Using Sony a6700 with this sigma 18-50 F2.8, and Sony 11mm F1.8 will be the perfect vlog setup for me. You can literally do anything with this combo, filter size 55mm all, light weight and versatile 😊
Sigma's Size is just too hard to pass up. Yes I wish it had the IS function of the Tamron, but like others here, I want my APS-C set-up to be as small as possible.
To me, this is either irrelevant to a negative. I don't see the sigma size being a benefit. The Tamron, though, much more room to hold, and looks more professional. Weights, well, a6700 (which i also feel is too small, without a cage or something like the smallrig bottom rail) with either lens is still light enough where a few grams doesn't make much difference to me, and irrelevant on a tripod. The tamron IMO is actually more efficient use space, because you're getting an extra mm wider, and and extra 20mm tighter over the sigma. You'd need 2 lenses, and swaps to do what the 17-70 can do. Plus the Tamron has OS, which helps a good bit with 40-70mm focal lengths, unless in bright conditions. I feel like Tamron wanted something like, the "universal" lens. One that you could just take and be pretty much covered for 90% of everything. It does that, and it's not a MASSIVE lens by any stretch. I'd call it like, just over medium. While the sigma I would just say is a very SMALL lens. I almost think that it could have been a better lens, if they didn't mind designing it larger. I also dislike the hood attachment on the sigma, but that's a nit pick, not important.
The VC in the Tamron actually interferes with the IBIS in any Sony camera. Only Sony lenses with OSS work with the IBIS, not 3rd party lenses. So you are better off without it.
Great video. Big oversight though is the huge benefit of the weather sealing on the Tamron. If - like many photographers - you're going to be in rain, snow, sand, mist, humidity, etc., the Tamron is the clear winner. Note that I own the Sigma and it's great. Sharp and small. Just can't use it in anything but ideal conditions, so it doesn't get used.
@@mr.croissant7960 well, on a normal day its pretty hot outside (90F), from 1-3pm it rains and then sun is out again. It’s like that 5/7 days a week. Although I’d mostly shoot early in the morning or at night, I would want to get gear that could stand quick weather changes and all that, i don’t know if im making any sense but the point is, i’ve seen multiple reviews and comparisons for both of these lenses and the Sigma seemed like the better option but the Tamron has the weather sealing, so I just want to know if the weather sealing really does something or not. at the end of the day i probably wouldn’t shoot while there isn’t good weather outside.
I ordered the Tamron when it first came out, sold it a few months later and picked up the Sigma when it came out. I definitely prefer the colour from the Sigma, and although I missed the stabilization, now that I'm upgrading to the a6700 that doesn't matter as much to me.
Omg, this is exactly me! I did exactly the same thing and now I am happy with the Sigma....but I gotta admit that the oss in Tamron did help a bit for VDO work but not much.
Man, among those creators that doing video about FX30/A6700, your color grading is which I impressed the most. You inspired me to get an a6700 but damn, my color grading is still garbage. Wish you have a tutorial on how you color grading/ how do you exposure in Slog. That would be super helpful! A thumb up for your video as always. Cheers.
I watched quite a few videos on these lenses and for the guys who do the pixel peeking, they all agreed that the Sigma was a lot better. Even the Sony equivalent beat the Tamron. So I went with the Sigma for my A6700. It works on my A6400 and A6600 just fine too! I have other lenses for the A7C since it's a full frame, but I have it set to auto change for APS-C lenses so it swaps to the Super 35 mode I believe it's called. It makes the full frame sensor work with APS-C lenses so you don't get the outside blackened shadow around the pictures. But the Sigma just seems to work just fine for vlogging and street photography and it's so light that you don't get tired of the weight. Just no stabilization so you need to be careful with video if you don't have IBIS on your camera. Thanks for sharing!
Great review, Kensei. I went back and forth on both lenses, and I finally pulled the trigger on the Sigma 18-50mm……….TODAY. Both are GREAT, but those two little words came into play………SIZE and WEIGHT. Perhaps I’ll purchase the Tamron 17-70 one of these days, but with my upcoming vacation this brand new Sigma 18-50 will be just fine. 🍻👊🏾
i just bought the Sigma for my a7C and it has never leave the camera. Its the perfect size, nice good range, great image quality both photo and videos. The only thing i cant stand is the constant yapping from ppl saying how it is an APSC lens, its not meant for FF, there will be noise, image will be less sharp yada yada. I dont see it all, in fact Im enjoying the great images it captures plus its easy on the bicep too!
great vid! i wanted to buy the tamron 17 70 but i saw a lot of videos saying that the tamron has some jumping frame issues... I mainly do videos and after watching yours I think I'm getting the sigma, as it doesn't have any weird frame behavior..
