Amazing they pulled up such a great super zoom lens - I'm going to order it thanks to your review - waited about 2 weeks for it to appear and thankfully you've managed to do it pretty quickly - thanks a lot ! :)
I found it super helpful to assign one of the buttons on my A7rii to change the minimum shutter speed (or change the auto shutter to normal/fast/faster) to avoid those situations you mention where the light drops and your on aperature priority and your camera gives you something way to slow (and you don't realise for a while).
Hi Dustin! Thank you for the incredible reviews you make (you've helped me make several decisions!). I just picked up this lens and now I’m thinking of selling my Tamron 28-75 f2.8. I wanted to ask your opinion, if you think optically the 28-75 is that much better than the 28-200? Or is the only real loss that extra stop light (70 is F4 on the 28-200) while you gain a huge zoom range? Much appreciated and thank you for all that do!
immediately sold my Sony 24-240 when the Tamron 28-200 was just a rumor. Most of my family travel videos was with the 24-240 so I cannot wait to use the Tamron in the field while traveling. I have noticed that the OSS in the 24-240 is kinda needed past say 80mm. but Tamron's 28-200 IQ is just amazing when compared to the 24-240. the setup would be something like Tamron 28-200 during day time travels, and use 17-28 or 28-75 in the evenings to minimize gear hauling while traveling :)
@@DustinAbbottTWI wasn't too horribly bad... just wasn't very "good" and past say +80mm IQ degrades quickly. The Sony's saving grace was versatility and OSS. I suspect that when zoomed out to +200, IQ degrades but things in focus looked better since background was blown out and compressed so visually in-focused items appeared sharp LOL
Tamron has come up with very intelligent designing - reduce zoom range - increase light gathering - optical quality & mfd. Minimal - lightweight & more wallet friendly. Also each lens has the possibility to work with its other lenses. It can be combined with the 17-28 or an UW prime that goes into a jacket pocket. Eventually they will probably come up with a 75-300 & I expect a 100-400 as well. The sony lens came out when the sony line still did not have ibis & longrange bridge cameras were coming out for flexibility and portability. We also had smaller monitors with less resolution then. Very impressive the legacy of Tamron right from its slr days.
I do think they've made a lot of smart design decisions - taking the risk of smaller zoom ranges and less marketing options, but also giving us better lenses as a result.
Thanks for a fabulous review - very enjoyable to watch. I'm wondering how the image quality of this lens compares to the image quality of the Sony 24-105? I see you've done a review on this lens too.
I believe it is quite competitive, with the Sony having a little advantage in the corners at wide apertures (at some focal lengths) but the Tamron having some advantage on the longer end.
It's been quite a long while since I reviewed the Sony 24-105, so I honestly don't know. The Tamron is quiet and smooth in video focus, though, so I've seen no problems on that front.
This was a real eye opener, glad I found this video. One thing you mentioned is the zoom is a bit smoother than sony, I have awful issues shooting video when I need to zoom with most of my sony lenses (not the 200-600, that is smooth) because it's "sticky". My 100-400 is nearly useless if I need to zoom mid video. I wonder can you zoom the entire range with this lens in one wrist motion or does it require more? Thanks again for a great review Dustin.
Good, balanced review as always. I bought two of this lens (returned the first one) and found some issues: The manual focus ring is rubber soft plastic and it deforms and creates some variable resistance if your fingers apply uneven pressure when you turn it. It almost gets "glued" if you slightly "squeeze" the focus ring. I returned the first one because some dust in the lens. These dust looks more like imperfection in the coating because they sharply reflect lights. But I don't know if the inner glasses have coatings. The manual focus ring feels like there are tiny sands inside, or the plastic is not polished smooth. Good lens in its performance. Rather cheap build and material quality!
@Dustin Abbott -- I'm curious, what photo test chart are you using? I can't find anything about it in a video or on your website??? (great review, by the way!)
Thanks for this review. Any chance you could make a comparison between this 28-200 and the sony 24-105 f4? You might not have both lenses physically at your disposal, but I bet you could give an informed comparison with the material ypu've collected from their separate reviews. I ask this, because the tamron is much more competing with the 24-105 opposed to the other super-zooms for the reasons you showcase here. But cant really decide between the 24-105 and the 28-200. I am a hobby photographer.
The 24-105mm was one of the very first Sony lenses that I reviewed, and I think it is a solid lens. It has the advantages of a constant aperture, wider focal length (24 vs 28mm), and having OSS. The advantages of the Tamron is a bigger zoom range, smaller size and weight, and lower price tag. There isn't going to be a significant optical difference between them.
I'm wondering how this lens is compared to the Sony 24-105mm f/4.0 and Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8! Would you mind to make a short article with some examples on that?
Hi Noell, I'm afraid not. I do mention some in relation to the Sony in a comparison video I have dropping next week, but I don't have time or opportunity to bring in every possible lens to compare to.
