I had the same dilemma recently and finally I chose Sigma too. It's such a great lens and I love how small and light it is. It really is a great lens to handle and to work with.
Having had both I prefer the Tamron G2. Yes, both lenses are close, but I like the extra 5mm reach. At least with the two lenses I compared, the Tamron was a little bit better optically, especially for close-up shots and about equal otherwise. And on my Sony a7riii, the AF is a bit better on the Tamron. Just my personal opinion of course.
This is very useful, thank you. I think the differences are negligible for my use, so I'd prefer sigma for its more compact size. Though in the UK, the sigma seems to be more expensive
I saw a different test called "Sigma 28-70 F2.8 vs Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 - Which Sony E-Mount Zoom Lens is better?", and Tamron was way better in almost every aspect.
I have to agree, I had the Tamron G2 and sold it to go with a prime set up to cover 24-70 range. Decided to go back with a zoom and ended up trying the Sigma this time. I am a self-admitted Sigma fan boy, however, the 28-70 is the first Sigma lens I have owned that not only did I not care for but also returned. I will be picking up the Tamron in its place.
I chose the Tamron exactly for the same reason you chose the Sigma. The weather sealing gasket makes for a tremendous seal at the mount. The lens fits snugger on my A7 iii than some of my Sony primes. Sigma not being weathet sealed is a deal breaker for me. It is a big miss on the Sigma.
To be fair, Sigma does have their 24-70mm f2.8 if you need the full weather sealing, but you're right, would be nice if it was completely weather sealed. The Sigma 28-70 is weather sealed at the mount with a gasket on the mount, its just not certified for the body of the lens. Which means it will be fine in light rain if you're smart. However, the G2 is a bit more weather sealed I believe so if it really matters to you the Tameron is 100% the way to go
light weight is the key lol, after many years of working and personal use, weight and size is almost the only thing in my concern with today's gear. Imo, any camera or lens produced in recent year are more than enough to work with, so I pick the smalllest and lightest one for my poor back and strength, which is getting worse each year lol
I chose Tamron because this lens reminds me of Contax/Yashica Zeiss lenses from 80-90s. These are warmer and have a kind of Alexa-look, which I find very attractive and remind me of old Eastman stock, even Kodachrome 25 (which was awesome, really). But because modern Zeiss Batis lenses are so expensive, the Tamron lens is a good alternative. Therefore, Tamron is my choice. That build quality and excellent autofocusing abilities is also attractive. Thanks for an excellent video by the way, Sensei Akatsu 🙏🏻
Great video and comparison for everyday work! I agree, the weight factor is very underestimated in the long run! And lately the sigma has been on better sales than the tamron, but have used both and you can’t really go wrong 👌🏼
in all aspects none of the lenses is particularly bad. however, autofocus is really a significant deal breaker that, in my personal opinion, could wreck your footage and possibly miss shots. at least for vlogging use case. so if you look at the tamron alone it's not bad at any aspect it's just when you compare it to the sigma somethings are slightly better on sigma but that doesn't make tamron bad, all of that of course excluding autofocus. so tamron is the way to go because autofocus missing could ruin your videos
2 equally impressive lenses. I choose the Tamron because I needed a people photography lense. I set auto focus to the custom button. I actually also like Sigma Art lenses build & feel, but the custom button, set with eye auto focus gets critical face focus better swayed me.
I think technically the Tamron is very slightly better, but it depends on the review you read so I'm guessing there could be variations in samples. I prefer the colour rendering of the Sigma, the Tamron is more clinical to my eyes. Also, the smaller size and weight are important, so I'd go for the Sigma
I choose tamron 35-150 and call it a day. One zoom to rule them all. Then get a 50 1.2 gm just for that creamy bokeh. And 17-28 tamron or a 16-35 gm. And your good. In addition 14 gm if you want to crop your video and have room for breathing compensation and gyro data. That’s crop factor times two for a7iv. If you have an A1 then get a 20 1.8 gm and call it a day. Great for vlogging, actually a7siii and fx3 due to rotating screen. Okay that’s a wrap. 😀
I just upgraded to an A7C and I can't make up my mind between these two lenses. Both are similarly priced and from all reviews I've seen on youtube it just boils down to preference.
