Can the Tamron 28-200mm Compete? | 4K

Photographer Dustin Abbott explores whether or not Tamron's new all-in-one zoom (the 28-200mm F2.8-5.6 RXD) can compete with their well-received 28-75mm F2.8 and 70-180mm F2.8 zoom lenses.
Tamron 28-200 Review: bit.ly/A071Review
Tamron 28-75 Review: bit.ly/TamA036da
Tamron 70-180 Review: bit.ly/A056Review
Purchase the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 RXD @ B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2xkmSUO | Amazon:
amzn.to/2L2DtyE | Amazon Canada: amzn.to/2H0VAT1 | Amazon UK: amzn.to/2soYBqX | Ebay: bit.ly/2875RXD
Purchase the Tamron 28-200mm RXD @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/2V1oooe | Amazon amzn.to/2zTeqy2 | Amazon Canada amzn.to/3dj79Fn | Amazon UK amzn.to/2Yh31S2 | Amazon Germany amzn.to/2V5JEJH | Ebay bit.ly/A071DA
Purchase the Tamron 70-180mm F2.8 VXD @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/2RsBIQV | Amazon amzn.to/2VlpeLQ | Amazon Canada amzn.to/2Rqy2PH | Amazon UK amzn.to/2Xm2pug | Amazon Germany amzn.to/3ebdX9N | Ebay bit.ly/F056VXD
Sony a9 Camera @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/2HyWIyt | Amazon amzn.to/2B4NAjh | Amazon Canada amzn.to/2peQkbn | Amazon UK amzn.to/2M7XPcY | Amazon Germany amzn.to/2VHbDOP | Ebay bit.ly/Sonyalpha9
Purchase the Sony a7RIV @ B&H Photo bhpho.to/2nUgnno | Amazon amzn.to/2oGpVD1 | Amazon Canada amzn.to/2mY8UDW | Amazon UK amzn.to/2n9GWF3 | Amazon Germany amzn.to/2nXhene | Ebay bit.ly/a7RIVda
Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at:
B&H Photo: bhpho.to/1TA0Xge
Ebay: bit.ly/DustineBay
Make a donation via Paypal: paypal.me/dustinTWI
Get a discount off all Skylum Editing Software (Luminar, Aurora HDR, AirMagic) by using code DUSTINHDR at checkout: bit.ly/LuminarDLA
Become a Patron: / dustinabbott | Check me out on: Personal Website: dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: bit.ly/DLAinsta | Google+: bit.ly/24PjMzv | Facebook: on. 1nuUUeH | Twitter: bit.ly/1RyYxIH | Flickr: bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu
My filming setup: Sony a7R III: B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2D6ibNO or Amazon: amzn.to/2CNxOvH | or | Sony a9 @ B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2HyWIyt or Amazon: amzn.to/2s1vYE0
Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 RXD @B&H Photo: bhpho.to/2FA00la or Amazon amzn.to/2G2kaEr
Lights: Rotolight AEOS @B&H Photo bhpho.to/2IK7mqV | Genaray Contender @B&H Photo: bhpho.to/33HbGNM | and Aputure AL-MW: bhpho.to/2N3MtZV
DISCLAIMER: This video and description contains affiliate links, which means that if you click on one of the product links, I’ll receive a small commission. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
Keywords: Sony, Tamron, withmytamron, A071, Tamron 28-200mm, Tamron 28-200mm, RXD, F2.8-5.6, 70-180, 28-75mm, 28-200mm, 28-200, Di III, Sony FE, Tamron 28-200mm Review, F2.8, Tamron 28-200 Review, 28-200mm F2.8-5.6, Dustin Abbott, Autofocus, Sample Images, Video, Video Test, review, Video review, Real World, Wide Angle, Sony a7RIII, Sony a7RIV, Portrait, Sharpness, Resolution, Bokeh, Sony 24-240mm, Travel, All-in-one

[@mengshun]

Home run, Dustin. Thank you for taking time and effort to cover this sort of topic where lens seemingly overlap each other significantly. I understand it can be tedious to do these and seemingly unnecessary but for the vast user base - a huge benefit and not well covered by other reviewers. A cup of joe your way!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks, mate.

[@youuuuuuuuuuutube]

It's really an incredible achievement. As you said, just the fact that we're having this comparison is a testament of how good that 28-200 is. Now I hope Tamron makes some super telephoto lenses with the same kind of compromises. Maybe a "compact" 240-560 with very high f, like f7.1-11.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

that seems to be an approach that Canon is taking with some of their new primes (600mm and 800mm F11 primes). We'll see if it works.

