ruthenium Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
p.2 #4 · p.2 #4 · Tamron 35-150mm, replace most of my lenses? | |
pcrit wrote:
I am debating the Tamron 35-150mm for Sony, I used to shoot a lot of weddings but mainly do videography but still do photo for weddings sometimes. I am looking to lessen the amount of gear I have and currently use the 24-105 (most of the time), 70-200 f/4, 55 1.8, & 85 1.8. Do you think I can replace my primes and the 70-200 with just the 35-150? I would probably keep the 24-105 as I use 24 for dance and large formals. I am a little concerned about losing the 200mm reach but think I can manage that. Anybody using this lens and what lenses did you give up and not miss?
I shoot with an A7III and just got an A9 if that makes any difference. ...Show more →
I bought my copy of the 35-150 in Nov 2021. The lens exceeded my expectations - I use it all the time. Considering that my other favorite lens is Sony 200-600, neither the size nor the weight of the Tamron bother me. I still own the excellent 24-105 f/4 but have not used it after acquiring the Tamron.
Optically, the Tamron should not disappoint. On a 50MP camera, it is strong at f/2-2.8, near prefect at f/4, and is perfect at f/5.6, then the diffraction kicks in at f/8. On a 24MP camera, f/8 should be excellent. I like the relatively low amount of veiling (haloing) around bright lights when using the Tamron in the dark. Ghosting has almost never been a problem in my use.
On a high-MP camera, cropping to 200 mm should probably rarely be a problem. On a 24MP camera, cropping can be more problematic, and having access to a 70-200 zoom can be useful. I recently added the 70-200 GM II to my kit. Both this lens and the Tamron 35-150 are outstanding, however, one cannot 100% replace the other. The Tamron is arguably more like a "Swiss-knife" device - it can do so much, and do well. The 70-200 GMII is more of an elite "specialist" lens and would be my choice for any action and unpredictably moving subjects in the 70-200 mm range - the AF seems to be a notch faster than the excellent AF of the Tamron. The 70-200 GMII should also be good for semi-macro, but this is a different subject.
Can the Tamron replace primes? Assuming that one shoots raw:
I believe, yes, every time when the primes are closed to f/2.8 and more.
I would say, no, when the primes are used wide open, e.g. to f/1.2 or 1.4.
I well understand that there are professional photographers who work on special projects when the best instrument might be a certain prime. For many other types of photography, the Tamron 35-150 should work just fine.
Thus, there is no simple answer to your question "Do you think I can replace my primes?" It might help if we knew the f/values you need and use 90% of the time. Even if the answer is "yes, you can," it would make sense to keep the primes. For example, I very rarely use my Sony 35 GM or 20 G, but I would not consider selling these primes. I am also interested in adding the 50 f/1.2 GM lens, despite knowing that the Tamron 35-150 should most likely remain my main go-to lens in the foreseeable future. Because of the Tamron, I am interested in the new a7RV that might be a better match than a1.
Good luck with your decision-making!
|