Just picked one up and shot with it yesterday, so far I am as impressed as everyone else. Really enjoying this lens, although sometimes I am having a bit of extra trouble with missed focus.
Jonathan F wrote:
After shooting with it for the last few weeks, my only request is that they release a lens profile to correct the minor distortion at the wide end and slight vignetting on the long end. I also owned the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 FE lens, and while decent, I find the 28-200mm more fun to shoot with!
How do you like the 28-200 compared to the 28-75mm? I have 28-75mm f2.8 but was looking for something longer, mainly as a landscape lens.
I had and sold the 28-75/2.8. What would you like compared? The 28-75/2.8 was amazing for what it was - an extremely light 2.8 standard zoom - but I found it weak in the corners at the wide end wide open, and that was unacceptable when there were other options on the table I thought did a good job. I now have the Sony 24-70/2.8, I was willing to trade the weight for the convenience of the wider focal length and - in my opinions - nicer colors.
The 28-200 is amazing for what it does. No it is not better than my Sigma 24-70/2.8, and likely - side by side - not 'better' than the Tamron 28-75, but it is exceptionally sharp across the frame at smaller apertures at all focal lengths, has lovely rendering, and does details and close ups well as well. I have never had such a competent superzoom, and I find myself thinking 'wow, this could adequately replace a lot of my (much more expensive) kit.' It is that good and so much fun to shoot with.
This lens (and the 17-28/2.8) just came in the mail and I wanted to try a 200mm tight portrait. It's definitely plenty sharp. I'll try it out on some desert landscapes soon. I'm really looking forward to using this two lens combination for everything from travel to landscape.
Same, I am currently using the 17-28, 28-200 and Laowa 9/5.6 as my travel everywhere in a Peak Design 6L Sling. Have to see if the Tamron can replace my Sony 16-35/2.8 GM and the 28-200 my Sony 24-105G. If they can, perhaps I sell those two Sony lenses - and maybe even the Tamron 70-180 (more doubtful) and pick up the Sony 12-24/2.8 if it is as good or better than the Sigma 14-24/2.8...
Just returned from 3 weeks out west. Gave the Tam28200 a lot of use while gone. Super satisfied with this lens. With the 17-28 and the 200600G most anything can be had.
My trip goal was mountain goats. Seems we plan trips based on species targeted. Once it was Svalbard for tooth walkers, Lake Clark for bruins, etc. This time sadly the main target area, Mt. Evens was closed but a good FM member told me where to go, and we had super success there; but we found them elsewhere to---and when I had the 28-200 on the Riv.
Just did the firmware update for the 28-200 via the A7Riv body. Easy peasy. Took only moments. Not that it was needed as far as I could tell but did it anyway after updating the A7Riv firmware.
Sorry for the simple snapshot, but I'm finding a lot of use for this lens documenting family. No need to move (which usually gives me away) or crop later, I have all the zoom I need for everything.
MedicineMan404 wrote:
Just did the firmware update for the 28-200 via the A7Riv body. Easy peasy. Took only moments. Not that it was needed as far as I could tell but did it anyway after updating the A7Riv firmware.
Thanks for the heads up on the firmware update. I just completed it with no issues. 👍
TravelinBriNY wrote:
I had and sold the 28-75/2.8. What would you like compared? The 28-75/2.8 was amazing for what it was - an extremely light 2.8 standard zoom - but I found it weak in the corners at the wide end wide open, and that was unacceptable when there were other options on the table I thought did a good job. I now have the Sony 24-70/2.8, I was willing to trade the weight for the convenience of the wider focal length and - in my opinions - nicer colors.
The 28-200 is amazing for what it does. No it is not better than my Sigma 24-70/2.8, and likely - side by side - not 'better' than the Tamron 28-75, but it is exceptionally sharp across the frame at smaller apertures at all focal lengths, has lovely rendering, and does details and close ups well as well. I have never had such a competent superzoom, and I find myself thinking 'wow, this could adequately replace a lot of my (much more expensive) kit.' It is that good and so much fun to shoot with.
'I have never had such a competent superzoom'. My sentiments exactly! And I've owned too darned many supers over the years. Makes me wonder why Tamron can get it so right and the other 'big' players can't or won't.