[@johansphoto]

Thanks for another great review! I took the plunge and sold my Tamron 28-75 f2.8 and my Sony 70-200 f4 and replaced them with the Tamron 28-200 and the Samyang 75. So far I am very happy with the trade. I really like small lenses with great performance, and now I can easily bring my entire kit (including Samyang 45 and Tamron 20) wherever I go. For events I primarily use primes so the Samyang 75 is a great addition. For travel and walk around the Tamron 28-200 is much better than my previous lenses. As you found I think it keeps up well with the 28-75, and the light loss is only one stop in that range. I also don't feel that I have lost much towards the Sony, but then I was never so impressed with the F4 zoom. However, it is obvious that it can't keep up with the two stops faster 70-180. I don't use longer lenses much, but it is still nice to have a telezoom. I think I will still bring the 28-200 as a backup for events. In the short end it is bright enough and in the long end it can be useful if there is enough light (I used to have a m43 35-100 f2.8, roughly equivalent to 70-200 f5.6). So far I am very impressed with the performance. The extreme edges can be a bit soft in my copy, especially on the left side, but that improves when stopping down which I would do anyway for landscape shots. Center and midframe are amazingly sharp for this kind of lens. I also really like the close up abilities of Tamrons lenses which makes them very versatile. The Tamron 28-200 can really do it all without giving up much IQ, but there are definitely better lenses for portrait and event work. The Samyang 75 looks very promising in that regard, great bokeh, and a very unintimidating lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Very fair assessment, I would say.

[@glennryan2829]

Do you think the I/Q on this lens is as good as Sony 70-200 f4? I'm thinking of doing the same thing.

[@charruaporelmundo]

Have you done a comparition with the 70-200 f4? because I'm thinking on sell it and get this 28-200...

[@imrankw]

What a useful review. I just bought the 28 200 and was wondering if I made the right choice. I am surprised at its performance so far and now understand why that's the case.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a very surprising lens optically.

[@davidbudo5551]

I'm loving this style of comparison video. I hope we get more of them. Cheers, Dustin.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi there, I was able to do this particular comparison because I happened to have all three of these lenses at the same time. That isn't always the case, obviously, but I don't mind doing them when I can make it work.

[@davidbudo5551]

@@DustinAbbottTWI, completely understandable.

[@davidbudo5551]

@Mauro Bonapace, I'm going to be purchasing a new lens soon. I'm probably going to get the 24mm GM. If I can lend it to Dustin for a comparison video, I'll send him any lens I own. I also have the Nokton 40mm f1.2. I also live in Ontario.

[@robertcudlipp3426]

@Mauro Bonapace Not too many of us can afford such exotic glass.

[@orangeofmars2835]

Tamron really makes deciding difficult. I am trying to find out if upgrading for portrait use from the Tamron 28-200 to the Tamron 70-180 VC G2. Normally I have to shoot with the 28-200 at 200 at ISO 6400. VC could help to stops and using f2.8 instead of f5.6 could also improve ISO to maybe 800-1600. That could be significant. Bottom line though, I use the Tamron 28-200 as my workhorse lens for street and outdoor landscapes as well as figure and portrait. So can't see replacing it with a 70-200 type lens. It would have to be extra for specific figure/portrait conditions.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Having fast glass is important if you're shooting indoors or in low light conditions frequently. The tradeoff is typically size, weight, and expense.

[@Xetenor]

Fantastic review! Thanks for putting the extra time to compare it to the 70-180 2.8. That was a surprising comparison to see the 70-180 do so well.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The 70-180 is an amazingly strong lens.

[@OccultDemonCassette]

Would it be useable for product photography with a studio flash setup?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It wouldn't be my top pick if that is your main purpose (a macro lens would be better), but it would get the job done.

[@OccultDemonCassette]

Are the sample images taken with a 24mp camera or a 40+ MP camera? I may have missed it if it was mentioned in the video.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

42MP - Sony a7RIII for the most part. There might be a few a9 (24MP) shots in there, but my formal tests are always done on the higher resolution body.

[@OccultDemonCassette]

@@DustinAbbottTWI awesome, thanks!

[@realpokski]

Seems the 28-200 is a great alternative to the 28-75, losing at most 1 stop of light (and for most of the range less than that), but with almost 3 times longer range. Pretty handy! For the 70-180 it is not so much an alternative if 2.8 or absolute sharpness is required. Thanks for the great comparison! This is the first super zoom lens I would ever consider, so great job by Tamron!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Your views are pretty much in line with mine.

[@metrixc]

Dustin Abbott Great video! Is there a big difference in sharpness (especially corners) between the 28-75 and 28-200? Best regards, Thomas

[@JJ-vp3bd]

Would yall consider this for an upcoming trip? Im looking to pair my sony a7r 3 with the 28 - 200.??

[@matthewchute5514]

@@JJ-vp3bd Definitely. Its a lot of fun to walk around with and provides a lot of options in terms of shots.

[@brentnapolitano5704]

That's what I decided. I bought the 28-200 instead of the 28-75 and plan to buy the 70-180 if there is a good black friday sale. But I still have the old Tamron 24-70 2.8 for my Nikon.

