p.1 #1 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
I think that with the first tests of the new Tamron it's time to ask the question : which one should we buy and for what usage ?
I don't think that the price difference is too important when it comes to pick one (if you can afford $800 you probably can afford $1200, or buy the 24-105 used). The weight is also not so different (+113 grams for the Sony).
I'm undecided yet (even if I preordered the Tamron), I like them both, of course the 24mm and the longer range of the Sony is great, the OSS too, but I would miss the f/2.8 when it comes to indoor shooting and background blur. I think the Sony can be used as a one and only lens for travel, : 24mm is wide enough, 105mm can be a 160mm on an A7RII/III), f/4.0 with good stabilization can be used on static subjects indoors... but for example indoor events when you NEVER have enough light, one stop is always better (I'm also a Canon L primes shooter, even at f/2.0 or less you often need to reach very high (too high?) iso).
To start with something that can be useful, I would be happy if someone has the lens(es) to make the following test : a portrait (or similar) framed identical, one at 75mm f/2.8 and the other at 105 f/4.0 (so from a bit further away) to give an idea of the difference of bokeh. Anyone with a 70-200 f/2.8 can make the test (I don't have one).
I would also love to read the reviews of the owners of the 24-105 for indoor events. Do they switch to another lens or do they find the 24-105 bright enough?
p.1 #2 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
I'd been wanting Sony to bring out a 24-105 F4 for ages as if I'm using a walk around zoom I'd like the extra reach. I'm using a zoom to save changing lenses and I always found my 17-55 EF-S Canon lens a bit short, so I held off buying a 24-70ish type lens when I switched to Sony FE.
If I need a faster aperture then I'll use a prime lens. Of course everyone has their own preferences and needs.
p.1 #3 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
I have the 24-105. It's awesome. My main purpose for this lens was for landscapes. I hike a lot and want one lens and one camera solution. If I was shooting solely indoors I'd probably go tamron if it was as sharp as the sony. I shoot a lot at 24 so I would definitely miss that extra 4 mm. Typically when I shoot indoors I grab a 50 1.4 or some other prime with faster appature than 2.8 anyways.
p.1 #5 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
Astroscapist wrote:
The 28-75/2.8 should, I think be compared to other 24-70/2.8
The 24-105/4 is another kind of lens. Not to be compared to f/2.8
I think it's an appropriate comparison because of the weight and cost savings. Normally the 28-70 range is an entirely different category, but the cost and weight are close enough that the 28-70 can be considered.
I also have a preorder on the 28-70, and am considering the 24-105. The real question is the difference between their focusing ability in low light for me. I'd be fine shooting a 24-105 at iso 12800 on an A7 III as long as the focus hit.
p.1 #6 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
For me a 2.8 lens that costs $800 and weighs so little is a dream. It's a perfect travel lens when I end up shooting in dim light. I already push ISO at times with my primes, an f4 zoom just won't cut it.
p.1 #7 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
I dont like either. I prefer 2.8 or faster but I dont love the 75mm max reach. I like the 105mm reach but f4 just doesn't do it for me. I "might" shoot f4 with 2 or 3 people groups but those are few. Soooo,I'm stuck switching lenses
1.8 or 1.4 in dim light is too beautiful to sacrifice.
Travel wise,I could see the appeal for both but I would just take the 28 & 55 and not fuss...also,I dont travel much lately.
p.1 #8 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
Astroscapist wrote:
The 28-75/2.8 should, I think be compared to other 24-70/2.8
The 24-105/4 is another kind of lens. Not to be compared to f/2.8
I think since many people will consider the 28-75, 24-70 f2.8 and f4 and the 24-105 f4 - and - since the 24-105 is such a good lens despite the range it makes sense to compare provided you are realistic about the obvious differences. Comments like "I'm not buying the 24-105 because it's only f4" are absurd in my view because you knew it was f4 since the day it was announced. In that case you're right that someone shouldn't even include the 24-105 in their comparisons and evaluations.
p.1 #9 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
RobCD wrote:
I think since many people will consider the 28-75, 24-70 f2.8 and f4 and the 24-105 f4 - and - since the 24-105 is such a good lens despite the range it makes sense to compare provided you are realistic about the obvious differences. Comments like "I'm not buying the 24-105 because it's only f4" are absurd in my view because you knew it was f4 since the day it was announced. In that case you're right that someone shouldn't even include the 24-105 in their comparisons and evaluations.