The lowlight "shinyness" performance of the Sigma translates into it's sharpness. Everything that has a texture with reflecting properties one way or another, get's a bit mushed. Not in a terrible way, it just adds to the "flat" color profile the sigma delivers overall. The Tamron works well with red colors and everything that is mixed with it. It's not a flat table you have to edit something into, but it brings it adds some own flavor to the picture. One might be delighted by that, others will curse it, for making them do some extra editing work. I think especially visible in the sharpness comparison of the 350Z, that the Tamron overall just has a 'smoother' sharpness distribution at least in my eyes. In summary i find the Tamron better than the contemporary. Only the Art beats it overall, but then by a fair margin. For me the prices are all the other way around: Tamron 699€, Sigma Contemporary ~800€ and Sigma Art ~1100€. The price is simply too good for the Tamron. Then again the extra money for the Sigma Art 24-70 improves over the Tamron in nearly every field. Though i wouldn't compare the Sigma Art 24-70 with these, more with the 24-70 GM for those who want a more budgetfriendly option. But in conclusion and in my opinion, why I included the Sigma Art to my argument, only the Sigma Art beats the Tamron.
The better choice is Sigma Art 24-70. But, if I am to compare Sigma Art with Contemporary and with Tamron, Tamron would come second and Contemporary third. I watched many reviews where they compared Art to Tamron and Art to Contemporary. Art is much superior to Contemporary lens, and in some regards only slightly better then Tamron 28-75. So my thoughts are that Tamron is reasonably better than Contemporary lens. What do you think?
I think Art is better than Contemporary lens. But I don't know about Art vs Tamron, cuz today's Tamron lenses are so much better than before. I think I gotta make a video about it!
@@Mr.Monta77 I see you like to pick and troll people. It would help a bit if you were more intelligent like this brain fart about weather sealing proved
@@Mr.Monta77 @Mycroft Montague Please explain what's the humour part in replying to person appreciating weather sealing (protects from dust and moisture) of this objective for desert use, that "is there much rain in your desert?". If you're serious and not just trying another bad attempt in trolling, then you really dont understand what humor is.
@@Soda_Le_Moon more punchier colors on Tamron on street lights for photography & better bokeh balls. Sigma had always been sharper and has warmer color cast in my opinion. (just my opinion though) Of course, you can always edit your photos/videos on post processing. There is not that much difference between the 2. If I can only get 1, I'd go with the sharpest lens (but sharper is better on sigma for portraits and better on tamron for streets/landscapes/architecture).
@@darrenhaken definitely because of tamron's more neutral colors (I shoot landscapes, I need neutral colors). I watched other reviews and image comparisons, the new tamron G2 performs really great
Wowwwww......nice video....nice comparison...i think tamron has more contrast,shirpness & better autofocus...75mm helps for portait...& we can firmware update this lens...
Questions: i know alot of sigma 24-70mm 2.8 owners have some issues with dust goin through the zoom barrel .. how is your opinion with the 28 70 contemporary version?
I like the 24-70mm lens better, but the cost and weight of a 24-70m f2.8 is too much. So how about a 24-70mm f4? The Sony Vario-Tessar is $898. I myself use Olympus and I bought a 12-45mm f4 and it is my favorite lens for outdoors.
Your english is excellent :) I have the 2470GM2 and it sucks. My old Tamron 28-75 G1 is much sharper in centrum and edge. I need sharpness and well performing AF, so I will return the GM2 and buy a Tamron G2.
@Ghost. You mean the Tamron sucks? I suspect you are doing something wrong or you have pickes up a faulty lens. Take it back to the dealer. Tamron lenses are razor sharp.
@@Mr.Monta77 I tested 2 2875G2, both are razor sharp from 28 to 55mm but from 60 to 75mm on 33 MP it was not very sharp. In the end I bought 3 2470gm2 - first two really shit sucked but the 3rd one was not decentered and almost 100% perfect.
@@Ghost_Pirate Hm.. I don't attach much importance to a test performed by anyone describing anything as 'shit sucked'. Are you not aware that using such vulgarities reflects your upbringing?