[@chryseass.5143]

I just picked up this lens to use with my a7c as a lightweight kit along with the Tamron 17-28 for travel. I plan to take one small fast prime as well to cover all the bases. I think that set up will be a game changer and much more fun to work with for sightseeing, and hiking, etc.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You'll enjoy, I believe.

[@ppnuwan]

Thanks, Dustin, really nice comparison and appreciate your hard work. Bought the 28-200 at the end and extremely happy with my decision.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I bought one, too. Just too useful for travel, hiking, etc...

[@Bloodshade]

I feel like for travel or social media: go 28-200 with a fast-ish prime like a 35 or 50 at f/1.8. For paid work or something where light and speed are difficult: go with a f/2.8 Zoom and maybe an appropriate prime

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough.

[@NickL0VIN]

The new 28-200mm will replace my 28-75mm as my main travel lens! I love the reach and always shoot at F3-5 anyway (I don't like blurring out scenery travel portraits with i.e. pyramids, bridges, Eiffel tower, etc in the background). But also if I need low light I can just shoot at 28-34mm f/2.8 and crop if needed. Great review once again!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Sounds fair to me.

[@oguzbenice7423]

I sold my 28-75 and bought this 28-200. No regrets. Great travel lens. Also ideal for street and landscape photography.

[@NickL0VIN]

@@oguzbenice7423 yes! I am traveling in the Florida Keys right now, using the 28-200mm 95% of the time. (the other lens I bring is the 45mm Samyang f/1.8 for night time photos if needed).

[@oguzbenice7423]

@@NickL0VIN I also have a few fast prime lenses to pair with this excellent Tamron travel lens. Have a nice Trip.

[@vladimirmigutin3909]

Dustin, huge thanks for this amazing review! The 28-200mm is really awesome with it's image quality, and like many others, I too had thoughts about selling the 28-75 and buying the 28-200mm instead. However, the light transmission difference, turns everything upside down, and I'm very grateful that you've pointed it out! Except for 1 T-stop difference at 28mm f/2.8 both lenses, I've examined the T-stop difference at 75mm in your shots, including brightness difference perceived by the eyes VS metadata, and it turns out to be about 0.5 T-stops, which means that at 75mm max aperture, the light transmission difference would not be just 1 (as assumed from f/2.8 to f/4.0 difference), but about 1.5 T-Stops. This is an even bigger "NO" for indoor family meetings, astro-photography, and other low light situations. This issue, at least for me, became a deal breaker.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's part of the reason why I perceive this as being a complimentary rather than competing lens.

[@nappynezz]

Exactly. I was about to buy the 28-200 instead of the 28-75, but you review saved me. I do a lot of events and weddings and the lighting is a huge issue. Need as much as I could get. Thanks for saving me from regret.

[@ankhaauuree]

@@nappynezz you mean 28-200 is the best? than 28-75. i coudnt decide which one is the better. let me know

[@johnpfeffer3933]

Another great review. Your straightforward but comprehensive presentation is so much appreciated over some of the “showmen” on KZbin. After seeing your complete review I placed an order which arrived Monday and I agree entirely with your summary. Great travel lens with a couple other tricks up its sleeve.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@setaside2]

This was a great time. I've enjoyed your newest formats. I hope you're still having fun, as well, good sir. Thank you for all your hard work. You are vastly appreciated out here.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks, Marc. Most of the time I do enjoy what I do. Thanks for the ongoing support...and Stacie in NY is fantastic to work with.

[@setaside2]

@@DustinAbbottTWI she is sincerely good people. You set a standard, though. I always tell people: even if we come in a distant second or third during one of your reviews (what? We're not always the best? 😁) I feel like we earned it. Your consistency in fairness remains the goalpost everyone should try to match.

[@robertgiguere875]

Great video! I use both the 28-200 and 70-180 on my a7iii. For indoor sports the 70-180 is perfect for my use. But for all around the 28-200 is lighter and more versatile. When there is no flash restrictions, using the 28-200 indoors with my GODOX TT350 flash adds all the light I need for the higher arpetures

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It remains a very nicely versatile lens.

[@sephiroth127]

What camera did you use to take the pictures when comparing the sharpness? Also, thanks for that comparison, it is veeery useful!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

A Sony a7RIII...and you're welcome.

[@mikebyrne8420]

Thanks so much for this comparison. Surprising how well the 28-200 performs.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Absolutley

[@gabeschiff-verre4260]

Great review Dustin. I’m trying to decide if I should bring my tamron 17-28, 28-75g2, 75-180 for landscape photography in New Zealand or get the 28-200 and 17-28 for wide end to save weight. (I’ll be backpack traveling.) I’m looking for professional quality images I could use for printing. Would this be those image quality standards?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The truth of the matter is that for landscape images (shooting at F5.6 or so), I've got a lot of really amazing images with this lens. I would say the 28-200mm + 17-28 would be a great weight saving kit.

