having similar side-by-side photos with the fuji at 55 and the tamron at 70 would have been really nice to compare so viewers can easily see the difference in background when using a similar composition between both lenses' longest ends. it's arguably their biggest difference in capability aside from chromatic aberration differences.
My 16-55 is such a great lens, but I can totally see why the extra to 70mm would be useful, particularly if you're travelling and only want to take one lens, especially as it's lighter than the Fujinon. Great video as always!
You could also have a look at the XF 16-80 mm f/4.0. A bit slower but with OIS and Fujinon's OIS system is the best on the market. The XF 18-135 mm f/3.5-5.6 also has the same OIS system and can be very usefull, although I find the corners a bit soft at the very wide and very telephoto end, but not any worse than other superzoom (wide range) lenses. Plus the OIS is really impressive, I mean handheld 135mm shots impressive.
Really useful test. The colour reproduction is significantly better on the Fujifilm but I want for the Tamron in the end as it was much cheaper and the 70mm range is definitely useful.
I don't think you would want to.. but it would be amazing to get more of a studio comparison type video. Same settings, same lighting, same photos.. with both lenses and going into the 100% crops. Not many people compare these two (rather the Fuji 16-80 and the Tammy) but I think this is a better comparison since they are both f2.8 Thanks for this video anyways!
Hello there - that’s a great idea actually! I’ll ask fuji to send me the 16-80 and why not a comparison of all 3 with flashes in my studio 😏 take care and thanks for watching!
I have the Fuji 70-300. That is sharp at 70 across the frame. So the 17-70 is a great complement for that lens. two lenses from 17 all the way to 300. All for 1118 grammes. Plus choice of body and a spare battery, a few filters and set to go. The Fuji has a filter thread size of 67mm. Dream team.
I say go for Fujinon if you are a still shooter and if the highest possible image quality is your main priority. Tamron 17-70mm is for a more all around usability. Those stabilization + constant aperture of f2.8 in Tamron are far useful in so many cases especially when you’re doing some paid work projects.
Xf 16-55 is great lens at a global level. But on the 40mp sensors, it is just not sharp to my standard. When compared to say my xf 50-140mm or 23mm 1.4 wr and 18mm 1.4 wr at the same focal length and aperture.
I use the XT4 and the couple 16-55 F2.8 and 50-140 F2.8 and I will never change that for a long time. I’m sure this Tamron is very good but I LOVE this 2 lenses as they are.
Each to our own, I have the 17-70 with my xh2 + my Fuji 70-300. I find the 17-70 is really sharp, the fact that it is lighter is a real bonus, the extra reach is nice. The aperture control is on the front dial on the camera body. At the end of the day you pays your money and takes your chance.
Thanks for the review, it's really helpful. I find the extra reach to be really tempting compared to the 16-55, especially to do some travel portrait without getting to close to the people we shoot for more comfort. Not sure why the aperture ring is a dealbreaker as you can control it from the camera, which is as easy, just a matter of getting used to it, I guess. Finally, the 16-55mm seems to be significantly sharper just by looking at few pics you posted, which is really important when producing professional grade pictures. That's a tough competition tbh. I guess that the Fuji purists would go for the 16-55mm, without any doubt. I am personally not one of them and the decision becomes even more difficult.
Thanks Remi 👍🏼 The aperture ring is one of those things you get used to and can’t go back from (after close to 10 years using Leica and Fuji with it - can’t use something that doesn’t have it (not a must tho - of course). I didn’t notice that much a difference other than when using apertures under f4(ish). But it might be different for you - hence the samples 😁 Hope you’ll find the right lens for you! Take care
I have the 18-55 and often find the 55 to be a little short of how I want to frame the scene, and the slower aperture is noticable at night even if I max out the ISO at 12800. (Could go for 51200, but only as a last resort cause it is noticably slow to capture)
I hear ya! Often having that extra bit (over 55) is great and can be helpful. I would suggest this Tamron or the Tamron 18-300mm (it's a beast but not the best for max aperture when zoomed). Otherwise the solution could be to get the 90mm f2 for example or the macro 80mm but that's gonna be a little more expensive and definitely less versatile!
At last! I found someone reviewed its image stabe on a non ibis body! Only thing holding me back to buy range finder fuji body is its lack of IBIS this solves it. Thank you subscribed!
Well done and informative video. I appreciate your balance in assessing the two lenses. For me, it's now a moot point as I just picked up the Fujinon 16-55mm lens today. I'd been looking intermittently for the last couple years to add it to my kit but did not want to spend $1,200 lens as would most certainly have entailed extensive marriage counseling. My local camera store had a pristine lens for less than $500 with a 90 return it if you don't like it policy. So, my marriage remains intact and I have a slightly better walkabout lens than my 18-55mm (also a great lens). Anyway, I like your content and subscribed for more content videos in the future. BTW great looking children!
Tried both, bought the Tamron. The Fuji is much sharper on the wide end, but the extra reach is great for portraits in an all-in-one lens. Autofocus would probably need more firmware updates as it is not as responsive as Fujifilm, but then again, the 16-55 is not better by a crazy margin. I've noticed in video eye-AF on the X-T4, it sometimes decides to jump to the background, so that's one issue I hope firmware fixes. Distortion is probably where people need to be careful.
0:32 I once wore my sunglasses while shooting and forgot about it, things looked darker, so I changed my camera settings. It was a hell of a post processing nightmare.
Does fuji 16-55 and tamron 17-70 habe significant/noticeable color difference in stills. I am buying fuji camera for their colors and just need to know if buying tamron 17-70 would defeats the purpose?
Hey there, thanks for the message. TBH I didn't notice THAT big a difference in color shits. that said, if that is very important to you and you notice it that much, you might want to get a Fujinon lens to make sure it is 100% (or as close as possible) the results you expect. Take care!
