-240, and had to create a custom profile to get them reasonably good. I don't think Sony colors are more accurate overall, but certainly the Tamron is much more neutral than the RF lens.
Canon portrait mode gives the entire picture a red or rosy tone. Try shooting in standard.
Great review! Thank you very much. Especially appreciate the side by side comparison with the Sony 24-240.
My pleasure.
This is a really fantastic review, Dustin. Thank you!
I had the 24-240mm and it really disappointed me above 150mm. I had some coyote shots from a distance which were unusable ultimately because of how soft it was. So even if it has OSS there is no compensation for lack of sharpness.
Exactly right...and that shows the value of this lens.
Another great review, thank you Mr Dustin.
This lens looks like a great all rounder travel lens, I can't wait to see it available.
Cheers.
You and me both! A great travel option.
How do the 28-200 compares to the 70-180 in optical performance? Thank you so much, clear and brilliant review as always!
I've had enough requests that I'm going to shoot a comparison between the 28-75, 28-200, and the 70-180.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks so much Dustin!!
@@DustinAbbottTWI did you do this review? I can't find it on your channel
Best superzoom lens ever made! It even outperforms 28-75mm lens at 70mm in extreme corners
It really is optically impressive for this kind of range.
Dear Dustin, Viewing your review for the first time. It is very clean, and impressive. Thank you very much, waiting for this type of review to make the purchase decision.
My pleasure!
Comprehensive and detailed review as always Dustin. Good job.
Thanks, Gordon.
I can’t wait to see what Dustin thinks of the new Tamron 28-300mm F4-7.1 lens compared to the 28-200mm. If the performance is as good I am definitely switching to the new 28-300mm, which aside from the extended focal range has VC. IMO Dustin offers the best reviews out there.
Good that I didn't buy the 24-240mm Canon RF. Now I'll wait for this Tamron to be available for the RF and get this one instead. Thanks again for a great detailed review Mr. Dustin Abbott.
So far I haven't heard any noise from Tamron or Sigma about RF, but I certainly hope it will come. I would prefer this lens to the 24-240 RF, for sure.
Dear Dustin,
Thank you very much for this great review we were patiently waiting for. In the review, you said that you use the 28-75 on a daily basis. Will you now switch with this 28-200? Did you make all the tests on your Sony A7R4 body?
I don't consider a 28-75 F2.8 and a 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 lenses competitors, personally. I would use them in two different ways. For video I prefer the wider aperture of the 28-75, as it gives me more options (and more pleasing bokeh). For travel I would definitely consider the 28-200mm. I don't actually own an a7RIV; I did the tests on an a7RIII.
This channel is the most informative, usefull and professional on Yt for photo gear, I really enjoy in every video. Keep it up with great work Dustin, 100k is just a first milestone.
I appreciate that! I'm really looking forward to 100K, too. It seems like the first big milestone.
Use the Tamron 28-200 with Sony A7RIV to replace my Canon 77D with Sigma 18-300 combo. The Canon/Sigma combo was much faster focuser (got many more in-focus shots). It takes careful focusing with the Tamron 28-200 to make sure I have it in focus before I shoot. Didn't have to do this with the Canon/Sigma combo. Will go back to Canon as soon as they may an APS-C 32 MP R camera.
Wow - not my experience at all. I purchased one of these and have traveled with it and autofocus is excellent.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Appreciate you comment. I am not a professional so may learn in the long run what I am doing wrong. Am liking the 28-200 a lot and will have to get good with it since I sold all Canon stuff to go Sony.
Thank you for another extremely detailed review, Dustin. As someone who mainly shoots travel and wildlife photography, I think this would make a great two lens combo with the Sony 200-600mm. The focal range you can cover with these two is phenomenal, and IQ of the Tamron here looks surprisingly good as you said!
Glad it was helpful!
Have been waiting for Dustin's opinion before deciding whether to get a copy. Suffice to say, Tamron is going to sell a lot of copies of this lens based on the strength of this very helpful review.