Thanks for the good video bro. I'm also using a7c and I decided to go with Sigma after watching your video. But I'm worried about waterproof. I heard that Sigma's waterproof is weaker than Tamron's. I'm thinking of taking photos and documentary videos in techno clubs and mountains. Is Sigma's waterproof okay?
Would you consider reviewing FE 20-70/4 G? The dilemma I have is between these two faster 3rd party lenses, or the native one stop slower Sony lens (that sports the ultra-wide and 1:2 macro option neither of these have).
I need help in choosing Sigma 24-70mm vs Tamron 28-75mm G2. I am new to photography and I wanna get a pro look. Sigma release back in November 2019 while Tamron 28-75mm G2 came out October 2021. Realistically to me I would go with the latest model but there are so many mix reviews!! Hope you are able to help me to decide which first lens should I get. I do not care about the weight but more of the quality and aesthetic of the camera and photos/videos. And I want to add you have a great content Kensei san!!
I’m having the exact same struggle between those two!! Which did you end up with? I’d go with Sigma if not for the continued dust issues even after the update...
@@KenseiAkatsu Can you explain why? And what situations would swing you to the Sigma instead? Be good to hear your thoughts on the pros and cons of the two - I'm debating these very two lenses.
I’ve sold my 24-105 yesterday and caught the tamarin G2. 24-105 ist a beautiful lens. Yes, F4 is not 2.8 but when it comes to sharpness and Zoom range the 24-105 is great! Also it comes with OSS wich is great for video. :)
I already own the Tamron 70-180 2.8 and I am debating on replacing my Sony 28-70 kit lens. I had been considering the sigma 24-70 art 2.8 or the Tamron 28-75 G2 2.8. It is hard choosing the right lens. I am a hobby photographer and don’t do it professionally but would like to some day.
i suggest you to pick sigma 24-70, due to Extremely Sharp, Great bokeh, solid build quality and Difference 24mm and 28mm is so huge while 70mm and 75mm is near closer. The Cons if you pick sigma is weight.
Sigma Art is a superior lens, if weight isn't an issue for you and IQ is a priority. Tamron is nice too, and considerably lighter, with very reasonable IQ for its size.
I totally confuse to buy which lens sigma or tamron after watching your informative video. I want to buy tamron g2 for hybrid purpose but now i m fully confuse . I m using sony a7iii & 6400 . I am using for wedding events. Maximum use for cinematography. Pls sugest🙏🙏🙏🙏Lots of love from india 🇮🇳 🇮🇳 🇮🇳 🇮🇳
Hmm hard. In video performance, did you let both of them in Autofocus since If you handheld and let them focus, it does not reflect reality? Why didn't you use a tripod and focus fixed on one point?
Kensei, I want to get one of these lenses, is 28mm wide enough for vertical social media videos? A big part of my work would be using these lenses for working with social media content influencers and making videos for restaurants or covering some form of establishment shots of these places and getting interior shots.
I watched 2 of your Sigma 2870 2.8 reviews. I want to ask sth about the video quality. The sigma 2470 has greater details/sharpness in video quality than sigma 2870 in this video comparison. But, in another video, sigma 28-70 has slightly more detail in video compare to tamron 2875. So is it the Sigma 2470 has the highest video quality？ However, the photo quality is still Tamron better. Isn't that higher the photo quality has higher video quality too？
Honestly I still think Sigma 2470 has the best image quality for me. But recently I started to think Tamron 2875G2 is also a great choice because of the size/weight and the price. Now you made me realize that I have to make the "Sigma2470 vs Tamron2875"
visited this again bcs stumbled on some deals today what if used price between those two only got 15usd differences? should i buy tamron (680usd) or sigma(665usd)?
lol, did you get not listen to what he said? he clearly said he preferred the look and texture of the sigma. you seem to think photography and videography are about specs. both lenses clearly do everything they need to, so if you prefer the look of one over the other, why would you not choose that lens?
@@Sinister_Joe So you didn't listen to what he said. He literally spelled out what he would do and why, and said someone with different priorities could choose differently. The video was clear, but your ears aren't, buddy.
