Thanks a lot for the comment John! Glad you've had as good an experience as I have had too :)

Really appreciate it! And yeah, it's not from lack of trying 😁

Enjoy it!

Awesome news! I know you'll enjoy it, and thank you :)

Thanks mate, really glad you enjoyed it :)

Very true! This and the 200-600 would be an excellent combo, one day hopefully!

Hello bro i have just started as a wedding photographer i have sony a7 m3 and i have 28-70 f3.5 - 5.6 and now i am a bit confused which lens to buy 35mm/85mm or should i buy tamron 70-180 f2.8 bro can you please suggest??

@@CarlosTucker-sp4bj I know it's very pricey, but I know of people that shoot entire weddings on the Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 without feeling the need for anything else. I'd definitely research it!

@@isaacsonntag i know 35-150 is a great option but i don't have that much budget

@@isaacsonntag in my budget i can either get prime lens or tamron 70-180 lens and so i just started i only have one body

No probs! Glad I've introduced you to it :) And for sure! I'd love to take it on safari, it would be excellent for that kind of trip :)

Cheers man!

No problems bud, glad I could help!

Thanks a lot mate!

Thanks so much for the sub! Really appreciate it :) And glad you're enjoying the lens so much! It will be a great travel companion for you I'm sure! All the best :)

It's still an excellent lens for me too 2 years on!

Thanks Richard! Glad you find it as good as I do 😃

Great review!

Glad I could help! It's an excellent choice

It's an excellent lens for basically everything! 😃

Hi @King01st, I'm making a purchase for a7rV and this lens. Can you give your use case review? It would be helpful to me 😊

@@MrRoxxy93 I only have the A7R5 for about a month but before that I had a A7R3. In fact I almost purchased the simultaneously. I do some landscape and seascape but mainly cityscape and and street photography. For that the lens is great. It is sharp and with very little color fringing. Only at the shortest focal length (around 28 mm) you can get some color fringing but that's correctable in post. On my A7R5 it's the same story. The various focussing modes are very good with this lens and also the focus tracking works great. The only problem you might encounter is low light handheld shooting at the longer focal lengths. But that the depends of course if you are photographing moving objects.

Yeah exactly, it's a go anywhere, do (almost) anything lens, glad you decided against it :)

Thanks so much bud! Appreciate that :) Really glad it was able to help you out, and re your question, it's hard to say, I own both (but the G2 28-75) and they're so different. So depending what you're after, the 28-75 has prime level sharpness but leaves a lot to be desired in terms of focal length. If you don't mind the variable aperture then I'd recommend the 28-200 any day, just don't expect too blurry a background unless you're super close as I mentioned. Then again, it's not meant to be a "cinematic" lens. I'd say if you're after more photos, this lens, but if you do a lot of video and client work, the 28-75 is the way forward :)

@@NicBucci Heck yes! This is very helpful. Keep up the great work. Take care! :)

You're welcome mate. Thanks for the sub! Means a lot. I've never owned/used that lens but can vouch for Tamron entirely! I have a video coming out at the end of the weekend on the 28-75G2 so if you're looking to replace the Sigma that might be of help :) All the best!

Thanks so much dude! I hope you enjoy the content going forward! Have a great day :)

Ah thanks so much mate, I really appreciate that! It's an excellent lens, so I'm glad I was able to help you in your purchase, enjoy!!

It's one of the best tea's going!

No problem mate :) And yeah I opted for this over that lens too because at 100mm it's f4 (or super close to) anyway and excellent quality. Have a great day! :)

No problem David, glad you found it insightful! I did toss up the 24-104 also but ultimately went for this one. Enjoy your week away! Looking forward to hearing how the Lens goes :)

@@adennaed I have the 24-105, and like it a lot. I’ll be running some direct comparisons tomorrow, and I’ll report back. I must say, I really enjoyed using the Tamron 28-200 this week, largely because of the additional range. I will be purchasing one for hiking and traveling. I did miss the Sony 24-105 stabilization, on occasion, with it’s on/off button. And the Tamron did miss focus a few times, but the focus problem is a known issue that was fixed in firmware updates. I tried to do a firmware update as the lens I have is version 0.03, and the latest version is 3.0. So far, I have been unsuccessful. I’ll try it, again, tomorrow using an older Mac. I found it as sharp, or sharper than the Sony 24-105 most of the time - it is definitely sharper than the Sony at f/11 and f/16, which is handy for some landscape shots. The colors were good and I did not notice the CA fringe as much as I thought I would - it just did not show up much. It did fine indoors at family gatherings, too. The f/2.8 at the wide end, along with the camera body stabilization, helped make up for the lack of lens stabilization. If you are looking for a general purpose lens, I would get the Tamron because of the extra reach, the 24-28mm difference on the wide end was never an issue. If you know you won’t use the reach on the long end, then it is a tougher decision.