I have tested it against my 24105G. from 28 to around 70 the tamron is noticeably softer on the edge especially before f5.6. i think it is because of the smaller filter tread (67 vs 77). center sharpness is very close. after 70 the two lenses are basically identical. i ended up selling my 24105G and keeping the tamron, it is just too good to refuse. i gain bigger aperture before 70mm, at 100mm i still get f4.5 which is similar to f4, i lost a bit of the wide end but i gained so much on the long end. i lost oss but i gained a sort of macro function. and the tamron is 100g lighter, cheaper, there is no reason not to trade. hope my experience helps
I was on the fence about this vs the Sony 24 240... The difference was shocking though and now I am waiting for my Tamron 28 200! Great video, subscribed :)
@@DustinAbbottTWI I love my primes but it's just too easy to miss something if you're having to try and swap lenses on the go, the tamron seems like a good compromise
Its hard not to consider this lens as a go-to all rounder. However I also have Tamrons 70-180 since your review on it was so positive, and it is currently my favorite lens! I have never had f2.8 at 180mm before and it is so much fun, where most traditional 70-200 lenses are huge it is very reasonably sized. However the 28-200 and 70-180 kind of cover the same range, and for someone who cant (shouldn't) have like 9 lenses (as I currently do...) I feel id have to replace the 70-180, which I'm not sure I want to! Agh, decisions!
I do think the two lenses have two different purposes. I will always reach for the 70-180 type lens for events or weddings. You have a pretty severe aperture penalty with the 28-200 for that kind of work.
How rugged to you think this lens will be? I've seen some long term reviews of the 28-75 have an issue with dust getting in the lens (e.g. Dave McKeegan's review), so I worry about the ruggedness of these lenses compared to ones with internal zooming. My own copy of the 28-75 already has a little dust inside on the back element! I know these things don't show up in images very easily, but its still an annoyance :)
I sold my Sony 24-240 because of the softness, I have been looking at the Sigma Art 24-70, how does the overall image quality compare to the Tamron 28-200? Would like the greater range. Using Sony A7 III.
The ART lens has a little more sharpness potential (particularly in the corners at some focal lengths), but the Tamron is competitive. It does lack the wide maximum aperture across the zoom range, but maybe that doesn't matter to you.
Thanks for your informative review. Now I'm pondering selling my Sony 24-240mm and getting the Tamron. I'd used the Sony on a trip to Arizona, Utah, New Mexico last year and was a little disappointed in the lack of sharpness, especially in the Grand Canyon shots.
@@DustinAbbottTWI By dxomark it shouldn't be as bad at all, in fact not nearly as bad as your copy www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sony/Sony-FE-24-240mm-F35-63-OSS-mounted-on-Sony-A7R-IV---Measurements__1326 By the way I'm on Nikon and my 55-200mm vr II gives almost better results than sony 70-200 f4 on a7 RII and on dxomark I have a sharpness of 11 with 55-200 on D5300 apsc
@@stjepanjina I wouldn't trust DXOMark, you really have to use a lens to get an idea how sharp it is. Copy to copy variation might be a factor but almost everyone who owns this lens says it's soft on the tele end.
Hi Dustin, many compliments for your video, really complete and clear. I'm Roberto from Italy, and sometime I've to travel very light so I think this zoom in perfect for me. I'd like to buy it with the Sony A7RIII. In this travel is possible I'll go in place where I could meet wild animals and for this I need a more powerful zoom (at least 100-400), but the problem is I don't have space for another lenses so big and heavy. What do you think about the use of a SEL 20 teleconverter by Sony? In this way I have a 56-400 zoom and for me it's perfect. I know, I'll lose 2 stop, but the Tamron is quite lighter. Why you don't do a test of this solution? Many thanks and greeting! Roberto
@@DustinAbbottTWI Ok, thanks a lot. Maybe it's a wrong question, but it doesn't work in manual focus as well? Sorry for bother you but I'd like to understand if there is a possibility to you use it. Again thanks and greeting!
Wow, when I was watching your channel 4 years ago, you were using Canon mainly Today I'm considering switching to Sony too and saw ur vid, surprised you switched to sony(a visit after 4 years ur channel grow much bigger and much more contents! ) Gonna sell my 6D and lenses , going for second hand a7RIIs (~$1000), pretty good sensor (all i want, considering horrible color banding on old Canon sensors) from your vid focusing and handling seems lackluster, but coming from a 6D nothing can be worse right? (infamous 1-point focus system)
@@DustinAbbottTWI yeah, I know a7rIII is much better in terms of handling and dual slot, EVF, focus all other stuff but IQ is the same. Coming from a 6D, even gen2 would be day and night difference
Dustin - great review. Thanks for comparing it to the Sony. But it also begs the question to Tamron 28-70 f/2.8 owners or future owners... doesn't this effectively cannibalize the Tamron 28-70 f/2.8 (yes there's a sliding loss to f/4ish at 70mm)? Or is the Tamron 28-70 f/2.8 IQ significantly better? I've seen a coupe of other reviewers not happy with the IQ but again, there's no mention of the potential overlap in their comments either.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Canon has a good tracking record of implementing a mature technology into their mainstream products. Their digital IS and lens optical IS are both top of class. I believe R5 &R6 will have decent IBIS
