Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 vs Sony 16-35mm GM!

    Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 vs Sony 16-35mm GM!
    Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 vs Sony 16-35mm GM!

    Hey guys, it’s Max I just got a box in the mail that I’ve been waiting for for a while now, of course, you know what that is it’s the Tamron 17 to 20 F. 2.8 lens.

    We’re going to be taking a look at it testing it out and comparing it directly against the Sony 6 seems to 35 A. G. master lens. This might be my favorite G.

    Muscles out of all of them, I was super impressed at the launch event. I do have a full review that you guys can go and check out super sharp, nice ones.

    But there’s just one thing that is wrong with it, and it’s not mistaken it’s just kind of sucks, and that is the price tag this thing is 2000 $200 so even more expensive than my A. 73 of course.

    If you have the money it is an excellent land, but this is where it Tamron is stepping in once again given us a good value option 17 to 28 not as versatile range, but it’s $900 is a 20 200 you can buy 2 of these now instead of 1 of these issues all right. Okay.

    With vehicles, I don’t see it feels like a toy because that’s an insult. The build quality is the same as in 2875. The materials look to be the same. It seems better than it’s unusual for 20 to 25. There’s a little line.

    When the plastic was molded this doesn’t have that so looks like they could have improved that of course that still has the same layout, so the zoom is at the top in focus is closer to the body that was the downside of this Tamron, but I did get used to it didn’t have any issues, but I’m surprised by how lightweight.

    It is I wanted to make this video a little bit differently more interesting, so I’m not just sitting in my office. I’m out here in my backyard. With that said, Sir, if you have some, you know barking so, Winona is a FedEx truck driving by or something like that work some hot spots here, but the first thing I want to look at is sharpness.

    My shadow over there, I’m going to take a series of photos both center in the corner. We’ll see how these compare in terms of sharpness 2875 is very sharp, so I expect the 17 to 28 to be very good now before we get into that there’s one thing I want to mention: how tight these lands attach is I just put it on before recording. I almost have to like force it to get it, and it feels like I have to push a little too hard.

    I don’t have that with my other Tamron with the G. master, and with this 1 I don’t know, maybe I’ll wear it after a while, but with native Sony lenses, you don’t get the issue.

    Let’s take some shots taking a look at the full shots it is incredible how similar they look just a little bit of a white balance temperature shift in free going to a center crop out 400 percent they are so close even on a 5 K.

    Display I would say the Sony might be just a hair sharper. Still, if we stopped on a 56 now the Taman looks just slightly brighter and looking at the extreme corners here, I think the Sony is only ever so slightly sharper he stopped down at 5.6 now at the Taman is taking the lead and going into 28 millimeters now.

    Center crop here at 5.6 is close I think that’s how much is very slightly sharper corners here at 2.8. I would give it to Sony, but when he stopped on a 5.6 just somewhat brighter with the Tamron, so just like.

    The Sony you do have the punch anything going to manual focus you should have I had a discussion as well the one thing you don’t get is manual focus switch on the side. Which I like in the customizable button this is just a simple design now another difference is this zooms internally the Tamron does so.

    If you’re throwing it on a gamble, it’s not going to throw off your balance will barely change when your job adjusting your zeal whereas a 16 of 35 as you guys can see.

    It extends not a lot, but a lot of glass is right up here at the front, which will throw off some of the balance in the front. Both of these are 2.aids but because this is 1635 the X.

    The range makes it much larger we have an 82 mil filter on the front compared to just 67 millimeters, which matches up precisely to the 2875 and a couple of other ones that house.

    That is very convenient, so that all right. Hey. This little guy came out to join me your face is all dirty, let’s go and test out the autofocusing system.
    Both in sales and video advertising isn’t that important in so once that is so wide compared to say like a portrait lens a lot of things you’re not doing much action anything like.

    But let’s see if we have any differences to Taman was much lower. It took 18 seconds to make 20 consecutive photos using a single autofocusing point compared to just 12 seconds on the Sony. It was noticeable when I was taking pictures.

    I also tested article, and I found something that I was not expecting both were very smooth and had proper motion, and they were silent, but the Sony has much more focus shifting, so the focal in changes when it’s focusing.

    Where’s the Tamron has almost none more like a single lens you guys may have noticed some of the Boca in a few of these tests let’s take a closer look at that you compare the Boca I shot a 28 millimeters F. 2.8 in they are very close to Sony as well let’s move there it’s a little bit cleaner here so.

    It is better, but this is a much closer comparison than the 2875 Tamron to the G. master 24 to 70 so good job Tamron the sun just picked out once again.

    This is the perfect time to test out flaring now. This is an issue that many people have when they’re shooting wide because of how susceptible these curves from Elland elements are in different coatings will improve and reduce flaring that’s 1 area where I think the G.

    Master will be quite a way ahead of the less expensive tam on, but let’s take a look now this is something that I was not expecting if we looked at the Tamron overall.

    It has better contrast. The flaring is more controlled. It’s a little more extreme in the corners with different colors, but the Stoney has a lot going on towards the center. There lie circles of different colors.

    The Tama just has that one little hot spot, and in this shot one or not shooting directly into the sun, the Tamron is pretty much perfectly clean. What is the Sony does have a Cup?

    Full marks over there in lower contrast as well, so this was surprising. I’m guessing that’s because the Sony is more full has a more prominent front element, but those salmon does win here.

    I’m not sure if you ever wanted me to be this close to the camera, but now we are going to test out minimal focusing distances just if you’re going to choose a macro or close the macro with your wedding len.

    You guys can see the Tehran can get quite a bit closer than Sony for macro photos both on the long and the 28 millimeters, and on the wide end at 17, this is another area where the team on 28 to 75 does better than the G.

    Master, so the last question that you guys probably have that, unfortunately.
    I can’t answer for you I can’t even answer for myself at least until my full review comes out is the 17 millimeters on the Tamron wide enough compared to the 16 so here you guys will see some shots side by side and this is like the worst time to shoot for some real things up just at my house here but just to show.

    You guys an example of the difference in this kind of scenario where you know the rooms are big enough. I think that the 17 millimeters are just beautiful, even for like a smaller kitchen in the bathrooms. You probably would want something more comprehensive and another thing to consider.

    If you’re doing videos, not photos, but if you’re doing videos in a shooting with the camera like the A. 7 3001.2 times crop if the shooting 4030 and that will be affected now, these shots were 4024, but for a lot of stuff.

    I want to go to 4030 gets me the results, and there’s a 70 millimeter that might be a little bit more limiting; ignoring my kids around in that room over there, I’m not as far as dollar thing on again will have the ronin S. C.

    I was able to balance the G. master 16 or 35. I am maxing out the plate and moving back to restore it, and unfortunately, with that, we are touching the I. cap, whereas the Taman 17 to 28 nothing is.

    Well, a lightweight, there’s no issues at all so far as weight wise I’d instead go with the Tamron incise but, of course, is giving you a bit wider of a shot now I will be doing a review of this lands.

    I hope to do a couple of real estate jobs she got some of those examples in getting some actual world usage out of it before I give you a full review so make sure he is a subscriber notification enabled.

    If you guys want to check out that article, for some people, this is just going to be the no-brainer because of the price tag, even if it’s not as good in specific categories.

    I’m not on the longer end the 28 millimeters I don’t mind that this goes to 35 sure it’s beautiful, but I would much rather take the trade office size and weight and lose a little bit on the long end.


    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here