@cris_photography thanks a lot for this. I am not pixel peeking into the colors. As long as both lens color rendition is roughly the same, i would prefer the budget option
You’re very welcome. I don’t shoot with IBIS on my fujifilm cameras (still now). I shoot on the T2 and T3 and didn’t test how’d perform with IBIS. I might do a test in the near futur. Cheers
I have a question ❓ In my country xt3 and xs10 both are same in terms of price. So i want to buy xt3 because of video feature's. Now my question is xt3 sensor good then (xs10 or xe4) ?
hi Cris currently i have only 23f2 planning to buy variable focal length can i buy 17 70 Tamron and further iam gona use it for paid work is ideal to get my work would be birthday shoot,candid wedding ,portrait and product shoot
Comparing to native lenses it's cost effective and practically features loaded ? and as u read comments after f4 images are gona be same from fuji and Tamron
Thanks Troy. Honestly I did not have that issue so far. I had a Sigma lens for my Sony that had that problem constantly but I didn't notice it here. Take care
Hi Cris, I'm a Fuji photographer that is switching from photo to video shootings. For this purpose I've bought a Fuji H2S and I'm trying to understand which zoom lens to buy for shooting videos. In your opinion, should I buy this Tamron lens or the Sigma 18-50 2.8 that is sure lighter than Tamron one unless it is not stabilized? What do you think about this? Thanks!
Hello Fabrizio, thanks for your message and great on getting the XH2s. There is a recent lens that Fuji released - the 18-120mm f4 that is pretty sweet for video, but it is an f4 lens. The Tamron is a good option (it is stabilized) I'd say if you need that extra stop of light/DOF. As a note, per the name I figured that you might be Italian. If so, I have an Italian channel as well (@cris fotografia) is you want to watch my reviews in Italian. Cheers!
@@cris_photography Ah, sei italiano! :) Nel mio commento ho sbagliato, intendevo il Sigma 18-50 2.8. Girando molto a mano libera mi sembrava meglio del Tamron che è un etto più pesante. Preferivo comunque evitare ottiche f4
Sono spagnolo in realtà, ma l'ho imparato qualche anno fa. Si, un obiettivo legero è utile ma non penso che un obiettivo pesante sia male - sopratutto se giri molta a mano libera (il peso aiuta nella stabilizzazione dell'immagine). Comunque sia, sia Tamron che Sigma sono ottima scelte x fare video (non ho ancora provato il Sigma). Il 18-120mm è stato creato specialmente x fare video, anche se è un f4 lo zoom è motorizzato quindi se vuoi e hai un attimo magari vai a vedere ;) A presto!
I'm not gonna lie, the 1 extra mm on the wide end of the 16-55mm makes a huge difference. It allows extra depth in foreground that wouldn't be as obvious with 17mm. I'm really torn between these 2 lens but I might have to go with Fuji.
You missed something very important. Fuji allows portraits at 55 while Tamron allows 70mm. A comparison is must showing advantages with DOF and compression. I mean thats the very reason of buying the Tamron.
what a great video... u got a abo like ur style ! Have the Xt-3, X-H2 16-55, 10-24 WR, and the 50- 140 with tc ---- im looking for a lighter version of my 16-55 =) But ---- till now im stayin at it =)) Thy 4 your grat comparison =)
Honestly depends on budget and use. I’d rather recommend the sigma 18-50 if the extra focal length is not needed (for size, weight, volume, etc.) but otherwise I’d go with the Fujinon if the above isn’t a concern. Cheers
Hi Cris.. very good review. I am really looking for a 2.8 zoom lens.. I have an XT4. So it’s 16-55 or tamron one? Please suggest. Btw I do videos mostly. Thanks
Hello there, honestly - as mentioned as j this full review - it depends if you need the extra mm of zoom and if OIS is important (XT4 has IBIS so not so much of a problem). Cheers
OIS (VC) can be very useful for filming (which is what he does mainly) so that can be a big plus for him. Other than that, yes the 16-55 is a great lens (and no, not exactly the same price). Cheers
Good review thanks Chris. For me the 16 55 is my go to lens and I see nothing that would make me swap to Tamron. I use 16 55 on an xt4 so ois is not an issue, build quality and aperture ring is a positive, images look more pleasing on the Fuji probably better contrast as you pointed out. I know the Fuji lens is very sharp, hard to tell on Tamron looking at a you tube video. Thanks again for putting the time into this video mate.
Hey Tony, thanks for your feedback and glad we think the same about this lens. You’ve pretty much covered all the points and I cannot find any reason why someone would swap from fuji to.. any third party lens 😉 Take care and thanks for watching!
2 года назад+3
The golden question is: Would you change your 16-80 f4 for the Tamron 17-70 f2.8, as an upgrade?
I did. The Tamron is sharper and faster. The colours are slightly greener if that makes sense. Hands down better than the 16-80. 16-55 is sharper, doesn't have the same reach though.
These disclaimers have to be there - don’t do it for the fun of saying it (thought that was obvious…) No unfortunately you cannot, it’s only a focusing ring 😩😩 Thanks for watching!
Excellent video and tests. Thanks for the review, fellow Cris 😁 Trying to decide on a standard zoom for Fuji. Still haven't seen a ton of comparisons between these two lenses on youtube, which is surprising. If someone covers events, especially in video, I could see the Tamron being extremely valuable. That would be the practical choice for me. But the 16-55 is legendary, and I think I would miss the feel and aperture ring. Very difficult! The Sigma 18-50 f2.8 will be another interesting choice when it comes out. Right now, I'm leaning toward getting the Fuji 16-55. Did you happen to get a chance to try the video AF performance for the Tamron?
Hello Chris “with an H” 😉 Those are good points and I understand your position - not easy! I’ll get my hands on the sigma and the Fuji 18-200 AS SOON as they are out to test and compare them. As for video, no to be honest I only shoot video with my Sony A7siii but I might do a video specifically for about that. Stay tuned!
Hello 👋🏼 I understand on the weight for a gimble. If you only use a specific focal length it might be good to go with a prime lens. Otherwise, there is the new 16-50mm (Fuji) which is just reviewed couple of days ago that has an internal zoom which means it won’t be a problem for gimbal work. Cheers!
Good review but I dont understand why anything but the most expensive equipment is labelled "beginners". This is a 2.8 lens that will not break for years. Optical qualities seem pretty good. Why is it labelled a "beginners" lens?
That is a great question! The answer is that it indeed doesn’t make any sense. You can be a beginner and have the best and most expensive lens in the world and yet get mediocre results. Or be a pro and use a terrible lens and yet get amazing results. There is no such thing as a “beginner” lens. f2.8 constant for a zoom makes it pro - period.
Appreciate the review! Really solid dude. Images look good and are helpful. For me it sounds like the few hundred dollars difference wouldn’t be worth it, doing professional photo and video work. That 16-55 is just so amazing
I mean it seems pretty clear to me that the Fujinon is way, way better when it comes to image quality. Contrast, colors, detail everything is just better so that the extra money is totally worth it I think.