[@gabeschiff-verre4260]

Do you think the image quality will stack up to the 70-180/28-75 for professional prints? Seems there is a lot of fringing. I’m also concerned about low light handheld for sunsets/sunrises. What was your experience? This will be paired with A7RV.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I've been pretty satisfied with my travel results from it.

[@martin9410]

@@gabeschiff-verre4260 I used the A7RIII and it does a good job, but it's only about 43mp for the camera.

[@ctphotographx]

Surprisingly excellent for what it is. Combined with a7III, a new photographer could start a portrait business very affordably. And for travel, this review has me thinking the 28-200 is reason to leave the 2.8 trio at home. Well done Tamron.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I’m travelling with it right now. Very nice!

[@BSmalls9ja]

Dustin, thanks for making this comparison as i know i was one of the people who asked you this question. Great comparison video. Answered all my questions.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@somnayak1]

Great Video. I currently own a Tamron 20-40, for my a7C and love that lens. But I miss the zoom. I am confused between Tamron 28-200 and Tamron 70-300 to add to my 20-40 lens. I don’t do any professional work and use my camera only for travel. Please help me choose the right lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you plan to travel with both lenses, then get the 70-300 to compliment your 20-40mm. You'll get more reach and better image quality.

[@somnayak1]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you so much for the quick reply.

[@jjansendavid]

Your channel is just one of the few a frequently visit to help me start my journey in the world of photography. Thank you for your amazing insights and detailed explanations of these sort of complex equipment. I have a question for you though, if you were to have just 2 lenses for you Sony mirrorless camera, what would they be?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi Jansen, that's not really an easy question for me to answer. I own at least a dozen lenses for Sony, and most all of them I own because I value them and use them.

[@brunofalcone9979]

Amazing video. May I suggest you include in the title that you're comparing against the 28-75 and 70-180? It's not so clear from the current title and I believe it'd attract many more viewers. Great work!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks for the feedback. I'll consider it.

[@AllCarsUnited]

I am very curious to see how it compares to the Sony 24 105 f4. Have had that thing since it's release but would consider swapping with the Tamron for travel

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi there, I was able to do this particular comparison because I happened to have all three of these lenses at the same time. I rarely have that opportunity, and unfortunately don't have easy access to the Sony. My experience is that the Tamron competes strongly in the center, the Sony has a little advantage in the corners (at F4-5.6), and by F8 they are equal.

[@CC-gt3ro]

@@DustinAbbottTWI and the sony has stabilization and faster autofocus which is important as internal lens stabilization are better than ibis stabilization, as the components are dedicated to the zoom lens focal, aperture and size. Ibis is generic stabilization. This is why i consider sony a7c and tamron 17-28 (which i already have ) buy the sony 24-105 (used) for mid range and add the cheap tamron 70-300 di IIII (100-450mm aps-c mode) for telephoto, for a full all around package. Maybe adding a cheap 35mm 1.8 for extreme low light. It is more expensive than the 28-200 though.

[@Amdfais]

Thank Dustin very useful video. By the way, the way you explaining reminded me David who loves Pheopbe from Friends! I am I right 😊

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I always tend to remind people of actors who are dark around the eyes.

[@snymat_68]

After this review and the one comparing it to the Sony 24-240mm, I'm seriously considering selling the Sony and buying the Tamron to pair with my A7Riii and Laowa 15mm f/2 for travel. I feel as though that would be a good travel kit, especially with being able to get out to 300mm @ 18MP with the Riii. As always, thanks for the time you put in to these reviews. It's much appreciated on this end.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure.

[@robertcudlipp3426]

Obviously your call, however seems like a pretty heavy travel kit.

[@kp-od8ji]

Thank you for this great review. Would you recommend the 70-180 2.8 on a Sony A6600?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Optically, sure. Just keep your shutter speed up, though, as the crop factor makes the lack of an image stabilizer more of a factor. IBIS helps, but isn’t as good as a lens OS here

[@joshs7642]

Im struggling to decide about buying the 28-200 for an upcoming trip to Italy. I have the tamron 17-28, 70-180 G1 and samyang 45. I sold the 28-75 G1 because i just didn't use it much and thought the bokeh was pretty rough. I haven't done any travelling in years though, and thought it might be a good idea to leave the 70-180 at home and buy a 28-200 instead. What would you do? Stick with what i have, or swap tne 70-180 for the 28-200?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

If you are looking specifically for a good travel lens, the 28-200 is hard to beat.

[@joshs7642]

@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks for your reply!