I think they deserve to. This is the best lens of its type that I've reviewed.
Wow! What an incredible review. You covered everything in as fine a detail as the lens resolves. Such a rapid pace to your delivery, there is no chance one's mind can wander yet it's still easy to absorb every detail. Whatever your intake of caffeine, I suggest keeping it right there. Great idea to include a few shots from your son. Gives a sense of how well it would work for the less expert photographer who is likely the specific target audience for this lens. The silence of the af is remarkable!
I am not sure Tamron decided to make this lens a 28-200 to specifically avoid the compromises inherent in the Sony's greater range. This sort of range is typical for Tamron, in fact, more abbreviated than the 28-300 type lens they have previously made. I own the first version they made and it is so much weaker than this version I almost never use it.
Some have said the lens is only suitable for beginners. You seem to think it may be good for a wider audience than that. True?
It is absolutely usable for a much wider audience. I'm strongly considering it for a hiking/travel lens myself.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I have been looking for a hiking lens as well and this Tamron checks a lot of the boxes indeed. I used to use the 18-135mm on my SL2 APSC DSLR for hiking, but now with the RP and this lens, I basically keep the advantage of APSC compactness and light weight, but I get full frame and the F2.8 aperture on the wide end! Yes I lose IS or VC but its a good compromise that I'm willing to take.
Unfortunately it is only available for Sony right now. Here's hoping that a Canon version comes in the future.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Tamron having access to Sony's af info is such a boon for Sony. Even if and when Tamron figures out the reverse engineering, the lenses will function better on Sony. Sony also gets to have a wider range of lens offerings for a longer period of time keeping their solid lead.
I should probably rent a 7iii and 28-75. Get my own hands on experience.
Being looking for a light travel lens to go with A7C, this Tamron seems to be the best choice. Thank you for the detailed review as always.
Glad it was helpful!
I purchased this Tamron lens and really appreciate the light weight and the versatility. Like the rich color and soft background. The only thing it misses is OSS at the 200mm end, it needs strong lighting to avoid slow speed/shaky hand. I also own 24-240 Sony, which is capable but bulky and heavy, so it’s not balanced to sit on A7C or APSC body. Then the reason to use such long zoom is usually for conscience specially during travel so size and weight matters. Anyhow, I like this Tamron and recommend it. I also purchased 17-28 Tamron, a great supplemental mate. These two lenses pus one 35mm f1.4 Sony are all I need to travel.
Крутая работа! Спасибо за качесвенный обзор!
Thank you for another thorough review, please advise how the image quality of this lens compares to the Sony 24-105 f4.
Hi Glenn, I'm afraid that it has been too long since I've reviewed the 24-105 to give an objective comparison (I've also changed my testing techniques), but I don't think that the Sony is any sharper. The Tamron is a pretty compelling alternative...and is nearly half the price.
I'm convinced this lens is a gem!
It definitely is
A great comprehensive review, as always. Thanks. Lucky I got the 17-28 f2.8 as my first lens for A7III. These lenses will make such a good combo for travel and video. The 28-200 is basically a fujifilm 18-55 f2.8-f4 plus a telephoto zoom built into it. I mean, It retains F4 until 79mm. Last December when I got the A7III, I was a bit torn between whether to buy the 24-240 or go for the 17-28 and then get the 28-75. The 24-240 just happened to be not in stock at that time. Feeling so lucky 6 months down the line, else this video would have been a 1000 dollars of regret story !! :-)
It's like the Fuji 18-55 + 18-135 + 18 f/2, and most of the 16-80 and even the 16-55 (except for the wide end, of course) :)
I think you'll end up being very thankful that Sony was not in stock. It isn't nearly as good a lens as the Tamron.
I was very disappointed with the 24-240 Sony at the higher focal lengths that I sold mine. I've now ordered this Tamron and very excited about it.