Adding to the size and lightness there is the fact that Sigma is significantly cheeper. I think the last thing I have to get out of the way now is wether I can skip on that extra 20mm of zoom or not…
One great test for sure, and your process deserves recognition for its results. You cover most every possible thing within those 10 minutes. May I add the length and weight of the Tamron creates a very good balance when paired with the FX30, especially if a camera cage is in the mix. Other thing to know, quite an important one and often forgotten : Sony own partially Tamron (up to 11%, if my data are up-to-date). This means lots of informations are passed from the Sony side when designing lenses and its various internal softwares. Because we all know these lenses are equipped with lots of microchips, so high-standard programming is crucial for perfect operation. In this regard, and thanks to expertise being shared, Tamron can have the lead over Sigma (providing all processes are done properly). Even more so when software updates are being released, thanks to users' feedback and testers usage. I think this is something to add in the determining factors when time comes for the choice. ✋️🙂
Im trying to decide... Love my old tamron 17-50 2.8 but now I want a good camera for shooting my family and it has to be light, so surely i will end with the Sigma.
I wish these lenses could zoom out to 16mm, like super-expensive Sony lens, or even to 15mm, like Canon's zoom. It would be very good for vlogs and wide angle shots. I would even sacrifice some range at the far end. Difference between 16mm and 17mm is only 1mm, but that's almost 7%, and compared to 18mm it's almost 15%.
I came to the same conclusion and bought the Sigma after trying out a friend's copy. The 17-70f2.8 Tamron is more or less the same size ( and heavier!) as the full frame Tamron 28-200 lens. I am looking for a more compact carrying experience when I use my APS-C cameras.
@@KenseiAkatsu No, I think the Sigma hits the sweet spot for a small, lightweight-" happy to take with you " camera and lens combo. I use my Tamron full frame, 70-300 lens when I want more reach on my a6500.
I have a Sony FX30. Should I use a Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 (APSC) or a Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 (full frame). The choice for the full frame lens would be for the following reasons: 1. Optical quality; 2. Being able to use this lens on a full frame camera that I intend to have in the near future. Do these reasons justify the biggest value I'm going to pay for the Sigma 24-70mm lens?
How I see it is, Tamron's pro is their image, but I buy Sigma's because of their ergonomics, form factor, and build quality. I had a tamron 28-70 and for video I wanted dedicated af/mf switch. Also after a few months the coating on the barrel of the Tamron had tons of tiny micro scratches that made it look not so nice. I was by no means rough with the lens. Picked up the Sigma 28-70 and never looked back.
I bought the sigma 18-50mm strictly for the form factor... keeps my a6400 small. Biggest downside is no oss, but other than that it has insane quality.
@@nicuchitineac1950 I only do photography, 50mm is fine, i just try to shoot at least around 1/160s so I know the image is in focus. If you're doing video at that length it would I might suggest cropping in when editing to make it look stabilized.
Great video!, Odd question though, Is your WB messed up at 10:16? Your skin tone is freaking out into the alien side of sony colors.. LOL just thought I'd swing that out there to mention... I totally recommend the 17-70 over the 18-50 anyday by the way, the 24-105 equivalent is just too good to pass up on APSC.
@@KenseiAkatsu Oh weird!! Yeah its like really really yellow/green, only mentioning because u put a portrait of yourself next to it and it didnt add up!
Love your video, one question which one works better in low light? And can I use the a6700 with the tamron to shoot professional wedding photography and videography? My budget is tight I’m trying to save 😅😅😅
very hard to choose because im currently using Sony 15mm with zve10 and the image quality is good., been weeks im searching on the internet which zoom lens should I get
I bought the 18-50 for my ZV-E10 and it was great and stayed on my camera 80% of the time, but I wanted the stability built into the 17-70. However now that I have the a6700 the 18-50 is even better and I feel I don't need what the 17-70 has to offer because of IBIS and Active Stab. If I get another lens it will be something like a 10-20mm or 50-200mm or a good prime. The 18-50 is small enough, priced low enough and good enough to do what I need to do in most (90%) of the time. It is I that needs to get better.
Thanks, your comment helped me! I'm going for Sigma! just sold my A6500 to get an A6700, I have both Viltrox 13mm 1.4 and 23mm 1.4 lenses, so I was looking for a real experience on a zooming lens.