Hi Cris, Thanks for the super helpful review. I've got the x-h2s and planning on running a 3-lens bag with my current 80mm macro and 50-140, then adding a zoom for my wider angles. Only thing that would've been nice to see was a little pixel peeping on sharpness, but this was definitely good enough for me to make my decision (fuji). Thank you so much for the time and effort you put into the comparison; will hit the sub button for ya. Cheers!
Hello! Thanks a lot for subscribing 😉 Yes might do a pixel peeping in the near future indeed, but happy it could help you make your choice - and nice setup you’ve got there! Take care
There’s my feedback in different scenarios with the sample shots - not an actual AF test (it can vary so much based on the contrast of the scene, the light, the body, etc. Don’t find it to be very interesting to do in a video). Unless you mean the AF for filming? In that case I didn’t include it but I will be making a follow up review for filming soon. Cheers
Всем доброго времени суток.Купил этот объектив для фуджа,работаю на видео!Во время зумирования объектив переходит в расфокус,сильный блур и потом после остановки зумирования картинка снова становится резкой.Это косяк объектива или надо прошивать линзу???🤔
Hum… strange! I didn’t have that problem but I don’t use it much (ever) for video so can’t say if it’s normal. I use Tamron a lot for my Sony cameras and it works ok so not sure 🤷🏻
@@cris_photography well, the 18-55 and 16-80 don't, according to Fuji. They only list the red badge zooms. If the Tamron does, I'll sell both my 16-55 and 16-80. If it doesn't, I'll stick with the Fujis. Thanks for your reply.
I feel like the slight loss of contrast at f2.8 is redeemed at f4.0, don't you think? That being said, I already bought that lens a few days ago - having the advantage of 70mm at f2.8 and OIS (and also sharp image quality) makes it a great, versatile tool for photo & especially video work.
@@DavidRey10 Good question! I still use it as my workhorse lens, my personal "holy trinity" would be this, the 50-140mm and the 33mm prime. I love it for video work, where the 17-70mm range is enough for 90% of what I do. For photography it's okay, but I still prefer primes whenever it's possible. One flaw I noticed is that it tends to miss focus on wideangle shots - e.g. when doing group shots: the camera claims to be in focus (putting green boxes around faces), but in reality the background is in focus and the subject slightly out of focus (which is so subtle that you won't notice it in the EVF). It doesn't happen everytime, but often enough that I started doing backup shots in these scenarios and/or check focus in playback mode with the punch-in zoom before moving on.
@@DavidRey10 I use a Tenba DNA backpack that has a separate section for the camera, which fits my camera + 17-70mm (attached), the 50-140mm and 1-2 smaller lenses. If it's only a short trip (2-3 days) and I'm minimalistic, I can fit everything in here.
Good question! It performs - Imo - as good as the Fuji lens if not a tad better. For photography (which what I use it for on my Fuji cameras) the focus is quick and snappy, didn’t have a problem with it. Cheers
It's a big difference between Tamron 70mm vs Fujinon 55mm...the Tamron have so much smoother bokeh at 2.8. I think the Tamron can be a nice lens for wedding
16-55 for 900 bucks? It's 1200 here (well, 1100 now the euro and dollar are identical) in the Netherlands. No aperture ring is a massive no-go for me honestly. I probably wouldn't consider the Tamron then. I already have the Fuji (650 euros second hand, years ago) so I'm all set. Nice review, just a bit weirded out by the audio glitches after the images. That shouldn't be necessary :)
Hi Cris I agree with you, Tamron makes great lenses and for the price they are excellent value. I have a couple for the Sony system and I cannot complain about the image quality or focusing speed etc. But personally I don't get excited about using them. I do use them and the results are fine. Sometimes it is not just about image quality but how something feels or how it makes you feel. Really enjoy your videos.
Hello Michael, thanks for your message - funny enough I also own a couple for my Sony cameras. I hear you on the “feel” of the lens and yes, it is not a Leica lens or a Fujifilm one for that matter. Y’a, it does get the job done but if you are about the “how” you took the shot that ain’t the lens for you - couldn’t agree more! Take care and thanks for watching!
exactly my thought, if it doesn't have an aperture ring, I'm not interested!!! The whole point of Fuji cameras to me, is to be able to use all the dials very quickly and setting everything without even turning on the camera. Without the aperture ring I might as well just use a Sony or Canon ;-)
Oh y’a i did, I also use every day the 10-24 - they have an infinite ring - better than nothing I guess but not a fan (in fact never owned the 27mm first gen)
Hello and thank for your great work. Just a question, why do you say it's for "beginner" ? What lense is equivalent to this range & aperture and is for pro ? I am in a real questioning about selling my 16-55 to buy this just to have the 15mm range and maybe also because it's lighter. I am shooting some sports event and I think this could be usefull. In Fuji lineup I do not see any lense that could be as versatile as this one. Maybe the Sigma combo from Canon lense 18 35 F1.8 & 50-100 F1.8 could be great.
Hello there, I don’t remember saying “it’s for beginners” but I probably said “it’s ALSO great for beginners” - not only. I say that cause you get a wide array of focal lengths and to start - f2.8 all the way is great and plenty. For a pro work it’s great too - for events for example or an other scenario where you’ll need more focal lengths without having to swap lenses. Personally i shoot weddings only with prime lenses for example. Take care 😉
@@cris_photography Thanks , I also shoot wedding with prime, but when shooting sport, it's a great addition to be able to zomm in & out quickly :p It's why it's hard to buy gear when you shoot a lot of different stuff :p If I was only in wedding I will have only 2 lenses 23& 56 :p But damn, shooting sport is so cool !
I guess ya. But the 18-300 for example is a lens fuji doesn’t have. Same for the 17-70 (they cover up to 55), so maybe someone might need the difference 🤷🏻 but in terms of quality can’t and won’t argue with you - absolute no brainer! Take care
Hello Samuel! Eh oui 😉 il y avait bel et bien ce petit accent 🙃 J’ai aussi une chaîne française (Cris Photographie) ou je fais les meme revues… mais en français 😎 Bonne continuation!
Buy 77mm filters or whatever the largest diameter of your lenses is and buy step-up rings for the smaller diameter lenses. Buying multiple sizes of filters is just silly.
I dropped tamron 17-70, and it cracked. I should've bought fuji instead of tamron. Also, tamron felt like foggy, fuji 70-300mm is clearer than tamron, and will never buy third-party lenses.
