So now I am torn between the Tamron 17-28mm vs the Sony 20mm f/1.8. The reason for wanting the f/1.8 is I like shooting day time wide portraits, however, AT A DISTANCE. Would shooting f/2.8 vs f/1.8 actually make a difference in subject separation if my subject was say, 20 feet away? I love to shoot "little person in a big landscape photos". Thank you, Andrew, great work!
In that scenario you won't see a noticeable difference. Wide angles generally produce less bokeh than longer focal lengths. The only real way to achieve blur is being close to your subject, like Andrew was when recording himself at a shallow aperture. If your subject or focal point is going to be 20ft away you aren't really going to get that effect.
Nice review, Andrew. Greetings from a fellow photographer in Ottawa. I have the Sony 20 1.8 and the Tamron 17-28 (and the 24 GM which I’ve shot a lot with) and they are all absolutely fantastic in their own way. The 20 is great for travel and the wider FOV. The Tamron is great for flexibility especially in video. The 24 GM has stellar IQ and is great for all kinds of shooting including environmental portraits. Pretty hard to go wrong with any of them. It just depends on your specific needs.
Tqvm for such a brief but indepth enough comparison. I am just starting off full frame venture after on APSC & Micro two thirds for many years. Just bought Sony A7c with 28-60mm kit lens. In dilemma to get either a wide Zoom vs prime lens. My main interest is in landscape. Already watched So many videos on Tamron 17-28mm vs Sony 20mm f1.8. After watching this video I have set my mind on Sony 20mm f1.8 then
Excellent comparison. I was wondering whether to get the sony 20 -the tamron zoom/prime or the very lightweight 18mm samyang. I have the tamron 24mm prime which except for its distortion is very sharp & has a macro range. I am more inclined now towards the sony -given its slightly wider range, light sensitivity & overall quality-particularly on the R4.
Great review and comparison. This helped me make the decision to go with the Sony 20mm F1.8. Now, i just have to wait for it to arrive. Keep up with the great content
Kévin Carvalho they are both great in their own ways. For travel and being outside, it’s hard to beat the Tamron. The Sony is just good at everything except having multiple focal lengths.
Thank you for the review. The Tamron seems to have a decentering issue on the left side of the photo (ie. bad copy), I have seen that in many Tamrons and Chineese lenses, probably due to lesser QA during production when compared to Sony.
Nice comparison .. I would like to point out that the Tamron is actually lower and is closer in height to the others because its rear cap is taller and deceives, almost a millimeter but it really does. See you soon.
Pier Giorgio Zuccaro good eye Pier. I just checked without the back caps and the Tamron is more than a cm longer than the Tokina. The size of the Tamron is not an issue mind you. It’s still quite compact.
Hi Andrew, I loved the video. I have a Sony A7iii and use my 24-105mm F4 exclusively. I'm looking to add a wide angle lens for vlogging and also so I can get some beautiful bokeh. As a second lens to add to my kit, do you suggest the Sony 20mm or the Tamron 17-28mm? Thanks!
Hello there! Which one would you choose for landscapes and street photography? I'm leaning towards the Sony G, but... the Tamron offers more flexibility.
Since I did that video I expected to get rid of the Tamron. In reality I ended up keeping both because I use them equally. The optics are better on the Sony but I don’t really notice that in real life. If you have lots of light, the Tamron would be my choice for street and either for landscapes.
Great comparison. Just came across this when looking into the Tokina and the Sony. Considering the Sony 20mm goes on sale from time to time it is a no brainer. Thanks
@@Thexderify I use the 20mm when I don’t need any flexibility in the focal length, need the added light gathering of the F1.8, and want the extra depth of field. This is most often when shooting stills. With video I like the 17mm field of view, the ability to dial into 28mm easily, and I don’t usually care as much about depth of field. Every lens has something I like more.
At F2.8 both are very sharp and you can’t tell the difference in regular viewing mode. View the image at 100% and you will find the Sony to be marginally sharper.
Damn 17-28 focus breathing is good. Takina is the worst in fb. The funny thing is that g shows less envinronment when subject is closer while takina does the opposite.