Extremely useful comparing it with the Sony and to a lesser extent the Canon. The Covid outbreak has delayed my purchase of a new lens, luckily it turns out. Thanks for the detailed review and by the way love your lake.
Hi Frank, I would say that delaying that purchase probably was a smart move!
If they will release a G2 version, just like the 28-75 G2, it will be a killer lens, I could even imagine using it for my street photography.
What would you suggest gets changed in a G2 version?
I hope Tamron make good lenses like16-55 F2.8 with OS, 16-70 F4 with OS and 10-18 F4/F2.8 with OS type lenses for the Sony E mount APS-C series.
That would be nice, for sure. APS-C E-mount hasn't gotten a ton of third party support.
Love your videos and comparisons!! and you are a good man. :)
That last part means more than anything to me.
@@DustinAbbottTWI ☺😊
Thank you for the comparison, not many people have done an in depth review on the SEL24240, and your review, by far, was the best one. I was new to photography a year ago and wish I knew back then about the Sony 24-240 when the camera shop had recommended it to me. I was disappointed after trying all types of shots, it was too late and I shelved it. I finally got to trade my Sony 24-240mm for a Tamron 28-75mm and the difference is just night and day. The Sony lens was just a very bland lens as you've shown. Tamron is just so worth it for the price and performance, there isn't a day I don't have it in my bag.
Agree about the 24-240 Sony lens. =/
I'll still release my review of the Sony 24-240, but there's little reason to consider it now.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Not sure you need to. That lens is now several years old and there are performance reviews on DXO and other sites.
You've done a great comparison here already. Better to just compare it to the Tamron 28-75 and 70-200 as others have requested. I'd like to see that too, though I am not interested in either of these two because of price and limited range. What I am really interested is how this 28-200 holds up. It seems like it will do okay, it won't beat them obviously, but should hold its own based on the image results you showed here.
I know it’s a diff type/class of lens (constant 2.8 standard vs super), but comparisons against the 28-75mm would be helpful too.
Because they’re in the same price and size range.
I don't see a lot of crossover, personally, but a lot of people have made that request. I might consider a comparison video with a few options.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Yeah, much diff lenses... but, there are many people thinking about trading their current 28-75mm for the 28-200mm; or, deciding which to get, if they haven't got the 28-75mm already.
I personally switched from the 28-75mm to the 28-200mm.
Dustin Abbott ...noticed a lot of people also wonder how the FE 24-105 f4 compares to it.
Would be a great test:
28-200mm
vs
28-75mm
vs
FE 24-105mm
vs
...any other lenses many others may want to see compared, that I don’t know about.
Good explained. Thankyou Dustin.
Glad it was helpful!
I think for full frame cameras the Tamron 35-150mm f/2.8-4 VC is much better, especially as a travel lens. Yes, it's a bit shorter range but still plenty but an extra stop for even more bokeh and image stabilization makes it far more useful for travel considering that for such an activity, you not only need range, but a low aperture for low light and stabilization if there's VERY low light. IF ONLY Tamron re-released this lens for mirrorless camera, especially Z mount. I got an Olympus 12-100mm f/4 and I'm having second thoughts... but switching over would mean I'd have to pay a lot more for this setup than my Olympus.... and a lot of extra weight. Plus an the FTZ adapter.
Hmmm, not sure I agree. The AF system in the 35-150 is much more primitive than what we have here.
Hi Dustin, great review. How does the image quality of this lens compare with the Tamron 70-180mm? I own the Tamron 28-75mm. Which one do you advise me to buy?
That really depends on what you want to do with the lens. To me this lens is not a replacement for a 70-180mm, which I use for events and portraits. I view the 28-200mm more as a travel option or all-in-one.
Sensational lens. Highly impressed!
It really surprised me.
I bought the Sony A7Rll to use with old vintage lenses and small short focus lengths from Samyang (and Sony) which I do have. l never intended to buy myself a superzoom lens. Had a couple oldies 18-200 for aps-c, but those were not very sharp. But this one seems to shine as a travelling companion. I was going to buy the 28-75, but I about to change my mind.
