Kudos to your Fuji videos that analyze newer 3rd party, and hopefully Fuji’s own (albeit older designs), on their 40mp sensor. Assembling a wide/mid/tele zoom kit for landscape, your videos are of high interest, and not being done by many reviewers out there. Thanks for your efforts. Subscribed!
nothing to compare with the fuji 16-55, i need to tell you to buy other one is throwing the money. Build quality, image quality, feeling, all. I tried sigma (all sigma lenses I had are terrible) and tamron... no coments.
@@nengzhao8100I can't speak for sharpness since I don't own the Sigma or Tamron lenses but the 16-80mm F4 is COMPACT and quite LIGHT. It is quite sharp at 30mm to 50mm, and softer at 16mm and 80mm. But the F4 has OIS, WR and the aperture ring. It is great for travel with one of the 24mp sensor cameras. Duatin tested the XF 16-55 mk1 and he says that the Sigma is sharper, but rendering is slightly better on the Fuji. The Tamron lens is the only f2.8 zoom with image stabilization so it has that going for it. No aperture ring. The Sigma is the sharpest but has no aperture ring.
@@solid477 yip, that is why I sometimes just put my Yongnuo 35mm f2 on. I am really happy with the performance and the camera remains light and nible. Similar to when you have the 50mm on. But that crop factor makes a bit of a pain in tight places for street photography in my opinion.
Thanks for these comprehensive reviews Dustin. The Tamron might be too big for some, but absolutely deserves credit for its consistent image sharpness, out to the corners and across the range. A rare thing.
Great overview. I have both lenses for Sony. I feel that the Tamron is a more versatile lens. The stabilization is great for video. I use it on assignments. the wider zoom range is noticeable in some situations. I bought the Sigma for the small size, as a carry everywhere compact solution. One practical downside is that the zoom turns opposite as any other zoom I have for Sony APSC and Nikon FF (the systems I use), which goes against my "muscle memory" in street photography. I wish Sigma would have made the barrel turn the same direction as the system it is for. I find the Tamron more consistent center to edge. But I love the Sigma's small size, close focus. buying both when there are rebates is cheaper than the Sony 16-55 f2.8, which I eventually sold after getting the Tamron, as image stabilization was more important than a slightly higher IQ.
Thank you Dustin for this once again very good comparison of two lenses, both of which have their right to exist. I decided on the Tamron 17-70 9 months ago, but I only had the Sony ZV-E10 without IBIS. Today with the a6700 the Tamron 150-500 usually remains on the expensive body and the ZV-E10 still has the 17-70. This means I can usually get by without changing lenses.
I wish Sigma would release a 50-140mm f2.8 to pair with their 18-50mm. While the cost would likely be less than the Fuji version, I really hope they could pull of a lighter lens as well!
I'm also hoping for a Sigma or Tamron 70-150 specifically for aps-c or, as far as I'm concerned, up to 180 if it stays at an F 2.8. That would close the gap to my Tamron 150-500!
Amazing comparisson Dustin. Tony Northrup pointed out that the Sigma's minimum distance is better for when you have to take the ring shots. But that longer reach of the Tamron is really useful and with VC can be better for low light static subjects.
It's interesting how different the perspectives are in response to this video. Goes to show the challenge that lens designers face - people's priorities are wildly different.
I have the Tamron incoming for my X-H2. It’ll replace my 16-80 as a travel lens. I want to better exploit the 40Mp while having a one lens does everything solution. I have primes for other occasions.
From reviews so far the IQ of the new Fuji kit zoom is great. BUT it stops down fast from f2.8 as soon as you zoom even a little bit so is going to be overall on the slow side for light
Can you make a comparison video like you did with sigma and tamron telephoto f2.8 lens Sigma and tamron All wide angle and standard zoom lens of f2.8 Or Can you recommend which one to go for Standard zoom sigma art 24-70 f2.8 / sigma contemporary 28 - 70 f2.8 / Tamron 28 - 75 f2.8 G2 / Tamron 20 - 40 f2.8 Wide angle sigma 16 - 28 f2.8 / Tamron 17 28 f2.8
@@DustinAbbottTWI that’s correct and with the difference of about 200 euros I would maybe go for the sigma but for the same price I would definitely go for the Tamron, the image quality especially at the wider angles is definitely better. Sice and weight can’t compromise that for me. Especially if you own a Fuji with the new 40 MP sensor.