[@markdbey]

... Yea I completely mis-read this title. For whatever reason I thought you were comparing Tamron's unorthodox 17 - 180 to other "Holy Trinities" such as the 16-35 to 70-200. Don't ask why I thought this... I should have thought wait... Tamron has a 17 - 28... Why are we starting at 28 to compare to the trinities? Anyhow, at the end of the day I saw a "Dustin Abbott" video and CLICKED IT! He's the SINGLE most thorough and detailed reviewer on KZbin. Hands Down! Congrats on the nearly 90K subs! I'm glad to be an early subscriber to this channel. I'm TOO proud of the growth. LONG over due.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thanks, Markus. That's really kind.

[@justa2]

Excellent review - helped me make my mind up, still surprised how good the 28-200 is !

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You and me both!

[@metrixc]

Hi Dustin, you mentioned some shortcomings in sharpness on the 28-200mm. Do you think this can be fixed in Lightroom with the sharpness slider? I mean the comparison is straight out of camera. Thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Of course one can add sharpness via a slider, but there's a price to pay for that in the form of artifacts. I evaluate native sharpness and not what one can add in post.

[@paololarocca7684]

thanks for the in depth review, Dustin. Do you think it is suitable for a high mp camera like a7rii or a7riii ? And how does is compare to a lens like fuji 18-135 on a 24/26mp sensor? Have you had the chance to test that lens?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's definitely sharper than the Fuji, and is definitely suitable for a high resolution body like the a7RIII

[@emanuele747]

Hi Dustin, thank you so much for this useful and well done comparison ! Which camera have you used for the comparison shots ?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Primarily the a7RIII with the A9 for a few other shots.

[@brunofalcone9979]

Great video! Are you sure about the greater light transmission of the 28-75 vs the 28-200? Because if so then the 28-75 will actually have better low light performance at the same aperture, which would allow you to reduce the ISO. From your test it appears to have twice the amount of light transmission, which would be one full stop, therefore allowing you to use half the ISO value. I think this point may be even more important than small differences in sharpness and could be a defining factor between the 28-75 and the 28-200. Thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I don't believe that it is a full stop, but the 28-75 does have better light transmission.

[@Pasha4ur]

Hello What lens did you use to film this video? There is and interesting bokeh Found. Tamron 70-180

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Looks like you answered your own question... :)

[@JamminHyaku]

Loved this video! Fantastic job. What do you recommend for portrait shots? I am not a portrait photographer - but I would like to get into it more with local meets and whatnot. Currently I still just have the Sony 50mm f1.8 for portraits and low light capabilities. I have been looking at replacing it with the Zeiss 55mm F1.8 possibly. Would the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 be suited to replace my 50mm 1.8? It is a full stop lost, but I would believe an IQ improvement and include more versatility in reach.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You might consider keeping your 50mm and augmenting it with the 70-180mm for a different focal range and a really superb portrait/event option.

[@adamcwatts]

Thank you so much for this review. This is the lens I was hoping for landscape work while hiking. Will pair great with my Voigtlander 21mm Color-Skopar.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Agreed. It will be a nice, lightweight combo.

[@Bussmicke2305]

Nice, if we compare this one with the Tamron AF 28-300/3,5-6,3 Di VC PZD, which one is best for 5D Mark IV?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

This lens is only for Sony E-mount, so the 28-300 is the only choice for the 5DIV

[@Bussmicke2305]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks a lot. I think it's better to buy that one rather than EOS R and The 24-240 mm?

[@ziadelghoul3373]

By far, your reviews are the most objective and technical. Thank you

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you very much.

[@LiquidTurbo]

A truly useful video for many people! Thanks for making it. (As far as I know seems to be the first one on KZbin doing this comparison.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@mengshun]

Side note for Dustin's viewers: get the firmware update. The version 1 of the software has a bit of a focusing issue in AF-S mode. Rectify this and you are good to go (and avoid an unnecessary return). You can update the firmware via the camera, USB cord and laptop - no dock/tap-in needed for that.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Good advice.

[@neil454]

Great review Dustin. I'm kind of surprised at the T-stop differences in the 28-200. It seems like the 28-75 is nearly a full stop brighter at 28mm F/2.8!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

There's a certain reality to physics that's hard to overcome....

[@Pdraver333]

Well done! Now I think I will probably go for the 70-180 when I get an A7c.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The a7C is a sweet little camera. I've actually been testing the new Tamron 70-300mm on it this past week. It seems to have pretty good IBIS, which will help with your 70-180

[@theconsoleinthecloset]

Outstanding review, exactly what I was looking for. You earned a subscriber.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Welcome aboard!

[@nappynezz]

Agree

[@matthewchute5514]

Dustin! You're the man! Really appreciate your review and the work that you do. Concise and informative. Gotta say its still difficult for me if I should sell my 28-75 and keep the 28-200 (keeping my 70-180!), but the light transmission and bokeh comparisons are really helpful. The f2.8 is almost a full stop better performance wise which is kind of crazy. Also in a weird way, the 28-200 is almost overwhelming when doing photo walks! Definite paradox of choice when deciding how to photograph something in terms of composition. So many options! I kind of like having less options as it feels like my choices have more intent if that makes sense? But if youre on a budget, the 28-200 is a fantastic choice! Thanks again!