Oh snap! Not good - sorry to hear. Not sure the angle you dropped it wouldn’t have broken the Fuji too - guess we’ll never know. I don’t remember dropping a lens besides a Leica Panasonic one and nothing happened thanks to the metal hood. Take care
Depends where you look - hence the “about”. That isn’t anyways going to stay like that forever and will change sooner than later. But that might be the official price right now possibly. Thanks for watching 👌🏼
Lack of aparture ring as a deal breaker sounds as if lack of an apple on the back of a phone was a dealbreaker - ridiculous. What is the diference which hand you use to change the aparture? You are still looking through a view finder and turning a ring - either under your left or right hand....Jesus
it will never make sense to let a uniform frontend lens element size rule your lens design… Fuji designs lenses for optical quality and results - everything else follows from that - this is how it should be
That is MY viewpoint - it makes sense to ME. Don’t really care « what should make sense » - I don’t at all actually. If I have to work with filters and NDs and if one company CAN do it then Fuji CAN too. Cinema lenses often have the same diameter - are they therefore « less good »?
You can take the parts that concern the lens and look at that only. The reason is that 95% of the viewers want to know if the 150$ are worth spending or not, if the quality is similar, etc. I wish I could but that would mean a LOT of comments about “how does it compare to…” as experienced many times in the past. The photos I show are 90% shot with the lens and SOOC so you can see how the results will look (which is the most important thing when watching a review imo). Thanks for the feedback and take care
having similar side-by-side photos with the fuji at 55 and the tamron at 70 would have been really nice to compare so viewers can easily see the difference in background when using a similar composition between both lenses' longest ends. it's arguably their biggest difference in capability aside from chromatic aberration differences.
Thanks AJ, i take not for future videos
My 16-55 is such a great lens, but I can totally see why the extra to 70mm would be useful, particularly if you're travelling and only want to take one lens, especially as it's lighter than the Fujinon. Great video as always!
Exactly 👍🏼 take care!
You could also have a look at the XF 16-80 mm f/4.0. A bit slower but with OIS and Fujinon's OIS system is the best on the market. The XF 18-135 mm f/3.5-5.6 also has the same OIS system and can be very usefull, although I find the corners a bit soft at the very wide and very telephoto end, but not any worse than other superzoom (wide range) lenses. Plus the OIS is really impressive, I mean handheld 135mm shots impressive.
Really useful test. The colour reproduction is significantly better on the Fujifilm but I want for the Tamron in the end as it was much cheaper and the 70mm range is definitely useful.
Thanks for the message and glad it was helpful!
I don't think you would want to.. but it would be amazing to get more of a studio comparison type video.
Same settings, same lighting, same photos.. with both lenses and going into the 100% crops.
Not many people compare these two (rather the Fuji 16-80 and the Tammy) but I think this is a better comparison since they are both f2.8
Thanks for this video anyways!
Hello there - that’s a great idea actually! I’ll ask fuji to send me the 16-80 and why not a comparison of all 3 with flashes in my studio 😏 take care and thanks for watching!
I have the Fuji 70-300. That is sharp at 70 across the frame. So the 17-70 is a great complement for that lens. two lenses from 17 all the way to 300. All for 1118 grammes.
Plus choice of body and a spare battery, a few filters and set to go. The Fuji has a filter thread size of 67mm. Dream team.
Absolutely!
I say go for Fujinon if you are a still shooter and if the highest possible image quality is your main priority.
Tamron 17-70mm is for a more all around usability. Those stabilization + constant aperture of f2.8 in Tamron are far useful in so many cases especially when you’re doing some paid work projects.
Very true 👍🏼 used the Tamron last Friday and it was very versatile and worked great. Cheers
I have the 16-55/2.8 for a couple of years now and wouldn't change it for anything. Now with that being said, it would be cool to have OIS inside...
Totally 💯 I personally am not bothered by the lack of OIS in a lens for my regular tasks tbh but might be useful to some indeed. Cheers
Xf 16-55 is great lens at a global level. But on the 40mp sensors, it is just not sharp to my standard. When compared to say my xf 50-140mm or 23mm 1.4 wr and 18mm 1.4 wr at the same focal length and aperture.
I use the XT4 and the couple 16-55 F2.8 and 50-140 F2.8 and I will never change that for a long time. I’m sure this Tamron is very good but I LOVE this 2 lenses as they are.
Great lenses - I hear ya! Cheers
@@cris_photography Yes Man. We are on the same wave. 👍
the 50-140 is awesome! had it for a long time, and it’s becoming my goto for alot of situations - landscape, portraits etc
Each to our own, I have the 17-70 with my xh2 + my Fuji 70-300. I find the 17-70 is really sharp, the fact that it is lighter is a real bonus, the extra reach is nice. The aperture control is on the front dial on the camera body. At the end of the day you pays your money and takes your chance.
Absolutely Alan 💯
Thanks for sharing your thoughts
Thanks for the review, it's really helpful.
I find the extra reach to be really tempting compared to the 16-55, especially to do some travel portrait without getting to close to the people we shoot for more comfort.
Not sure why the aperture ring is a dealbreaker as you can control it from the camera, which is as easy, just a matter of getting used to it, I guess.
Finally, the 16-55mm seems to be significantly sharper just by looking at few pics you posted, which is really important when producing professional grade pictures.
That's a tough competition tbh. I guess that the Fuji purists would go for the 16-55mm, without any doubt. I am personally not one of them and the decision becomes even more difficult.
Thanks Remi 👍🏼
The aperture ring is one of those things you get used to and can’t go back from (after close to 10 years using Leica and Fuji with it - can’t use something that doesn’t have it (not a must tho - of course).
I didn’t notice that much a difference other than when using apertures under f4(ish). But it might be different for you - hence the samples 😁
Hope you’ll find the right lens for you! Take care
I have the 18-55 and often find the 55 to be a little short of how I want to frame the scene, and the slower aperture is noticable at night even if I max out the ISO at 12800. (Could go for 51200, but only as a last resort cause it is noticably slow to capture)
I hear ya! Often having that extra bit (over 55) is great and can be helpful. I would suggest this Tamron or the Tamron 18-300mm (it's a beast but not the best for max aperture when zoomed). Otherwise the solution could be to get the 90mm f2 for example or the macro 80mm but that's gonna be a little more expensive and definitely less versatile!
At last! I found someone reviewed its image stabe on a non ibis body! Only thing holding me back to buy range finder fuji body is its lack of IBIS this solves it. Thank you subscribed!