People buy f/2.8 for a reason.
People buy more zoom range for another reason
People buy even more (super zoom) for a third reason.
All three has their up and downsides. I wouldn't consider any f/4 zooms if my main priority was that extra f-stop. I would however consider f/4 alternative if the it was up to portability or sharpness or coma or vignetting or ghosting etc was my main priority.
If f/2.8 is not of weight in the decision, I wonder, why haven't those people already bought the 24-105/4? It's been out for awhile now.
Anyway, my main priority in this matter is f-stop first, then sharpness, then contrast. CA would nice to have controlled well and vignetting comes in last. Other pople might have other priorities, but f/2.8 vs f/4 (from 75 to 105). Those last mm will be my feet zooming in or croping from 42 Mpx to 18 Mpx.
I have other lenses for different purposes, thi lens will just fill the gap for a relaxed travel with the family lens.
For super portablity, I have the Samyang 35/2.8.
p.1 #10 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
RobCD wrote:
I think since many people will consider the 28-75, 24-70 f2.8 and f4 and the 24-105 f4 - and - since the 24-105 is such a good lens despite the range it makes sense to compare provided you are realistic about the obvious differences. Comments like "I'm not buying the 24-105 because it's only f4" are absurd in my view because you knew it was f4 since the day it was announced. In that case you're right that someone shouldn't even include the 24-105 in their comparisons and evaluations.
Why would you call not considering the 24-105 because it's an f4 as absurd. I'm not considering it for exactly that reason...I love the range, but the lens is just too slow for some of my needs.
p.1 #11 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
The 24-105 is a really nice range and a really nice lens with great IQ but for my intended need it just would not work being a F4 in low light. I bought it as my PR lens tried it a few times and ran into some issue where I just put it back in my bag and grabbed my backup CV 40 1.2 and got me out of trouble. Shame as I really liked the Sony zoom so if F4 works than I highly recommend it but I’m bailing on the Tammy as well and decided to go back to AF primes like a Batis 25 and a 50 1.4 the good news they can be zooms for me just by throwing them in crop mode as for this type of work 18mpx is plenty . So I can go 25,37,50,75 and than I have my Batis 135 all fast and will work in low light. Admittedly I’m not the biggest zoom fan anyway, so at least for now and looks like a long wait anyway the Tammy is a back burner item if at all.
p.1 #12 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
Do you guys think that the Tamron will be available on other sites like Amazon, Best Buy etc on day 1 for those that didn't preorder with just limited stock? Or is this a situation where they only ship to the main photo sites first?
I'm new to Sony in the next few weeks coming from Canon, I got the MC-11 already so I'm set for lenses however I'd love to dabble in at least ONE travel zoom. I was considering this or the 24-105. Ive seen so many positives about the 24-105 and I think I'm sold but this seems like a good range too. I think I can live with the 28 instead of 24 considering I do landscape work and I always have a 16-35 on me (Canon F4).
p.1 #14 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
One review I watched showed lots of distortion in the 28-75 at the wide end. Otherwise I loved how compact it is. I already have the 24-105 and think very highly of it, but miss the faster aperture. Wouldn't want to compromise on optical quality to save a bit of money though.
p.1 #15 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
first off, the 24-105 costs 1300 not 1200, and even at 1300 its not in stock anywhere.