I have had the 17-70 for over a year now, and im going to sell it for the Sigma 18-50. Why? Loss of contrast at 60-70MM wide open. I have tried replacing the lens, and the lens on different camera's. All had the same bad contrast on contrasting edges wide open and zoomed in. After 50MM, I need to stop down to 4.5 or 5.6 or the photo's look like crap, and I forget very often. So many photo's ruined because I forgot to stop down. Plus its MASSIVE. I also got the Tamron 28-75 G2. Its full frame, and MUCH better, but its the extract same size/weight as the 17-70.
People look at the focal length of the Tameron and think it's more versatile, but I want to be able to shoot close with my lenses where possible. Sharpness, I hear sony wins that round, but not on price alas.
Thanks for your work. Good review and video. One question is bugging me. I saw lot of people complain about the IBIS and VC fighting each other and not being really compatible in the Tamron 17-70. Sometimes the video shakes or flick in a very anoying way and you can't disable only VC. Did you found those issues in your video testing? Thanks!
Both of these lenses are not designed for videography! Prime lenses and fixed-body zoom lenses are suitable for videography. SEL1655G and SELP18105G are the best zoom lenses for the filming! SELP18110G is a genuine cinema lens. It is a waste of money to use photographic zoom lenses for filming.
I had both the Tamron 11-20 and the Tamron 17-70 that I used on my Sony a7 iv. They are fun lenses to use because they are lightweight compared to full frames, they don't cost much and you have all the focal lengths you need with the same filter size. but unfortunately they have a big problem... they make a very annoying flare when a ray of sunlight enters the lens. and it ruins your shots. Then the bokeh and the colors are unfortunately not beautiful. Sigma always wins on this.
I got the Tameron before watching this and have the Sony ZV 10. It seems ok and I wanted a bigger lens for optocs. Should I exchange it for the sigma or keep it? I bought it used so around the same as Sigma.
I have a really important cuestion for me, do you recommend the tamron 17-70 for vloggin? I know for vlogging I should buy a len with less focal distance, but i'm thinking about it for both purposes, phtos and videos, I would appreciate you to help me with this...
If I would own an APSC like the 6700 not my full frame cameras... I would definitely go with the 18-50 and maybe get a couple of primes like the 16mm and the 56mm... keep the entire set up compact, lightweight and budget friendly... (maybe a telephoto lens like the Sony 70-350)
Hello, I would like to ask you, I have seen some videos of this lens presenting problems with stabilization, apparently the lens stabilization is not very compatible with the camera stabilization, I saw a video with a Sony fx30, but I don't know if it is with the 7iv something similar happened? Could you give me your opinion please?
For the same price would you buy sigma 18-50 or tamron 17-70, I already have sigma and i need glass for a second camera angle- Stationary. Now i can get Tamron for the same price as Sigma.
Cool! Thank you for this video. Actually thinking about buying a6700 and sigma 18-50 to film bouldering. Do you think its wide enough or would you recommend something wider for bouldering vlogs?
I passed on both and found used 18-105 F4 18-70, 18-135 all about the same price that made no sense to me but again size and weight I went wit( the 18-135 Sony been very happy great range , light and results seem pretty good to me
no, i have it and the vibration compentantion it’s not that good, it has some weird “jumps” on the shot, i’m going to sell mine because of it, and use the sigma with a gimbal to shoot videos
unfortunately I had 2 Tamron lenses break, it snaps right at the focus lens, first time I thought I was just unlucky, second time it was obvious the lens had a weak point, didn't take much for it to snap.
Well, Sigma cost a lot less as well. I do have the 24-70 GM, because I have a full frame, that I'm selling and just got the A6700, so I'm between these 2 lenses 🤣🤣🤣
With my essential tremor, I have to lean into the Tamron, but the Sigma is super small and light in comparison. Difficult choice... UPDATE: I got to handle the Sigma on Thursday... It's TINY and definitely the smallest f2.8 zoom I've ever picked up. Smaller than the FE Tamron 20-40mm f2.8 which I like a lot.
neither lens. Instead, sony 18-135 solves all your issues, weighs less, smaller, and has tremendous flexibility. To add to this, get the sigma 30mm 1.4 and the sony 70-350mm, all incredibly small travel lenses that give you unreal reach.
The 18-135mm seems like a meh lens tbh. It’s variable aperture is an issue, very sharp in the centre but that’s about it. Well I mean that is from my perspective at least, considering I will be using it professionally
As you said Tamron is good for landscape photography...what would you suggest for a passionate person who likes to take pictures and doesnt want to spend more money.shall i buy sigma or tamron 🥲. I own Sony A6000😅 too old