Awesome! Glad it could help out - take care and thanks for subscribing!
The biggest factor for someone like me, owner of X-T3 is the VC of the Tamron. That is the major factor and why I'm going with the Tamron.
Makes sense 👍🏼
The aperture ring is the least of my concerns lol. Fuji cameras have tons of controls.
Good for ya! Then this lens could work out just fine for you 👍🏼 take care
fantastic review, I do appreciate your good advice!!
Thanks a lot - much appreciated! Glad it was helpful 😉
Great review, thanks. Although you didn't make any side by side sharpness tests.
Thanks for the feedback Olga - will keep that in mind 😉
Well done and informative video. I appreciate your balance in assessing the two lenses. For me, it's now a moot point as I just picked up the Fujinon 16-55mm lens today. I'd been looking intermittently for the last couple years to add it to my kit but did not want to spend $1,200 lens as would most certainly have entailed extensive marriage counseling. My local camera store had a pristine lens for less than $500 with a 90 return it if you don't like it policy. So, my marriage remains intact and I have a slightly better walkabout lens than my 18-55mm (also a great lens). Anyway, I like your content and subscribed for more content videos in the future. BTW great looking children!
Thanks for your feedback Gary and for subscribing! Yes 500$ is definitely a great deal for a great lens - good choice! Have a good one and take care
Tried both, bought the Tamron. The Fuji is much sharper on the wide end, but the extra reach is great for portraits in an all-in-one lens. Autofocus would probably need more firmware updates as it is not as responsive as Fujifilm, but then again, the 16-55 is not better by a crazy margin. I've noticed in video eye-AF on the X-T4, it sometimes decides to jump to the background, so that's one issue I hope firmware fixes. Distortion is probably where people need to be careful.
Good feedback and additional data - thanks!
Interested to see how the new fuji mk2 stacks up.
Fuji should be sending it over very soon 😉
@@cris_photography waiting for the comparison video!
I’m holding out for the 300g Sigma 18-50, but I put lightness above everything in my Fuji kit.
I hear ya Luke!
0:32 I once wore my sunglasses while shooting and forgot about it, things looked darker, so I changed my camera settings. It was a hell of a post processing nightmare.
Ya that’s for the broll only (I don’t have people taking videos of me while I shoot usually lol)
I don’t ever shoot with glasses on 😎 cheers!
Tamron 17-70 produces lovely warm yellowish color ❤.
Yes!
appreciate the review and your photos, great. thanks
Thanks a lot - glad it was helpful
6:07 when you zoom in on the spider there seems to be a ton of purple fringing on the Tamron
There is, when wide opened and at the minimum focusing distance
Does fuji 16-55 and tamron 17-70 habe significant/noticeable color difference in stills. I am buying fuji camera for their colors and just need to know if buying tamron 17-70 would defeats the purpose?
Hey there, thanks for the message. TBH I didn't notice THAT big a difference in color shits. that said, if that is very important to you and you notice it that much, you might want to get a Fujinon lens to make sure it is 100% (or as close as possible) the results you expect.
Take care!
@cris_photography thanks a lot for this. I am not pixel peeking into the colors. As long as both lens color rendition is roughly the same, i would prefer the budget option
Thank you for the useful information.
How about using it with Thamron's VC and Fuji Body's IBIS?
You’re very welcome.
I don’t shoot with IBIS on my fujifilm cameras (still now). I shoot on the T2 and T3 and didn’t test how’d perform with IBIS. I might do a test in the near futur. Cheers
As someone with a lowly xt200 (no IBIS), going to be traveling this year, a low budget due to building a house... The tamron is VERY tempting.
Oh you gonna love it! Even if you’re not on a budget it’s a great alternative with good IQ
Cheers!
Very, very thorough review. Nice. Will subscribe.
Thanks Robert - much appreciated!
I have a question ❓
In my country xt3 and xs10 both are same in terms of price.
So i want to buy xt3 because of video feature's.
Now my question is xt3 sensor good then (xs10 or xe4) ?
Hello there, the sensor of the XT3 is exactly the same as the XT4 and the XS-10 so you won’t lose any quality there. Cheers
@@cris_photography thank. I was watching pal2tech video. He showed that xt3 has little noise on low light.
So great test
Thanks man
hi Cris currently i have only 23f2 planning to buy variable focal length can i buy 17 70 Tamron and further iam gona use it for paid work is ideal to get my work would be birthday shoot,candid wedding ,portrait and product shoot
Nice! Yes it’s a very versatile lens for all sorts of events
Comparing to native lenses it's cost effective and practically features loaded ? and as u read comments after f4 images are gona be same from fuji and Tamron
Wow, thats was nice, was looking for same comparison.
You just got new subscriber.
Thanks a lot and glad it was helpful to you!
Thanks for ur video！How do you think XF 18-55 & Tamron 17-70？(I really need Stabilization so pick one of them)
I’d go with Tamron personally if I had to chose (better range 70 vs 55 and 17 vs 18 AND 2.8 vs 2.8-4
Cheers
Great video. Love the studio !!
Thanks 😃😃
Great video! I understand the Tamron has an issue with dust getting into the lens via the barrel as it zooms in and out. Have you run into that?
Thanks Troy. Honestly I did not have that issue so far. I had a Sigma lens for my Sony that had that problem constantly but I didn't notice it here. Take care
Hi Cris, I'm a Fuji photographer that is switching from photo to video shootings. For this purpose I've bought a Fuji H2S and I'm trying to understand which zoom lens to buy for shooting videos.
In your opinion, should I buy this Tamron lens or the Sigma 18-50 2.8 that is sure lighter than Tamron one unless it is not stabilized? What do you think about this? Thanks!
Hello Fabrizio, thanks for your message and great on getting the XH2s. There is a recent lens that Fuji released - the 18-120mm f4 that is pretty sweet for video, but it is an f4 lens. The Tamron is a good option (it is stabilized) I'd say if you need that extra stop of light/DOF.
As a note, per the name I figured that you might be Italian. If so, I have an Italian channel as well (@cris fotografia) is you want to watch my reviews in Italian. Cheers!