Thanks for a substansial, detailed review, Dustin. Which yours always are. You inspire me alot with reviews of «cheap» gear, though this is not cheap at all, for my pensioner wallet anyway. I bought my Samyang 45 (1,8) thanks to you, and just love that little lens.
It's wonderful when some more reasonably priced lenses are the better options.
Very good video! great job!
Thank you!
Got this lense at $550 on Greentoe the other day. I'd say it's a steal for what it offers.
It really is.
Great review thank you. Looks like this might be a better value purchase than the Tamron 70-180mm f2.8. Maybe even allow for selling my 28-75 RXD.
Hi David, I will do a comparison video with those lenses, but I don't see this as a replacement for those...unless your photography never requires a faster maximum aperture.
@@DustinAbbottTWI A good point. I'll just have to save for a little longer.
Thanks for this review !!
My pleasure!
Awesome review. Would you recommend it for landscape- and butterfly-photography?
I would say yes. It's very sharp, very versatile, and nicely compact.
You are so amazing and professional dang haha
Thank you!
Hi Dustin. I reallly like your reviews. Clear, trustfull en to the point. I keep struggling with a choice between the Tamrom 28-200 and the Sony 24-105. I like to shoot nature, animals in nature, portraits and all kind of events. I shoot almost always in good light conditions. If you, as a photographer with such a profile, have to choose between those lenses, witch one should you choose? And if picture quality is important? The price isn’t a big deal here in Belgium, with the current cashback on the Sony lenses the difference is more or less 200 dollar. Greetz. Geert
Ultimately I guess it comes down to whether you prefer the constant aperture to the additional zoom range. I’m traveling with the 28-200mm right now and continue to be impressed by how well it does as a travel/walk around lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you, Dustin.
In that case i go for the Tamron. If there is no difference in picture quality and the difference on 105mm is only 0,5 aperture, i choose the focal lenght. Thanks Dustin.
Would love to see a comparison between the Tamron 28-75 and this 28-200. Even though they are not direct competitors, I would be very interested to know if I can use this lens instead of a 28-85 + 200m prime for my hikes without sacrificing too much image quality on the wide end.
I do plan to work on that kind of episode.
Hi Dustin, thanks very much for the review again. Love your detailed reviews.
Just wondering though... is it just me, or does this lens actually seem better than even Tamron's individual lenses covering that range separately. Am very surprised by what I'm seeing, especially when compared to Sony's similarly ranged lense!!!
I've got a dedicated video on that topic: ruclips.net/video/C3htW66hs1Y/видео.html
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you so much! Will have a quick look now! Just seems from this vid that it's certainly unexpectedly good. I'm almost tempted in getting it as an all in one, as I usually shoot with primes anyway, so will be a good compliment to the rest of the collection.
Perfect travel lens!!
Pretty much.
Great review.Thanks!
Glad it was helpful!
Great cover, thanks
You're welcome.
does it make noise when it focuses and adjusts the aperture? can it be picked up when recording?
It is very quiet in operation.
Question, hopefully you are still "available"
After understanding your explanation, very technical and complete (btw, from my point of view)
At this point I do not have a camera w a lens, Im still debating about what lens to buy and this seems to be a good option.
My question: Aperture Mode on a Variable Zoom Lens
What would be the result by setting Aperture Mode to F2.8 and zoom in? Does the lens specs overrule the camera setting? Is there a trick to do that?
As you understand I am looking for to keep the maximum aperture along the zoom range.
Thank you
The camera holds the largest available aperture, so by the end of the zoom range, you would be at F5.6.
hi dustin after all these tests what do you think is the best all in one zoom lens in this class for sony system? i mean something in the range of 20-300mm this type of range... 35-150 is too tight on the wide end i think
I haven't reviewed a better one (outside of the 35-150, which is a completely different kind of lens).