Second, with many of the other manufacturers, their 24-105 is cheaper than 24-70 2.8 (which is actually also true about Sony in house lenses)
All that said, its a question as old as time. well not quite, but.. I have personally owned both in other brands, with the 24-105 being my preferred travel lens, and 24/28-70, my preferred indoor and event lens. I dont think there is a clear answer to this, esp given the IBIS of sony making the tamron image stablized. still 1300 vs 800 might sway a lot of people.
p.1 #16 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
Of course when you know you can easily swap lenses, none of the 2 zooms is a great choice. Of course primes are better (smaller, lighter, better IQ...) but I find myself in a lot of situations where having just one lens is almost the only solution.
I have 2 kids, when I'm out I have a bag more filled with diapers and clothes than lenses. I have one hand holding one kid, the other sometimes free for a camera. I can take small hikes and enjoy beautiful landscape but have little time to stop to take pictures... even if photography is my job and my main hobby!
I know that sometimes you have to make compromises, the tough question is which ones? Should I leave the kids at home?
I used to have a 12-24 f/4.0 and thought it would be my main "outside/hike" lens, for perfect landscape and "normal" wide angle (18-36mm) in crop mode (on my A7RII) . But I often found myself blocked at 36mm when trying to include people in the frame. So I'm now waiting for a 16-35 (probably the 2.8) to replace it.
So I need a lens for the other side of the spectrum, when landscape is not really needed but more when I think "pictures of people", more or less in context. I have the 85mm f/1.8 but it is not versatile at all (too long, mfd too far away...).
The 28-75 f/2.8 seems to be the best solution. I like the idea of being able to use it indoors or outdoor, and why not to use it professionally as a backup of my Canon gear (mostly weddings) and also for video use (it should be ok on a gimbal, long enough for tight portraits shots on blurred backgrounds in crop mode...).
...but most of the 24-105 f/4.0 users explains that this lens is so great that you barely need a wider aperture, and in fact it is good enough at 24mm that you don't really need anything wider (take a few shots and merge them as a panorama in post).
But I have troubles to picture myself using a 24-105 f/4.0 for a wedding !
I know that the best answer is probably to get them all (16-35 f/2.8 + 28-75 f/2.8 + 24-105 f/4.0) and use them depending on the situation... but owning a 28-75 and a 24-105 seems a little bit redundant!
p.1 #17 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
The great unknown right now is IQ. If the Tamron actually matches or surpasses the IQ of the Sony THAT will be a major factor. We have gotten to know the Sony pretty well by now. With limited reports and samples the Tamron has yet to prove itself. Time will tell.
p.1 #20 · Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 VS Sony 24-105 f/4.0
I used to shoot events with Canon 5D (later 5D2) and EF 24-70/2.8L lens with on-camera flash slightly above ambient light set to ISO 1250, f/5.0 and 1/50. This worked really well for many years.
Eventually I acquired an excellent copy of the EF 24-105/4L and found it completely suitable for shooting at f/5.0-5.6 for event work concentrating on individuals, small posed groups, speakers, large crowds seated and standing, detail shots of the venue, booths, convention overviews, etc. The added 105mm came in very handy on many of these including the speakers, individuals, details, and products shots at trade show booths.
The 24-70/2.8L became a seldom used lens after that, due to weight and bulk and lack of range.
In limited comparison on a7R2s, I found the new Sony 24-105 to have slightly better IQ than my nice Canon. Not a lot, but certainly noticeable in details viewed at 100%. That is really an accomplishment, IMO, and raises the Sony to an impressive spot for event and all-around photography.
I still depend on the Canon gear for such event oriented photos (for the time being at least) due to my familiarity with their flash units, but I will likely acquire a few flashes for the Sony in the future, possibly pushing the Canon gear further from use.
I don't trust Tamron to be as sharp into the corners as the Sony 24-105, and certainly can't give me the extra range, which I crave over f/2.8 or cost savings. So, there's no way it is on my radar except for casual interest in how Tamron is doing. I've yet to see a bargain f/2.8 zoom that satisfied me.
I recently added a used EF 24-70/2.8L II zoom ($1300) to my stable, to be used on either Canon or Sony bodies. It provides excellent resolution and versatility.