Interesting to have such a difference in FOV at 20mm, it would be nice to actually measure the real value for each lens. Maybe the Sony is 19-ish and the Tokina is 21-ish.
My interest is only video. I would use the lens primarily for vlogging or talking head but also for gimbal video / documentary. I’m an absolute sucker for a narrow depth of field so I yearn for the 1.8 but in a video scenario I definitely don’t want to change lenses at all unless I’m going to telephoto. Do you think the tamron makes for sense and forget about the 1.8?
For video I only use F1.8 if I’m right in front of the camera. For 95% of my video I’m using the Tamron 17-28 and 28-75. It’s always a toss up between that shallow DOF and the versatility.
Hey Andrew, great review! I was stuck deciding between the Sony 20mm and the Tamron 17-28mm, I was surprised to see at 20mm the Sony was the widest of the 3, which was odd. I heard the Tamron has some vignette in the corners until about 19-20mm anyway. So it seemed logical to go with the 20mm. I'm still on the fence, but leaning towards the Sony.
Hey Derek, keep in mind that the Sony is the widest at 20mm. The Tamron will sill be wider at 17mm but not as wide as I expected. I still use both of these lenses weekly.
This is a very subjective decision. Some people prefer the flexibility of a zoom while others prefer the weight and increased clarity, and wider aperture of a prime. I like both a lot so I'm keeping both.
Nice comparison! Thoughts on the Sony 16-35mm f/4? I know it's f/4, but it also has OSS which I've heard is the equivalent of having additional f-stops.
Great video ! (I’m a newbie with camera and lens) I have a Sony A6000 with APS-C and I wanted to grab the Sony 20mm F 1.8 to shoot indoors (RU-vid videos and online course). Do you recommend this lens or should I go for something else ? Thank you in advance for the answers.
Just what I was looking for- thanks for making this video! I own the Tamron 17-28 and the excellent Sony 24 f1.4 GM lens which I bought before the Sony 20 f1.8 was announced. I can't really justify getting the new Sony 20mm lens after seeing your video, ha,ha!
@@LUITESLIFE If you can afford to do so you will not be disappointed! The 24 GM is a great lens for night time! There is something special about the images you get when using it. The Tamron 17-28 perfectly complements the Tamron 28-200 for a great travel lens duo!
Tamron is a very good lens, but with A7rIII and A7rIV the edges are unfortunately showing the limits of the lens. On the other hand, it shines on 24MP cameras. Unfortunately the QC is a joke... I tried 5 samples of this lens (2 different stores) and not a single one was without noticeable decentering. Some of them were horrible (17mm f8 and left side of the flat object in the picture completely blurry when focused on the right side), some of them less (just around 1/5 of the photo blurry under certain conditions, but also on f5.6 or f8). The sample I kept in the end (though sold later since I was not completely happy with the image quality) had a problem with 28mm and left 1/3 side of the pic (unable to get sharp picture until f8, right side was always perfect). It is also worth mentioning that the Tamron has a bit strange field curvature, which when combined with a slight decentering can be really frustrating (e.g. compared to Batis 25 when shooting at 24/25mm and f8, with batis I always get distant landscape in focus no matter where the focus point is, with the Tamron I have to try and check the pic because it was simply not reliable, sometimes significant parts of the picture were blurry even at this aperture). Will try the Sony, I am glad it's a bit wider than the other 20mm lenses :) Thanks!
Still rocking the kit lens since switching to Sony and want my first real lens to be wide angle as I shoot mainly landscape and want to shoot more astro. Reading about small IQ issues at both the wide and long end of the Tamron (seemingly making the best iq range 20-24) and your qc issues make me think the Sony is the way to go. I really wanted a zoom as they are convenient but IQ, QC, the aperture ring and the af/mf switch... Think Sony is winning.
17mm to 20mm makes a difference in bokeh and field of view is pretty different too. So of course at 17mm 2.8 bokeh is going to be much less than 20mm at 1.8. So your intentions are good but your observations are showing lack of knowledge, sorry.