Dear sir what a wonderful review! Excellent!
One question please, i am with the kit lens 28-70 in Sony A7iii, if I switch to this Tamron 28-200, you believe that i can see some improvement in sharpness? (except of course the obvious focal range)
I do
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you sir.
Thank you for the great review! As mentioned by others, I do want to know the difference between this lens and the 2875.
I'm surprised at all those requests, as I don't consider these lenses competitors, but I may throw something together.
Hi Dustin I just purchased the Tamron 28-200 after seeing your review. I have a first generation A7 and noticed that steady shot is not permitted on this lens. I’m wondering why and am concerned since image stabilization is in camera. Was this a bad purchase in my case. The handheld shots are not sharp and rather disappointing :( I love my A7 and don’t have the budget to upgrade my camera right now...HELP!!
I'm afraid I can't really help other than to recommend you reach out to Tamron. You're the first to mention this problem to me, so it may be that a firmware update could solve the problem.
Good review as always.
Dustin do you do Nikon gear review? would be nice to see a comparison between the Tamron 28-200 Vs. the Nikon Z 24-200 F4-6.3 VR. The Nikon also received a lot of rave about its optical performance as well. I am not a fan of these type of super zoom, but based on what I saw from your review of this lens, it may not be a bad one for those " me too" travel snap shots.
I'm afraid I don't cover Nikon
Hi Dustin! I just got this lens! I was pretty impressed until I found out that at 200mm focal length for the long-range shot, the result was unacceptable for me. It seems like a blurry or fuzzy look. Do you have any problem with long-distance shots?
My copy is still pretty sharp at 200mm.
I was originally looking at the 70-180, but was holding off because of the shorter focal length and it was a good chunk of change. Then, this came out! Low light isn’t something l care about, and the bokeh seems great at every focal length. Possibly a better bang for your buck? I hope so!
Very good bang for the back, though I disagree on the bokeh. That doesn't matter, though, as long you're happy!
Well, the ability to separate the subject from the background, l should say! Absolutely. Great review!
Would you recommend this lens for the Sony A6400, or is the lack of IBIS on the A6400 a deal breaker? I mainly use it for photography.
It would be a challenge, unfortunately. I would probably only recommend getting the lens if/when you move to a body with IBIS.
I always enjoy Dustin's videos. They are informative.
What if Tamron launches
$500 24-105 f5.6 at size & weight of Sony 16-70 f4
Just being curious & being a little nerdy did some calculations about a FF vs APS-C of same resolution 24 MP.
FF is 2.25 times brighter in ISO & 1.5 times in Aperture(f4 in APS-C is f6 in FF) .
So if we assume this is true then an f5.6 or f6 zoom is enough for travel photos? But I maybe wrong. Just curious will people buy this:
15-30, 24-105, 100-400, 28-200 all at f/5.6, compact, lightweight affordable travel lens also 200-600 f/6.3
I don't foresee them doing a second variable aperture zoom covering mostly the same focal range.
Nice review. This lens seems to push me over the top to consider Sony Fe system. The Tamron KFe lenses seem to really make an argument to go with Sony. This 28-200 may also be a reasonable replacement for the Canon RF 24-105 f4 IS. The Canon 24-240 is not a lens I would consider but the Tamron 28-200 looks like a possibility for me. I expect we will see a Tamron 200-500 Fe (new version) or some other type to go with the 28-200.
I agree on your point that Tamron (and, to a lesser extent, Sigma and Samyang) are making Sony a very attractive platform. And yes, I would love to see a 200-500 from them.
Hi dustin. What is your opinion about Tamron 35-150 2.8-4 VS This Tamron 28-200 2.8-5.6? Which one is a better landscape lens? My main concern is sharpness.
I'm not entirely sure of the relevance, as both lenses are made for different systems. On Sony the 28-200 is the best choice.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I have Metabones V and A7R3 already. And I’m considering getting one of these 2 lens for landscape shot.