@@DustinAbbottTWI That's weird. I've cleared the browser cache and tried another browser with the same result. Same with the RUclips-app on my Samsung tablet. The problem continues at 13:36. Are you watching on RUclips or your local video file? Could be a problem with the RUclips encoder.
The Sigma 18-50mm makes more sense to me, because it feels like an APS-C lens. It's meaningfully smaller than Sigma's own 28-70mm f/2.8 for full frame, for example. The Tamron 17-70mm is larger than even some 24-105mm f/4's for full frame. Maybe for APS-C only shooters, it makes sense, but for anyone else who also runs a full frame system, there just isn't any advantage to it, except maybe price.
@@simonmaney3438I said maybe for “APS-C only” shooters. Many of us shoot both, w the APS-C system as a lighter alternative. I see very little reason to choose the 17-70 over a 24-105mm.
@@Josh-ow4gcSure, I run Canon crop and FF systems and it is unlikely I would put a Tamron 17-70 on my crop camera (if I could!) over my FF and 24-105. However, I imagine many Fuji owners stick within the system meaning FF lenses are out of the question. In this context I see the Tamron as a great option, even if it is on the 'big' side.
@@lifewiththree01 I'm confused - you've commented on a Fuji video. If you're asking about Sony, I don't use either of these lenses. I actually own full frame bodies for Sony E Mount
You did not mention anything about the fact that Sigma lens is not weather sealed, when Tamron is. So for someone who shoots frequently outdoors and has a weather sealed body, it can be a game changer.
The Fuji 40MP is the most demanding that I've ever tested on. Only the very sharpest lenses really look strong on it, and that includes very, very few zoom lenses.
@DustinAbbottTWI Wow so is high Mp sensors all like that or only Fuji? Do you think if Sony made a apsc 40mp sensor it would be just as demanding? I never knew this. Thabk you for teaching me that
It's hard for me to say, as I find Fuji's X-trans sensors a little difficult anyway. But I also found that Canon's 33MP APS-C sensor was pretty tough on glass.
![ARGENTINA vs. PERÚ [1-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xtI25ENDDSY/mqdefault.jpg)
Kudos to your Fuji videos that analyze newer 3rd party, and hopefully Fuji’s own (albeit older designs), on their 40mp sensor. Assembling a wide/mid/tele zoom kit for landscape, your videos are of high interest, and not being done by many reviewers out there. Thanks for your efforts. Subscribed!
Now all we need to know is how they compare with the Fuji 16-55. A used Fuji lens is pretty close in price to the Tamron. Thanks.
and how they compare with the Fuji 16-80.
nothing to compare with the fuji 16-55, i need to tell you to buy other one is throwing the money. Build quality, image quality, feeling, all. I tried sigma (all sigma lenses I had are terrible) and tamron... no coments.
@@nengzhao8100I can't speak for sharpness since I don't own the Sigma or Tamron lenses but the 16-80mm F4 is COMPACT and quite LIGHT.
It is quite sharp at 30mm to 50mm, and softer at 16mm and 80mm.
But the F4 has OIS, WR and the aperture ring. It is great for travel with one of the 24mp sensor cameras.
Duatin tested the XF 16-55 mk1 and he says that the Sigma is sharper, but rendering is slightly better on the Fuji.
The Tamron lens is the only f2.8 zoom with image stabilization so it has that going for it. No aperture ring.
The Sigma is the sharpest but has no aperture ring.
I personally have the Sigma have 17-50mm f2.8 EX HSM for my Canon 90D and it's my favorite lens for street photography. No complaints at all.
@@solid477 yip, that is why I sometimes just put my Yongnuo 35mm f2 on. I am really happy with the performance and the camera remains light and nible. Similar to when you have the 50mm on. But that crop factor makes a bit of a pain in tight places for street photography in my opinion.
I've had both and the extra reach of the Tamron won out. Both are fantastic.
Thanks for these comprehensive reviews Dustin.
The Tamron might be too big for some, but absolutely deserves credit for its consistent image sharpness, out to the corners and across the range. A rare thing.
