p.1 #2 · Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 or Sony 24-105 f4?
Mads Peter Iversen has a video on YouTube from a few years back where he compares these two lenses.
He ended up mostly using the 28-200, so go figure 😎
p.1 #3 · Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 or Sony 24-105 f4?
hasenbein wrote:
Mads Peter Iversen has a video on YouTube from a few years back where he compares these two lenses.
He ended up mostly using the 28-200, so go figure 😎
I couldn't find that particular video, but I did find a couple of other videos of him using the 28-200 as his primary lens while he was shooting landscapes. He seems to like that lens.
From other reviews I've seen, the Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 always receives high praises for its versatility with the disclaimer "it's a great lens for what it is, a superzoom." It's basically described as a "Swiss Army Knife" of a lens. Problem is that neither Swiss Army Knives nor superzoom lenses excell in any particular category other than the convenience of versatility.
My question is how do these lenses really compare when it comes to IQ? Which lens shows less distortion, vignetting, chromatic aberration? Which one of these two lenses shows more contrast at all apertures? Which one is sharper from center to edges?
p.1 #8 · Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 or Sony 24-105 f4?
Although I have not shot them side by side, I would guess fewer compromises were made on the 24-105 - being constant f4 and shorter range. Having said that, that lens is starting to get a bit long in the tooth and could do with an upgrade
p.1 #9 · Tamron 28-200mm f2.8-5.6 or Sony 24-105 f4?
graytrekker wrote:
Although I have not shot them side by side, I would guess fewer compromises were made on the 24-105 - being constant f4 and shorter range. Having said that, that lens is starting to get a bit long in the tooth and could do with an upgrade
I've heard sample variations are a serious issue with the Sony 24-105 f4, as well as decentering issues.