[@oguzbenice7423]

I think I will sell my 28-75 and buy that 28-200, plus a prime lens, probably a 85mm 1.8.

[@matthewchute5514]

Not a bad combo! Check out that rokinon 75mm f1.8 as well!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough. The great news is that we have solid options on Sony, which is great.

[@robertcudlipp3426]

Your call, however I would keep all the lens. Gives you a great deal of choice.

[@InsideOut204]

I always appreciate your reviews! You speak very highly of the Tamron 28-200. Could you tell me if real world result would really hold up to a pro-grade lens like the new Sigma Art II 24-70? I know the zoom range and aperture don't line up exactly, but in general, do the higher-grade optics of the Sigma justify the higher cost/lesser range? Thanks in advance 🙂

[@OBrandt-i5c]

Fantastic review, Dustin. I think when it comes to the question of the 28-200 as a replacement for the 28-75, the answer is a bit less muddied in my mind, in favor of the 28-200, especially since its range does not stop at 75 and continues onto 200. And within the overlapping ranges, the max aperture of the 28-200 falls just a stop or so below the 28-75, while being optically comparable. I think the 28-200 (for general purpose, travel and outdoor use), coupled with a few small light primes for specialized work, including during travel and for portraiture (20mm f/1.8, 35/1.8, 55mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8.......and maybe a good 135) will do a better job than the 2 f/2.8 zooms. Or maybe the 28-200 (for general purpose use and travel) coupled with the 70-180. Just an alternate thought.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Fair enough. It's very surprising that the 28-200 is as optically competitive as it is.

[@davidpomerleau8419]

Hi Dustin. I'm seeking a "what-would-you-do" scenario.. Lightroom currently shows the bulk of my photos were taken at less than 35mm, with the bulk of that group being at or less than 25mm. The number of photos progressively fizzles out at around 200mm at the upper end. Here's my question (2 questions, actually): With a Sony full-frame camera and a 16-35mm zoom, I'm looking for a lens (preferably zoom) that'll fill in the range from my current 35mm up to the 200mm range.. My options are the Sony 24-240mm, or the Tamron 28-200mm. I also really like the idea of the new-ish Tamron 35-150 f2-2.8 zoom, even though it only goes to 150mm, but appeals to me due to the fast aperture. Question 1: Any suggestions on what lens to go with to get me up to the 200mm-ish range? Question 2: Pros/cons of getting the 35-150mm Tamron and switching to APS-C mode to effectively get me beyond the 150mm range with the crop. Thanks, Dustin. Cheers from Kingston, Ontario..

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi David, the 35-150 is definitely the top choice for image quality. I would definitely recommend the Tamron 28-200 over the 24-240 as far as image quality, though.

[@AnandGopinath]

I'd be quite interested to see the comparison between 28-200mm and Sony 24-105G. I have the latter and I wonder how this new tamron superzoom compares.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi Anand, it's all about availability. I don't have either of those lenses on hand anymore (both were loaners where I reviewed them). I could compare to the other two lenses because I actually had them on hand.

[@chrismeakin7830]

Hi Dustin, would you choose the Tamron 28-200 over the Sony 24-105 at f4? That’s a better comparison for my situation.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I really like the Tamron a lot, actually, and I'm not sure that the Sony is worth the extra money.

[@chrismeakin7830]

@@DustinAbbottTWI My dilemma is, I already have the Sony 24-105 f4, and was contemplating selling it to fund the Tamron 28-200. So it would equate to about an even swap. I also have the Tamron 17-28.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I see. I would probably only make that swap if you really wanted that additional focal range. The 24-105 G is a good lens

[@jml7916]

I think this lens plus some fast primes for specific tasks is a better use of limited funds. At least this is what I have decided to go with. Tamron 20mm f/2.8, Samyang 35mm f/1.8, Samyang 50mm f/1.4 and Sony 85mm f/1.8. I also have a 28mm, 90mm macro and 135mm that can be used with adapters if I think I'll need them. I shoot 2 bodies at any events. For travel I use this lens, 20mm Tamron and the lowly Sony 50mm f/1.8 and a Godox TT350 flash and trigger. Light and flexible enough.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Sounds like a good, lightweight kit.

[@timothyfu5211]

Thanks for the wonderful analysis. You are my go to authority for lens reviews. I'll eagerly wait for your direct comparison between this 28-200 and Sony's 24-105 G. I have the latter and am wondering if I should switch to the 28-200 for travel photography to benefit from the longer focal length offered by Tamron.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi Timothy, a direct comparison is unlikely at this point. I have far too much demand for new products to do a lot of "retro" comparisons.