@@cris_photography Ah, sei italiano! :)
Nel mio commento ho sbagliato, intendevo il Sigma 18-50 2.8. Girando molto a mano libera mi sembrava meglio del Tamron che è un etto più pesante. Preferivo comunque evitare ottiche f4
Sono spagnolo in realtà, ma l'ho imparato qualche anno fa. Si, un obiettivo legero è utile ma non penso che un obiettivo pesante sia male - sopratutto se giri molta a mano libera (il peso aiuta nella stabilizzazione dell'immagine). Comunque sia, sia Tamron che Sigma sono ottima scelte x fare video (non ho ancora provato il Sigma). Il 18-120mm è stato creato specialmente x fare video, anche se è un f4 lo zoom è motorizzato quindi se vuoi e hai un attimo magari vai a vedere ;)
A presto!
@@cris_photography grazie carissimo! 😉
The thing is now how do these lenses resolve the 40 megapixel sensor.
Didn’t use it much with the new 40mp sensor but as far as I can tell they are ok
I'm not gonna lie, the 1 extra mm on the wide end of the 16-55mm makes a huge difference. It allows extra depth in foreground that wouldn't be as obvious with 17mm. I'm really torn between these 2 lens but I might have to go with Fuji.
I hear ya Nate - hope you’ll find the best for you 😉
@7:54 Did the Tamron also start at 55mm or at 70mm f2.8 for this sample series? THANKS
Hi Simon, thanks. They both started at 55mm (to make sure I get the closest comparaison possible between the 2). Take care!
Is the AF fast on an XT3? Still thinking about getting one. Thank you
Hello Victor, i still use it for my main work all the time. I find it very good, cheers
Same as autofocus on Xt4 with firmware updates. It's OK...Sony and Canon are better
You missed something very important. Fuji allows portraits at 55 while Tamron allows 70mm. A comparison is must showing advantages with DOF and compression. I mean thats the very reason of buying the Tamron.
Thanks for the comment and for bringing that up 👍🏼😉
what a great video... u got a abo like ur style ! Have the Xt-3, X-H2 16-55, 10-24 WR, and the 50- 140 with tc ---- im looking for a lighter version of my 16-55 =) But ---- till now im stayin at it =)) Thy 4 your grat comparison =)
Thanks man! Glad you enjoyed the video 😉
I might suggest u check the Sigma 18-50 (which I reviewed on this channel. I love that lens 😍😉 cheers
I prefer the Fuji 16-80 f4. Excellent, light, very sharp, no vignette, super stabilized, watertight!!!
Thanks for the feedback! 💪🏼
Would you recommend this lens on a Fujifilm XT5 over the 16-55?
Honestly depends on budget and use. I’d rather recommend the sigma 18-50 if the extra focal length is not needed (for size, weight, volume, etc.) but otherwise I’d go with the Fujinon if the above isn’t a concern.
Cheers
Hi Cris.. very good review. I am really looking for a 2.8 zoom lens.. I have an XT4. So it’s 16-55 or tamron one? Please suggest. Btw I do videos mostly. Thanks
Hello there, honestly - as mentioned as j this full review - it depends if you need the extra mm of zoom and if OIS is important (XT4 has IBIS so not so much of a problem). Cheers
@@cris_photography thanks for the reply Cris.. I think 16-55 will be good for videography in CT4.. 👍
The price are the same, so go 16-55, its a damn beast
OIS (VC) can be very useful for filming (which is what he does mainly) so that can be a big plus for him. Other than that, yes the 16-55 is a great lens (and no, not exactly the same price). Cheers
Good review thanks Chris. For me the 16 55 is my go to lens and I see nothing that would make me swap to Tamron. I use 16 55 on an xt4 so ois is not an issue, build quality and aperture ring is a positive, images look more pleasing on the Fuji probably better contrast as you pointed out. I know the Fuji lens is very sharp, hard to tell on Tamron looking at a you tube video. Thanks again for putting the time into this video mate.
Hey Tony, thanks for your feedback and glad we think the same about this lens. You’ve pretty much covered all the points and I cannot find any reason why someone would swap from fuji to.. any third party lens 😉
Take care and thanks for watching!
The golden question is: Would you change your 16-80 f4 for the Tamron 17-70 f2.8, as an upgrade?
I’d say no - I wouldn’t change. Unless your really need those stops of light/DOF
I did. The Tamron is sharper and faster. The colours are slightly greener if that makes sense. Hands down better than the 16-80. 16-55 is sharper, doesn't have the same reach though.
I change it too. My 16-80 was soft on the corners. The Tamron is sharper. No regrets.
Have the 16-80 as well, strongly considering change it for the tamron
These disclaimers getting a bit old. Can you program the aperture ring on the Tamron? Thanks for the review.
These disclaimers have to be there - don’t do it for the fun of saying it (thought that was obvious…)
No unfortunately you cannot, it’s only a focusing ring 😩😩
Thanks for watching!
@@cris_photography you sure that it cannot? I just watched another review and the guy said it can be programmed. Thanks.
Hum 🤨 that’s strange… I looked everywhere - did he say how?
Excellent video and tests. Thanks for the review, fellow Cris 😁
Trying to decide on a standard zoom for Fuji. Still haven't seen a ton of comparisons between these two lenses on youtube, which is surprising. If someone covers events, especially in video, I could see the Tamron being extremely valuable. That would be the practical choice for me. But the 16-55 is legendary, and I think I would miss the feel and aperture ring. Very difficult! The Sigma 18-50 f2.8 will be another interesting choice when it comes out. Right now, I'm leaning toward getting the Fuji 16-55.
Did you happen to get a chance to try the video AF performance for the Tamron?
Hello Chris “with an H” 😉
Those are good points and I understand your position - not easy!
I’ll get my hands on the sigma and the Fuji 18-200 AS SOON as they are out to test and compare them.
As for video, no to be honest I only shoot video with my Sony A7siii but I might do a video specifically for about that. Stay tuned!
@@cris_photography Fair enough, sounds good, thanks! Looking forward to future videos
Acabei de vender minha 16-55 pois era kit muito pesado para o meu gimbal trabalhar na vertical. To estudando pegar uma lente fixa ou essa tamron
Hello 👋🏼 I understand on the weight for a gimble. If you only use a specific focal length it might be good to go with a prime lens. Otherwise, there is the new 16-50mm (Fuji) which is just reviewed couple of days ago that has an internal zoom which means it won’t be a problem for gimbal work.
Cheers!
@@cris_photography que legal. Ainda não tinha ouvido falar dessa 16-50
🤣
Good review but I dont understand why anything but the most expensive equipment is labelled "beginners". This is a 2.8 lens that will not break for years. Optical qualities seem pretty good. Why is it labelled a "beginners" lens?