No problem without VC/OSS at the 200mm focal lenght? a have the A9 also, the IBIS is sufficient? good review mister Abbott
I have used it on an a9 before, and I didn’t really have an IBIS issue.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks I orderd one...greets from Netherlands
How is the Tamron at filming video, especially in darker settings?
I haven't filmed in dark, dark conditions, but I have filmed with it a fair bit under normal conditions, and it works fine. Your only limitation would be the typical limitation when working with a smaller maximum aperture.
Great review. Is there a difference between the RXD vs VXD motors? Thank you.
The VXD motor (so far only used in the 70-180) is a dual motor design with higher torque.
Dustin Abbott thanks. Have you found one to be better than the other?
They both work well, but the higher torque was needed in the more demanding 70-180
Looks very good value.
I think that it is.
I'm torn between this one and the tamron 70 to 180 and can't decide if the wider range is worth the variable aprature and vice versa
That really depends on what you plan to do with it. If you are going to shoot indoor events, the 70-180 is the better choice, but if you want a versatile travel lens, this is the way to go
Hi Dustin! Thanks for another great review, I have been waiting for this one. How would you compare the 28-200 vs the Tamron 28-75? Considering the good optical performance of the 28-200 and that is only f4 at 75 mm (I think) would I lose much more than one stop of light and a tiny bit of iq in that comparison? I currently own the Tamron 28-75 mm plus the Sony 70-200 f4 but since I am primarily a prime guy and don't use the latter lens much I am considering replacing both of them with the 28-200. That way I could afford the Samyang 75 mm as well :-)
I've had enough requests that I may do a comparison video with a few options.
Great review. How is it comparable with Tamron 28-75 mm in terms sharpness and contrast ?
I see there are many requests to compare this lenses. We are waiting ))
Hi Elmeddin - you didn't look very hard. There is a comparison video on my channel.
Question for anyone here really. The only thing stopping me from buying this lens is the bokeh. In particular the onion bokeh Dustin talks about.
My question is: Would a polarising filter work to cancel this effect out?
It will not. That's an optical property of the lens. You just need to avoid the situations where that is present (bright circular highlights).
Would you recommend this for APS-C for extra reach? I shoot with both the A7III and a A6500.
About 43-300mm, that seems like a great reach. Don't know if your image will suffer with less quality at the telephoto end.
It sounds like the perfect lens to use on both your cameras to me. The fact that both have IBIS helps.
I know I kinda missed the mark on what letters mean what when it comes to crop sensor vs full frame, but is this a Full Frame lens that can work on a Crop Sensor body? Or is this a Crop Sensor lens that would need a Full Frame body to be put into crop sensor mode?
This is a full frame lens, and it would work fine on APS-C, too.
Dustin Abbott Thank you man, I always feel embarrassed never knowing if I’m looking at a full frame lens or an aps-c lens when it comes to third-party glass
Hey Dustin, really like your videos. You think this lens would be good for journalism photography. All around for protest, riots something even at lowlights. Correctly using the A7riv+24-70gmii. But I don't wanna risk this amazing lens it:)
It could work, particularly since journalism doesn't always require a pristine image. You can raise the ISO in low light and it could still work.
Is it good for video compared to 24-105mm?
This is a very broad question. I've definitely used it for video work with good success.
At this price point it is fairly reasonable to have this lens AND the Tamron f2.8 trinity, is it not? I think it compliments rather than competes with the trinity, for day trips or casual outings this is the perfect one lens setup. Also I have OCD and must get the 70-180 to complete the f2.8 trinity lol, but really this is such a convenient and interesting lens not to have :D
That's my opinion, yes.
I'm a bit shocked by the brownish tone of the Canon lens. Was the white balance ok?
It has a really, really warm tone to it. I had to create a custom color profile to get the colors neutral for real world use. One of the downsides of the lens.
