p.2 #4 · Tamron 25-200mm F/2.8-5.6 Di III VXD G2 (Model A075)
Luballs
It's actually slower per focal length but it gains almost 0.5x macro capabilities
Isn't it slightly more than 0.5x macro as 1:1.9? But when does the macro become 1:3 and lower? Sigma's 20-200mm surprisingly keeps it's 1:2 all the way from 28-85mm which is impressive. Sharpness wise 20-200mm is competitive to the Tamron 28-200mm. But the Tamron 25-200mm is sharper and brighter bringing it back to what are your priorities.
p.2 #9 · Tamron 25-200mm F/2.8-5.6 Di III VXD G2 (Model A075)
I noticed that in some of the new advertising language they no longer claim a clear sharpness improvement, but rather suggest the faster autofocus, wider FOV and better macro leads to sharper images. Hoping I am wrong and looking forward to tests and comparisons with the Sigma 20-200...
p.2 #12 · Tamron 25-200mm F/2.8-5.6 Di III VXD G2 (Model A075)
I am pleased with my Tamron 28-200 for travel. I am asking myself, do I need to upgrade for minor image improvements? Not sure :-). These lenses kill the usage of many of my lenses. One good reason not to get these lenses is so I can use my Sony 20-70 and 70-200F4
p.2 #16 · Tamron 25-200mm F/2.8-5.6 Di III VXD G2 (Model A075)
Setting aside image quality for a second, I think each superzoom has some clear advantages:
Tamron 28-200:
+ 1/3 stop faster than new Tamron, 1.3 stops faster than Sigma
+ Budget choice--easy to find discounted/used at this point
Tamron 25-200:
+ Now goes to 25mm on the wide end
+ 2/3 to 1 stop faster than Sigma
+ Better min focus distance for macro shots
Sigma 20-200:
+ Goes to 20mm wide (could often replace a 2nd lens)
For a travel lens, I'm leaning more towards the Sigma at the moment, thinking I'd complement it with a small fast prime to make up for the Sigma's slower aperture. I think I could often get by with 20mm being my widest focal length. My last trip I took the Tamron 17-28, Sony 28-60, and Tamron 70-180. I found myself doing a lot more lens swaps than I wanted on my hikes.
p.2 #17 · Tamron 25-200mm F/2.8-5.6 Di III VXD G2 (Model A075)
NYCCameraGuy wrote:
As someone who really enjoys the 28-200mm, I'm really excited for the idea of a faster-focusing, sharper version.
But Tamron missed my #1 desired improvement - this lens really, really needs VR for the 100mm+ range. I would much rather have that than 3mm more on the wide end.
Hoping that this lens is out to rent for a November trip to evaluate.
I hear you for the longer focal lengths and older bodies. I noticed a lot of blur above 100mm even with pretty steady hands and the 24MP OG A9.
However, I’m now onto the “improved IBIS” bodies with an A9iii and A7Rv and I have been startled over the last two years of ownership of the A7Rv at how good the new body stabilizes this lens at higher focal lengths. It stands up to pixel peeping in low atmospheric haze situations really well. There is a noticeable, but pretty minor drop off in contrast and sharpness compared to the 70-200GM, but I’m down with the flexibility / size + weight trade off.
p.2 #18 · Tamron 25-200mm F/2.8-5.6 Di III VXD G2 (Model A075)
Newenglandrocks wrote:
I hear you for the longer focal lengths and older bodies. I noticed a lot of blur above 100mm even with pretty steady hands and the 24MP OG A9.
However, I’m now onto the “improved IBIS” bodies with an A9iii and A7Rv and I have been startled over the last two years of ownership of the A7Rv at how good the new body stabilizes this lens at higher focal lengths. It stands up to pixel peeping in low atmospheric haze situations really well. There is a noticeable, but pretty minor drop off in contrast and sharpness compared to the 70-200GM, but I’m down with the flexibility / size + weight trade off....Show more →
This is a hobby, so I'm always going to be ~5 years behind. Just upgraded to an A7RIVA, and I would definitely prefer VR @ 200mm to keep ISO down. 61MP is even more demanding than 42MP was.
Really looking forward to the A7RV in 2028! I tried it at a Sony event with the 24-70mm GMII and it was magnificent.
p.2 #20 · Tamron 25-200mm F/2.8-5.6 Di III VXD G2 (Model A075)
It's a shame the close focus on this lens is a marketing gimmick though, since i thought we were trading slightly slower aperture at equivalent focal lengths for better close focus and sharpness. Seems like sharpness is only incrementally better and close focus was kinda a joke, so it was really made slower aperture for 25mm over 28mm? I loved the 28-200 for what it was and see myself probably getting the 25-200 over the 20-200 in the future, but would still like to see the head to head with the old 28-200 as well
