p.1 #1 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
I recently bought a A7RV and use a Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 more often than anything else. I am buying a Sony 20-70mm F4 G for underwater use. Is it worth keeping the Tamron? I know this isn't a super-expensive lens, but I'd rather sell it than keep storing it and never use it. On paper, 20-28 is much more useful than 70-75 and the Sony has a bit less fringing and better autofocus and is a few grams lighter. The extra half stop is useful, but if I really need a faster lens, I can't use either of these. I can't imagine any situation where I'd carry both.
p.1 #3 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
In my personal experience on dry land, 28-75 G2.
Partly because I got a lemon of a 20-70, party because the 28-75 is so good and partly because from 20-28 where the 20-70 is weak I'd rather have a dedicated wide angle
p.1 #5 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
johnahill wrote:
In my personal experience on dry land, 28-75 G2.
Partly because I got a lemon of a 20-70, party because the 28-75 is so good and partly because from 20-28 where the 20-70 is weak I'd rather have a dedicated wide angle
This is a good reason not to sell the Tamron until I can do a detailed comparison.
How do you know yours is a lemon? Unless you've used multiple 20-70's, how do you know what is a problem with your individual lens vs a problem with the model in general?
I am buying this used from someone who thinks very highly of it, so hopefully that means it won't be a lemon.
I do own a 14mm GM, which is awesome, but maybe not practical for most uses. I am used to prime lenses, so 14-20 is not a big gap (even 14-28 isn't). The 14mm has such a nice image and the a7rv is such a high res sensor that cropping a 14mm image is probably comparable to many lenses in this range. If I do shoot a lot in this range, I may pick up something like a 24mm prime. The nice thing about the 20-70mm is it is a good choice backpacking where I need to minimize weight and don't want to change lenses.
p.1 #6 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
When I first switched to Sony, I started with the 28-70 G1. Since then, I’ve explored various lenses and recently picked up the 20-70, which I’m enjoying so far. My advice would be to avoid overlapping focal ranges—you're unlikely to use both. Stick with the 20-70 and consider adding a fast prime for situations where f/4 isn’t sufficient.
p.1 #7 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
It's an extra stop (rather than half), no? But as you say, if you find 20-28mm more useful then there's your answer
Personally the 20-70/4 is one of few lenses recently I didn't manage to gel with. In part because I'm used to standard zooms starting at 28mm, in part because I miscalculated how many "bokeh" type shots I was going to take, at around a meter distance. The 20-70/4 is not known for its nice bokeh, except at mfd, and precisely that is what I experienced. I later got the Sigma 28-70/2,8 and I like it a lot more.
So horses for courses or whatever the saying is, i.e no use in keeping a lens you know you won't use much : )
p.1 #8 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
bvbellomo wrote:
This is a good reason not to sell the Tamron until I can do a detailed comparison.
How do you know yours is a lemon? Unless you've used multiple 20-70's, how do you know what is a problem with your individual lens vs a problem with the model in general?
I am buying this used from someone who thinks very highly of it, so hopefully that means it won't be a lemon.
I do own a 14mm GM, which is awesome, but maybe not practical for most uses. I am used to prime lenses, so 14-20 is not a big gap (even 14-28 isn't). The 14mm has such a nice image and the a7rv is such a high res sensor that cropping a 14mm image is probably comparable to many lenses in this range. If I do shoot a lot in this range, I may pick up something like a 24mm prime. The nice thing about the 20-70mm is it is a good choice backpacking where I need to minimize weight and don't want to change lenses....Show more →
I tested extensively and found it to be soft on the left hand side at 35mm at all apertures.
There have been threads here about similar findings with this lens in the middle of the zoom range.
Honestly I wanted the lens so bad because it ticks a lot of boxes and could be a 2 lens landscape kit with a 70-200, but once I'd seen it I couldn't unsee it.
p.1 #9 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
johnahill wrote:
I tested extensively and found it to be soft on the left hand side at 35mm at all apertures.
There have been threads here about similar findings with this lens in the middle of the zoom range.
Honestly I wanted the lens so bad because it ticks a lot of boxes and could be a 2 lens landscape kit with a 70-200, but once I'd seen it I couldn't unsee it.
Mine had this issue of being soft at 35mm to one side even stopped down and I sent it back to Sony and they have pretty much corrected it though I do find it seems to suffer from some really strange field curvature at mid distances. On the other hand it is sharp across the frame at both ends of the focal range and though a useful lens I find it hard to really gel with
p.1 #12 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
I replaced the 28-75mm with a 35mm/85mm combo. Mainly the 35mm. So its the correct FL, I just prefer 1.4 due to some places I shoot is horrible lighting or night. 1.4 lets in a lot of light. IBIS/VR/tripod does zero help with things are moving (Bands etc).
So that is what led me to faster primes.
G2 is a great value for the money if you don't need more light than 2.8. I would not hesitate on the G2.
p.1 #13 · Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 and/or Sony 20-70mm F4 G
The choice between having a greater range of focal lengths or a wider aperture comes down to your use case for the lens and your personal preferences for things such as size and weight. For me, I'd prefer the Sony as a landscape lens but the Tamron as a general purpose lens and for portraits / people pictures. Which was the better travel lens for me would depend on the trip I was going on. Yes, the aperture difference is only one stop (it's a stop, not half a stop) but, for me, f/2.8 makes a significant difference at those focal lengths. Yes, a fast prime could provide a substantially wider aperture again of course, and I do use primes sometimes but obviously then you lose the focal length flexibility of the zoom. In the end you have to pick your poison! Personally, I have a 24-70/2.8 and a 20-70/4 would be an additional lens if I got one. (That said, at times in the past I have had a 24-70/4 and a set of fast primes.)
If you can afford to keep both for a while, I'd recommend doing that and seeing how you go.
bvbellomo wrote:
I recently bought a A7RV and use a Tamron 28-75 F2.8 G2 more often than anything else. I am buying a Sony 20-70mm F4 G for underwater use. Is it worth keeping the Tamron? I know this isn't a super-expensive lens, but I'd rather sell it than keep storing it and never use it. On paper, 20-28 is much more useful than 70-75 and the Sony has a bit less fringing and better autofocus and is a few grams lighter. The extra half stop is useful, but if I really need a faster lens, I can't use either of these. I can't imagine any situation where I'd carry both....Show more →