That is a great question! The answer is that it indeed doesn’t make any sense. You can be a beginner and have the best and most expensive lens in the world and yet get mediocre results. Or be a pro and use a terrible lens and yet get amazing results. There is no such thing as a “beginner” lens. f2.8 constant for a zoom makes it pro - period.
Appreciate the review! Really solid dude. Images look good and are helpful. For me it sounds like the few hundred dollars difference wouldn’t be worth it, doing professional photo and video work. That 16-55 is just so amazing
Thanks a lot for the feedback Austin - much appreciated. I hear ya on the price difference and yes, Fujinon is still Fujinon 😏
Take care
Great review, many thanks.
Glad it was helpful Phillip
I mean it seems pretty clear to me that the Fujinon is way, way better when it comes to image quality. Contrast, colors, detail everything is just better so that the extra money is totally worth it I think.
Fujinon is… fujinon! I agree with you - i feel the same way. Take care
This is a content i am waiting for. 👍👍
👍🏼😄
Hi Cris,
Thanks for the super helpful review. I've got the x-h2s and planning on running a 3-lens bag with my current 80mm macro and 50-140, then adding a zoom for my wider angles. Only thing that would've been nice to see was a little pixel peeping on sharpness, but this was definitely good enough for me to make my decision (fuji).
Thank you so much for the time and effort you put into the comparison; will hit the sub button for ya.
Cheers!
Hello! Thanks a lot for subscribing 😉
Yes might do a pixel peeping in the near future indeed, but happy it could help you make your choice - and nice setup you’ve got there! Take care
Get the 8-16. It's out of this world.
Where is the autofocus section on the video pleas?
There’s my feedback in different scenarios with the sample shots - not an actual AF test (it can vary so much based on the contrast of the scene, the light, the body, etc. Don’t find it to be very interesting to do in a video). Unless you mean the AF for filming? In that case I didn’t include it but I will be making a follow up review for filming soon. Cheers
@@cris_photography AF for photography, i wanted to know of the tamron fucus faster than the fuji 18-55. Thanks for your answer.
To be honest I haven’t see much of a difference between the 2 lenses on an XT4 body. Hope that helps
@@cris_photography thank you, that helps
Всем доброго времени суток.Купил этот объектив для фуджа,работаю на видео!Во время зумирования объектив переходит в расфокус,сильный блур и потом после остановки зумирования картинка снова становится резкой.Это косяк объектива или надо прошивать линзу???🤔
Hum… strange! I didn’t have that problem but I don’t use it much (ever) for video so can’t say if it’s normal. I use Tamron a lot for my Sony cameras and it works ok so not sure 🤷🏻
nice video! 👍
What ND filter did you show in the video?
Thanks. It’s a NiSi vnd 1.5-5 stops. You’ll find a review of it on my channel. Cheers
@@cris_photography thank you my friend! I'll definitely check it out🙏
The bigger question is can the tampon resolve 40mp like the Fuji can?
We shall see on the H2 but I don’t see why it wouldn’t. To be determined
@@cris_photography well, the 18-55 and 16-80 don't, according to Fuji. They only list the red badge zooms. If the Tamron does, I'll sell both my 16-55 and 16-80. If it doesn't, I'll stick with the Fujis.
Thanks for your reply.
Really hum? Let me try it out on the H2 (very soon) and I’ll let you know how it performs
If you were to buy this now, knowing. You can buy a used Fuji one for around 700 on eBay. What would you choose?
Fuji - hands down 😎
I feel like the slight loss of contrast at f2.8 is redeemed at f4.0, don't you think? That being said, I already bought that lens a few days ago - having the advantage of 70mm at f2.8 and OIS (and also sharp image quality) makes it a great, versatile tool for photo & especially video work.
Hello there, yea the contrast is better from f4/5.6 indeed 👍🏼
Good on you for buying it - I find it to be a great lens.
Cheers
How is it going after several months??
@@DavidRey10 Good question! I still use it as my workhorse lens, my personal "holy trinity" would be this, the 50-140mm and the 33mm prime. I love it for video work, where the 17-70mm range is enough for 90% of what I do. For photography it's okay, but I still prefer primes whenever it's possible. One flaw I noticed is that it tends to miss focus on wideangle shots - e.g. when doing group shots: the camera claims to be in focus (putting green boxes around faces), but in reality the background is in focus and the subject slightly out of focus (which is so subtle that you won't notice it in the EVF). It doesn't happen everytime, but often enough that I started doing backup shots in these scenarios and/or check focus in playback mode with the punch-in zoom before moving on.
@@shervinsardari how do you carry this when traveling as it is big? You unmount objective?
@@DavidRey10 I use a Tenba DNA backpack that has a separate section for the camera, which fits my camera + 17-70mm (attached), the 50-140mm and 1-2 smaller lenses. If it's only a short trip (2-3 days) and I'm minimalistic, I can fit everything in here.
What about autofocus?
Good question!
It performs - Imo - as good as the Fuji lens if not a tad better.
For photography (which what I use it for on my Fuji cameras) the focus is quick and snappy, didn’t have a problem with it. Cheers
@@cris_photography thanks
It's a big difference between Tamron 70mm vs Fujinon 55mm...the Tamron have so much smoother bokeh at 2.8. I think the Tamron can be a nice lens for wedding
Hello Daniel, yes it’s very true! I used to love shooting at 90mm f2 with the fujinon 90mm as it really gives a crazy DOF for weddings!
Almost no color fringing? I can see a ton of it at 6.06 😉
True true! But wide opened and zoomed to the max. I guess it’s fair 😁
i wish Tamron had 77mm as it's standard filter size
I hear ya 😉
I use xt4 how can us manual mode?? I can’t use manual
Change from « s » or « c » to « m » (on the dial in the front of the camera bottom right corner)
@@cris_photography yes but this lens i don’t understand iso speed aperture
How can change aperture this lens
Thank you my answer
16-55 for 900 bucks? It's 1200 here (well, 1100 now the euro and dollar are identical) in the Netherlands.
No aperture ring is a massive no-go for me honestly. I probably wouldn't consider the Tamron then. I already have the Fuji (650 euros second hand, years ago) so I'm all set. Nice review, just a bit weirded out by the audio glitches after the images. That shouldn't be necessary :)
👍🏼 thanks for the feedback
Does it work with xt1 and xt10?
Yes 👍🏼
Both great options but the sigmas size is what matters for me.