Hey Lewis, For sure it could be, though at a game you're already sitting a decent way away, so I would imagine something like the Tamron 70-180 or 70-300 would be slightly better? Just my thoughts :)

Hmm, depends really, it has quite a long reach so you would have to have a housing that fits it which may be quite expensive. Overall for fast moving subjects I haven't had an issue, just keep your ISO high for longer lengths I'd say. As for shake, I wouldn't worry about it, ibis is enough - hope this helps!

Yeah exactly! Such a versatile lens :)

I’ve found no issues in these environments, so long as there’s plenty of light around when you’re at 200mm :)

In all the time I've had it it's never skipped a beat! Zero issues on those fronts :)

@@NicBucci thanks!

For portraits you can get away with it, but not for professional use as the fstop is too high. My favourite lens though is an 85mm, and it's coming up in a video coming out soon so stay tuned!

Well I have looked to be sure, but as you say it's quite heavy and it's also triple the price of this lens, so I probably won't, and I'm yet to find a true reason to need f2.8 at the long end. So for my needs, that lens will probably be a pass, hope this helps bud :)

@@NicBucci Yeah if you don't do portraits there is no need for that incredible lens. I wouldn't use it for landscapes because you don't shoot landscapes wide open. I wouldn't use it for wildlife because it's not long enough and again you would stop the lens down for wildlife.

Depends on your camera body really, the lens has no stabilisation inside to help it out :)

Doooo it! 😂

@@NicBucci savings up to get a new lense, and I'm sorta torn between the 28-200 and the 70-300 tamrons. Need a zoom like lens, don't like the slower apertures at the higher end but I also don't have the funds for the Sony 70-200 f4.

@@malcolmkasner I’ve never had an issue with this lens, except in the dark :)

I'd say if it's outdoors/well lit during the day you would be fine yeah. Low light probably not unless your camera can handle high ISO :)

Have both lens aswell,but throghout all zoom ranges tamron is much sharper with better contrast overall,2.8 vs 4 especialy in lower part 28-100 is big difference,would choose Tamron over Sony anytime...

I agree. so keep both.

I agree. Just switched from sony to this tamron but soon going to buy once again the 24-105 G. Maybe I got a bad copy but IQ is pretty poor, especially on the corners which are way too soft.

Definitely, it's incredibly versatile. Check out my latest shorts video as an example :)

I've never had an issue with the eye AF :)

No issues so far! Though it is a little noticeable in the darker places

Hey there, I definitely recommend this as one of your first "rich" lenses. It was one of mine and it's been absolutely fantastic. I poke about it in my latest video basically mirroring this review. You won't be disappointed. Stat here and then branch out is my advice :)

@@NicBucci Also i wanted to ask of it's good for sports photography

@@itzpawl3024 relatively, it just won’t have super bokeh at 200mm is all :)

That was just my (now) old neewer Amazon bag, surprisingly good for the price!

For photography sure, it's great, though there's no stabilisation in either so unless you have something to stabilise with I wouldn't use it for video :)

@@NicBucci roger that, looks like a great option as opposed to the 70-350 which i was also considering. For video, i will probably stick to my Sigma trio and the 17-70.

Yeah that's a great combo, the 28-200 is a great photography lens :)

Hey bud, nice one, I hope you enjoy the transition! You've mentioned a lot of low light stuff there, so the lens you watched my video on is 2.8 only at 28mm, from there it changes. This one and the 24-105 though I'd pick the Tamron as it's f4 at 100mm anyway. But with everything you've mentioned I'd probably say the 35-150mm 2-2.8 fits your bill. It's expensive and heavy yes but you'd probably not need another lens for a long while as it's pretty perfect. Hope this helps!

I have heard this so many times you wouldn’t believe 😂

@@NicBucci you better have a sitdown with your mom, it's time😜🤌🏽

@@zijeisdezon I think she has some explaining to do 🤣🤣

That is a good question George, and one I've run through my head a few times! I think that if I was getting into photography now, then I would have got the 35-150 for sure yeah, and skipped this. But now that I have it and I'm so happy with it I don't see the point as it performs incredibly well. Hope this answers it for you! They're both great lenses, one is just slightly cheaper than the other :)

Thanks so much mate!

Now wouldn't that be a perfect union