Let me know your view for using this lense in a camera without an IBIS. I am looking for a zoom lense for my 6400. I am an amateur and need you suggestion for this Tamron piece while comparing with sony 24-240.
The Tamron is still going to be better optically, but at the longer end you will have to be extra careful to keep your shutter speed well up.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks. I found one more tele zoom lense which is Sony G 70-350. For 6400 without IBIS will it be a better choice comparing with Tamron?
Excellent review. Dustin, is it possible you have a poor copy of the Sony lens? I've seen some sharper results from this lens...at least in video. The problem with the Tamron is the lack of OIS and given how poor Sony IBIS tends to be, that OIS can become important. I'm more of a video shooter than a stills shooter.
I don't think my findings are out of line with what I've seen from MTF charts or other reviewers resolution numbers.
I like new lenses from Tamron. But I do not like waiting for Sigma to have the full visibility on the available lenses (e.g. get Tamron 70-180 or wait for Sigma 70-200?)
By the way, great review, as usual :-)
It has actually worked against Sigma to be the second to market with most of these lenses. I was happy for them to be first with the 100-400 DN, as I think a lot of people have bought Tamron before the Sigma options typically arrive.
Wow - I'm wondering should i sell my 70-200 f4 sony and get one of these? I was considering selling anyway (I bought used so won't lose too much money) and going for a tamron 70-180 f2.8, but maybe I don't REALLY need that fast speed on a telephoto...
Also just saw in the comments that you plan to do a comparison video, looking forward to that! *hits subscribe*
Watch for it next Wednesday1
Sir is this lense as sharp as 28-75 ?
If you'll search my channel, I actually have a comparison video with the 28-75 and 70-180.
Please do a comparison video on Tamron 28 - 200 vs Tamron 70 - 300 on Sony apsc camera with lots of 4k video sample ... Please Please please 🙏
Hi Deberati, I've done thorough review series on both of those lenses, so I won't be doing any further reviews on them. Sorry.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Okay .. Thank you so much Dustin ..
I'm wondering how the new Tamron 28-200 compares to the 70-300 or 70-200 f4 at the focal lengths that they overlap. The 70-300 was never considered a super sharp lens. The 28-200 focal length is more useful to me than 70-300.
I suspect that it is just as sharp. This lens is fairly surprising.
Amazing, just do not like the step motor for manual focus for video.
I get that, though that's hard to avoid with AF mirrorless lenses.
When we can expect something longer than 200mm from Tamron?
Good question...but not one that I have an answer to. The new Sigma 100-400 DN is a nice choice, though.
"Hinky Bokeh"...nice. Thanks for the great review
You're welcome!
Hello. I have a sony 24-105 f4 lens and a tamron 28-200mm lens. I wanted to sell Tamron and buy Sony 70-200 f4 instead. Is it the right thing to do? Which one is sharper? Sony 70-200 f4 or Tamron 28-200.
I actually never reviewed the Sony 70-200mm F4. It came out before I was doing Sony reviews.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Many thanks
I wonder if Sigma or Sony would/could ever come out with a non-budget super zoom--like a big , expensive lens that an event or news photographer could use for most of their shots? Could someone make a professional quality 24-240, constant f/2.0 with IBIS and great AF? I'd put up with the extra expense and weight to always have the right lens in my hand with split-second notice. Or are the physics impossible?
Probably not impossible, but it would be a truly huge lens and expensive lens. Just look at the size of a 200mm F2, and then imagine trying to build a 10x zoom range around that. Something that was F2.8-F4 variable is far more possible, and even that would be large and heavy (and probably cost thousands) Unlikely.
Enough mid video ads?
This is the way the world works. It is those ads that provide me with income so that I can continue to deliver a free product to you - a product that costs me time and money.
I wish they can make for nikon Z system. 🤣
I was also considering Nikon Z camera. But now I a happy A73 user and there is so many new lenses out there. It is crazy to do a right decision for me...
So far I haven't heard any rumblings from Tamron or Sigma about RF or Z.