That's fair.
Sold the Fuji 16-55mm and went with the Sigma. Size,weight & image quality is fantastic.
I'm just starting a comparison between the two plus the 18-55mm
I might be joining you!
The Sigma for me. Tbh, am something of a Sigma apsc fan, however for me, the form size won out, moreso for travelling.
Both are clearly class units.
Great overview. I have both lenses for Sony. I feel that the Tamron is a more versatile lens. The stabilization is great for video. I use it on assignments. the wider zoom range is noticeable in some situations. I bought the Sigma for the small size, as a carry everywhere compact solution. One practical downside is that the zoom turns opposite as any other zoom I have for Sony APSC and Nikon FF (the systems I use), which goes against my "muscle memory" in street photography. I wish Sigma would have made the barrel turn the same direction as the system it is for. I find the Tamron more consistent center to edge. But I love the Sigma's small size, close focus. buying both when there are rebates is cheaper than the Sony 16-55 f2.8, which I eventually sold after getting the Tamron, as image stabilization was more important than a slightly higher IQ.
Thank you Dustin for this once again very good comparison of two lenses, both of which have their right to exist. I decided on the Tamron 17-70 9 months ago, but I only had the Sony ZV-E10 without IBIS. Today with the a6700 the Tamron 150-500 usually remains on the expensive body and the ZV-E10 still has the 17-70. This means I can usually get by without changing lenses.
I wish Sigma would release a 50-140mm f2.8 to pair with their 18-50mm. While the cost would likely be less than the Fuji version, I really hope they could pull of a lighter lens as well!
100%. I'd love to see that.
What I did choose is tamron 17-70mm for sony
I hope there other version of aps-c 70 - 180mm 2.8
I'm also hoping for a Sigma or Tamron 70-150 specifically for aps-c or, as far as I'm concerned, up to 180 if it stays at an F 2.8. That would close the gap to my Tamron 150-500!
I've been very happy with the Siggy on my XT5. IQ, weight & size are all better than expected.
Excellent
I cancelled my order for the Sigma and ordered the Tamron instead. My camera doesn’t have OIS and gives me a wider focal length range
Amazing comparisson Dustin. Tony Northrup pointed out that the Sigma's minimum distance is better for when you have to take the ring shots.
But that longer reach of the Tamron is really useful and with VC can be better for low light static subjects.
Both things are true. They each have unique strengths and weaknesses.
A homerun for the Sigma. I am not in aps-c to have ff size lenses. The price and magnification are also big advantages.
It's interesting how different the perspectives are in response to this video. Goes to show the challenge that lens designers face - people's priorities are wildly different.
Agreed, why would you buy an aps-c camera/lens that has equivalent size , weight and cost of full frame , make no sense.
I have the Tamron incoming for my X-H2. It’ll replace my 16-80 as a travel lens. I want to better exploit the 40Mp while having a one lens does everything solution. I have primes for other occasions.
The Tamron isn't small, but that big zoom range is very, very useful as a one lens solution.
Even more relevant is how they compare to the just announced Fuji 16-50
I definitely plan to take a look at the 16-50 and have high hopes that it is designed around the higher resolution sensor.
From reviews so far the IQ of the new Fuji kit zoom is great. BUT it stops down fast from f2.8 as soon as you zoom even a little bit so is going to be overall on the slow side for light
很好的视频 非常感谢你的测评 我买了适马18-50。
Sigma if you want compact, tamron if you dont mind the extra size
Sounds fair.
Can you make a comparison video like you did with sigma and tamron telephoto f2.8 lens
Sigma and tamron
All wide angle and standard zoom lens of f2.8
Or
Can you recommend which one to go for
Standard zoom
sigma art 24-70 f2.8 /
sigma contemporary 28 - 70 f2.8 /
Tamron 28 - 75 f2.8 G2 /
Tamron 20 - 40 f2.8
Wide angle sigma 16 - 28 f2.8 /
Tamron 17 28 f2.8
That's a lot of lenses! Unfortunately I can't make that video because I don't have any of those lenses on hand at the moment.
Which of these two is better for video manual focusing?
I would lean towards the Sigma.