[@perseus2052]

Thanks again for linking me to this vid, Dustin. Just how is that 28-200mm so good? Granted some areas the individual 2.8 lenses are better, but really NOT by much at all! I'm mainly an outdoors shooter, chasing after protests for photojournalism shots, so the 28-200 will be brilliant for me to have that all in one versatility.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Frankly it shocked me. I've never seen a lens like this perform so well optically. I snapped one up for myself as my travel/hiking option.

[@anon82037]

The question is when you travel are you ok constantly changing between 2 lenses or do you prefer one lens on camera. 24-28 is quite important for travel. Is 24 wide enough as a wide angle or is 17-24 needed. For me I need 24-28 a lot and that’s why I have the Sony 24-105. However a tamron 17-28, 28-200 is a nice combination but I would end up switching constantly between the 2 which is not ideal for a travel zoom.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It’s true that occasionally you want wider than 28mm, but I’m finding that it dos the job in most situations, and having that solid image quality in one compact lens is fantastic. I’m traveling with it right now, and loving it. I did bring the 17-28mm along with the Samyang 45mm F1.8 for a compact kit.

[@matthewbeizer7241]

Hi Dustin. Great review. I now have the Sony 24-105. Based on your reviews, I am thinking of trading it in for two lenses. First, the Tammy 28-200 for travel and hiking. Second, the Sigma 24-70 for indoors, low light, events and portraits. I have the Tammy 17-28 and 70-180 already. Does this make sense to you?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Seems reasonable to me, though the 70-180mm is a wonderful event lens.

[@siamxiii]

Just got one, and it's fantastic for outdoor shooting. For portraits i've got Sony FE 85/1.8, so I covered basical needs. Really good video, by the way.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It really is such a useful lens in so many situations.

[@Davidod01]

Thank you for that comparison. All my questions answered plus many that I didn't even think about.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@JohnDennery]

Thanks Dustin, this was amazing. Even seeing the 70-180 with better image quality, the 28-200 still looked fantastic at all focal lengths. I'm almost 100% sold except I wanna wait for the upcoming 28-75 g2 and 35-150 lenses to be officially unveiled. Amazing work from Tamron to make this superzoom compete so closely with these other lenses which people have raved about constantly since their release! I have primes to use indoors when I need them but I'm usually outside anyways. This looks like an amazing option. Cheers

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The 35-150mm could be a real game changer if it is well executed.

[@shimonzalkind2600]

Great and informative review! thanks.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@beutelm1]

Is the Tamron 28-200 only available to fit Sony cameras ?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

AT the moment, yes.

[@Princeton_James]

Took this to the San Diego zoo and it was excellent. For some shots the Sony 100-400 would have been excellent. But this is my new walk around plus some. Cant go wrong with it.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a very versatile lens, for sure.

[@philscanlan7321]

Appreciate the thorough series of videos about this lens. Owning both the 24-70 & 70-200 GM lenses, I didn’t think I’d find myself looking at this lens but I shoot a lot of demolition documentary photography and video content and changing lenses isn’t always timely or suitable due to dust/debris in the air. This lens seems to be made for these kind of situations, will just need to be careful when zooming as I assume the lens will suck in dust if I’m not careful.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

hi Phil, that's a valid point. Being able to avoid switching lenses at all in high risk environments is handy

[@lsaideOK]

It's the complementary aspect you mentioned that makes it a good choice for maybe even a professional when in a hobbyist mode. It is much more convenient to carry around during family travel, for instance. Great review! Really nails the advantages/disadvantages of this lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Exactly. I'm strongly considering one as a complimentary lens

[@N0rdman]

Good show and good work; it makes for an excellent comparison and helps a lot of people with decision making. As one grown up with photography in the 1980s, I worked for Kodak in 1981, it is simply astounding how far the zooms of today has come. Almost all zooms of the early 1980s were worth their weight; as paperweights. Being rubbish for most parts. The first zoom I bought in the early 1980s: a Soligor 80-200mm had excellent finish but optically, I actually binned it after a couple of rolls as it was totally unusable.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is true that in many ways the performance of zooms has advanced more than the performance of primes in general.

[@N0rdman]

@@DustinAbbottTWI except possibly wide angle lenses, they were with few exceptions quite constrained with a lot of different aberrations and very few really good ones; the wide angle lenses of today are are very good, even the extreme ones.

[@evenatienzaart]

Thank you, Dustin. I have watched dozens of your videos and have been consistently impressed with your articulation. However, your lip flutter at 15:55, pshhhh at 16:40 and heh at 17:19 convinced me to exchange my Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 for my travel and hiking needs.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

LOL. Love it!