I hear ya!
Hi Cris I agree with you, Tamron makes great lenses and for the price they are excellent value. I have a couple for the Sony system and I cannot complain about the image quality or focusing speed etc. But personally I don't get excited about using them. I do use them and the results are fine. Sometimes it is not just about image quality but how something feels or how it makes you feel. Really enjoy your videos.
Hello Michael, thanks for your message - funny enough I also own a couple for my Sony cameras.
I hear you on the “feel” of the lens and yes, it is not a Leica lens or a Fujifilm one for that matter. Y’a, it does get the job done but if you are about the “how” you took the shot that ain’t the lens for you - couldn’t agree more!
Take care and thanks for watching!
exactly my thought, if it doesn't have an aperture ring, I'm not interested!!! The whole point of Fuji cameras to me, is to be able to use all the dials very quickly and setting everything without even turning on the camera. Without the aperture ring I might as well just use a Sony or Canon ;-)
We’re on the same page 😁😉 cheers
Never used the original 27mm then? No aperture ring. Does it really matter?
Oh y’a i did, I also use every day the 10-24 - they have an infinite ring - better than nothing I guess but not a fan (in fact never owned the 27mm first gen)
yup! Gelded (no aperture ring) lenses are terrible in usage
@@cris_photography the “infinite aperture ring”, is to accommodate variable biggest aperture throughout the zoom range
Hello and thank for your great work. Just a question, why do you say it's for "beginner" ? What lense is equivalent to this range & aperture and is for pro ?
I am in a real questioning about selling my 16-55 to buy this just to have the 15mm range and maybe also because it's lighter. I am shooting some sports event and I think this could be usefull. In Fuji lineup I do not see any lense that could be as versatile as this one. Maybe the Sigma combo from Canon lense 18 35 F1.8 & 50-100 F1.8 could be great.
Hello there, I don’t remember saying “it’s for beginners” but I probably said “it’s ALSO great for beginners” - not only. I say that cause you get a wide array of focal lengths and to start - f2.8 all the way is great and plenty.
For a pro work it’s great too - for events for example or an other scenario where you’ll need more focal lengths without having to swap lenses. Personally i shoot weddings only with prime lenses for example.
Take care 😉
@@cris_photography Thanks , I also shoot wedding with prime, but when shooting sport, it's a great addition to be able to zomm in & out quickly :p It's why it's hard to buy gear when you shoot a lot of different stuff :p If I was only in wedding I will have only 2 lenses 23& 56 :p
But damn, shooting sport is so cool !
in the same focal the fujinon have a really smooth and creamy bokeh, much better than the tamron for some reason
Very possible! Thanks 😉
There is only one Tamron lens I would buy for Fuji and that's the 35-150 F2-2.8, all of their other lenses are already done by Fuji themselves better.
I guess ya. But the 18-300 for example is a lens fuji doesn’t have. Same for the 17-70 (they cover up to 55), so maybe someone might need the difference 🤷🏻 but in terms of quality can’t and won’t argue with you - absolute no brainer! Take care
দাদা আমি ফুজি ক্যামেরা দিয়ে ভিডিও নিতে পারছিনা 😢
Sorry I don’t understand what you wrote
Ah, la Suisse, je me disais bien avoir décelé un petit accent francophone.
great review !
:) Tamron is on fire 🔥 with their new lenses !! It's gonna make Fuji move their b€tts with their zoom lineup :)
Thanks man! Y’a absolutely!!
Hello Samuel! Eh oui 😉 il y avait bel et bien ce petit accent 🙃
J’ai aussi une chaîne française (Cris Photographie) ou je fais les meme revues… mais en français 😎
Bonne continuation!
@@cris_photography ah? Tu peux donner le lien? Si ça se trouve je suis déjà abonné, je sais pas...
@@doctorstrobe Salut Samuel! Tu trouveras ça ici: ruclips.net/channel/UCoUesdEy9IxcS4fDXwRP5Rg
ওটিজি কোড থেকেও ভিডিও নিতে পারছিনা 😢
Sorry I can’t understand 🙁 able to translate in English ? Thanks 😊
Buy 77mm filters or whatever the largest diameter of your lenses is and buy step-up rings for the smaller diameter lenses. Buying multiple sizes of filters is just silly.
Or… use Tamron and only use 67mm for all your lenses 😁😂
But jokes aside, y’a totally 👍🏼
I dropped tamron 17-70, and it cracked. I should've bought fuji instead of tamron. Also, tamron felt like foggy, fuji 70-300mm is clearer than tamron, and will never buy third-party lenses.
Oh snap! Not good - sorry to hear.
Not sure the angle you dropped it wouldn’t have broken the Fuji too - guess we’ll never know.
I don’t remember dropping a lens besides a Leica Panasonic one and nothing happened thanks to the metal hood. Take care
Ótimo trabalho...parabens
Obrigado Sandro 😉
The price is $750 for the Sony version. For fujifilm its $799
Depends where you look - hence the “about”. That isn’t anyways going to stay like that forever and will change sooner than later. But that might be the official price right now possibly. Thanks for watching 👌🏼
কিভাবে নেব তার জন্য একটা ভিডিও বানাও প্লিজ দাদা
Sorry I don’t understand what you wrote
Ohohoh that 16-55 2.8 is a chunky boi =)
Yup 😉
Lack of aparture ring as a deal breaker sounds as if lack of an apple on the back of a phone was a dealbreaker - ridiculous. What is the diference which hand you use to change the aparture? You are still looking through a view finder and turning a ring - either under your left or right hand....Jesus
Your opinion - which I respect. Try doing the same?
it will never make sense to let a uniform frontend lens element size rule your lens design… Fuji designs lenses for optical quality and results - everything else follows from that - this is how it should be
That is MY viewpoint - it makes sense to ME. Don’t really care « what should make sense » - I don’t at all actually. If I have to work with filters and NDs and if one company CAN do it then Fuji CAN too. Cinema lenses often have the same diameter - are they therefore « less good »?
I just wish that you would review the lens based on it’s own merit instead of comparing it with another lens.
You can take the parts that concern the lens and look at that only. The reason is that 95% of the viewers want to know if the 150$ are worth spending or not, if the quality is similar, etc. I wish I could but that would mean a LOT of comments about “how does it compare to…” as experienced many times in the past.
The photos I show are 90% shot with the lens and SOOC so you can see how the results will look (which is the most important thing when watching a review imo).
Thanks for the feedback and take care