Interesting, in Germany I can order the Tamron for about the same price as the Sigma, they’re both 550 euro on Amazon at the moment
Both are good lenses, though with different strengths.
@@DustinAbbottTWI that’s correct and with the difference of about 200 euros I would maybe go for the sigma but for the same price I would definitely go for the Tamron, the image quality especially at the wider angles is definitely better. Sice and weight can’t compromise that for me. Especially if you own a Fuji with the new 40 MP sensor.
Sir, do you think we can manage handheld videos for Sigma on an IBIS body
Definitely do
many many likes for your comprehensive comparison🥰
You're welcome.
Thank you for this video, very informative!!!
Glad it was helpful!
Very good review.
Thanks!
Something apparently went haywire with the Tamron samples slideshow at 13:15.
Hmmm, must be a local issue. I don't see it when I play it here on RUclips, and no one else has mentioned it.
@@DustinAbbottTWI You don't see pictures layered on top of each other? The actual problems start at 13:30.
I don't.@@Elgsdyr
@@DustinAbbottTWI That's weird. I've cleared the browser cache and tried another browser with the same result. Same with the RUclips-app on my Samsung tablet. The problem continues at 13:36. Are you watching on RUclips or your local video file? Could be a problem with the RUclips encoder.
Oh, you did mention you watched it on RUclips. Hmmm... Must be a problem with RUclips regional caching.
Again, thank you. I’ve just watched the end appraisal.
Glad you enjoyed it!
The Sigma 18-50mm makes more sense to me, because it feels like an APS-C lens. It's meaningfully smaller than Sigma's own 28-70mm f/2.8 for full frame, for example.
The Tamron 17-70mm is larger than even some 24-105mm f/4's for full frame. Maybe for APS-C only shooters, it makes sense, but for anyone else who also runs a full frame system, there just isn't any advantage to it, except maybe price.
'Maybe for APS-C'. Well, that is what it is for - a quality 24(ish) - 105 equivalent for crop.
@@simonmaney3438I said maybe for “APS-C only” shooters. Many of us shoot both, w the APS-C system as a lighter alternative. I see very little reason to choose the 17-70 over a 24-105mm.
@@Josh-ow4gcSure, I run Canon crop and FF systems and it is unlikely I would put a Tamron 17-70 on my crop camera (if I could!) over my FF and 24-105.
However, I imagine many Fuji owners stick within the system meaning FF lenses are out of the question.
In this context I see the Tamron as a great option, even if it is on the 'big' side.
Great, thank you!
I never understood the "warping". It's so stupid. What causes that? If it is in camera corrections, you should be able to turn it off.
I went through the menu and couldn't find a way to turn off a distortion correction.
Yes the Tamron give extra range....but its massive!.
That is true.
Which lense do you use?
I've owned both of these lenses, and decided to keep the Sigma. That small form factor means it is more likely that I will bring it along.
@@DustinAbbottTWI what about Sony FE 20mm
@@lifewiththree01 I'm confused - you've commented on a Fuji video. If you're asking about Sony, I don't use either of these lenses. I actually own full frame bodies for Sony E Mount
I spy Brookstreet Hotel!! 12:30
Exactly right.
Crap. I just bought the Sigma today. I dont care about the size id ratger get much better range.
That's unfortunate.
Bet you’re not disappointed with the Sigma!!!
You did not mention anything about the fact that Sigma lens is not weather sealed, when Tamron is. So for someone who shoots frequently outdoors and has a weather sealed body, it can be a game changer.
The Sigma is sealed at the mount (it has a gasket), but yes, the Tamron has internal seals and a more thorough sealing overall.
I'm shocked that the Tamron performance is different on fuji compared to the Sony ver
The Fuji 40MP is the most demanding that I've ever tested on. Only the very sharpest lenses really look strong on it, and that includes very, very few zoom lenses.
@DustinAbbottTWI Wow so is high Mp sensors all like that or only Fuji? Do you think if Sony made a apsc 40mp sensor it would be just as demanding?
I never knew this. Thabk you for teaching me that
It's hard for me to say, as I find Fuji's X-trans sensors a little difficult anyway. But I also found that Canon's 33MP APS-C sensor was pretty tough on glass.