[@evenatienzaart]

I exchanged a Sigma 24-70mm for a Tamron 28-200 but I also bought a Samyang/Rokinon 18mm f/2.8 to complement the Tamron for travel, hiking and short backpacking trips. Thanks again for your guidance toward a great set-up for my needs, Dustin.

[@sussar]

Is it a good idea to sell my A036 and get this one instead?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That really depends on your purpose. I need F2.8 often in my zooms, so I'm keeping my A036, but I did buy an A056, too. It's so handy.

[@amalofoto]

Fantastic review! I've decided to sell my 28-75 in favour of this superzoom. I had planned to own the 28-75, 70-180 and a few primes for portraiture, but I decided on this lens instead of the two zoom lenses. Since I do lots of hiking (and travel when there's no pandemic), the convenience of not switching and carrying two lenses goes a long way, I can sacrifice the fixed aperture for that. The 28-75 for the 28-200 is an easy trade, would have been harder if I had already bought the 70-180. Thanks again!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That sounds like a reasonable argument to me.

[@Wildbom]

I got a deal on a 70-180 for 800. If I never saw that deal, I would’ve definitely gone this route after seeing this video.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's a great price for an excellent lens.

[@luciegagnon1238]

Excellent and thorough review! Thank you!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure!

[@andreasbuder4417]

Man, that is a strong performance out of the 28-200mm. Really the only viable superzoom for full frame regarding great image quality, and one of only two superzooms in any system (the other one being the Olympus 12-100mm f4). But what makes it really special, is the f2.8 at 28mm with already great optical performance, sorely needed for low light and indoor capability with or without moving subjects. Let´s see what the rumored Sony A5 brings to the table, might be the perfect couple if it still has IBIS and reason to switch for everyday photography.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It's a surprisingly strong lens. I bought a copy as a travel/hiking lens.

[@coertwelman5840]

Hi Dustin! Thanks for a great review, as usual. My question is a bit weird, but here goes. Even though they are currently available in different ecosystems, how would you compare this to the Canon RF 24-105 f/4L? The context for my question. I am currently shooting APS-C Canon DSLR and am considering moving to RF in the future. At present I have the latest incarnation of the 18-135 as my walkabout lens and if I move to RF, I will miss the extra reach when I get the 24-105, whereas this lens is virtually identical in reach to the 18-135. The larger aperture on the wide end will also come in handy for indoor shooting like a museum. Hopefully by the time I migrate to RF, Tamron would have made this available in that mount as well.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I would say sharpness levels are probably similar...and I too am hoping that Tamron makes a version for RF. You would want to use it on an R5 or R6, however, as the lens doesn't have IS.

[@evhen14]

A very good comparison and a nice point about the purpose of the lens and how it compares to others

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Thank you

[@siddraj2002]

I'm debating returning my 28-75mm after watching this ... Another lens to compare this with is the Sigma 24-70mm (its a little more expensive, but curious to see optical comparison)

[@oguzbenice7423]

I think I will sell my 28-75 and buy that 28-200, plus a prime lens, probably a 85mm 1.8.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I'm afraid the comparisons are over. I only have so much time to give to each lens and project.

[@leonard2238]

Anyone knows what 28-200 will be good for other than traveling? Street photography (not bright enough)? Wildlife (not long enough)? Already have Sony 24-105, trying to decide which one is more useful.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi Leonard, I would say it is very useful for the day to day stuff, hiking, and those situations where you don't want to change lenses.

[@alexgimagery]

Seems street photography should be alright with this (f2.8 at 28, and f3.5 at 35mm aren't bad). Some street photographers use only 35mm which isn't very wide either.

[@pianoman1973]

Thanks for another great review - I purchased it and it's great !

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Great to hear! It's a great lens.

[@levyarmovsky1721]

As always a great and very informative review. It seems like a fantastic travel lens, combined with Sony 20mm f1.8 for wide angle and low lite. I would prefer the Samyang or Sony primes for portraiture to a zoom.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

The 20mm F1.8 would be a great travel pairing, for sure. That's a very sharp lens.

[@vanjasimunko708]

Thank you Dustin. Helpful as always!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

My pleasure!

[@artmaltman]

Brilliant idea this comparison! Very helpful. Thank you.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@jakeyulo8738]

I actually feel like this is being overlooked for professional use if you already have several fast primes. I’m considering replacing my 24-70 2.8 for this because of the sheer volume of keepers I could quickly get with decent light, and then switch to primes for specific uses and low light on the mid to long end. Has anyone else made a similar move and tried this out during paid gigs at weddings/events?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I’ve used it already for professional work for branding for a major hotel brand. They wanted active, outdoor shots along with landscapes of the region, and they loved the results.

[@gyhd789]

Thank you very much, Abbott! This comparison is exactly what I am looking for.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad to hear it!

[@joyindeeamornchai754]

would you say this Tamron 28-200 is sharper than the Sony RX100VII?

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I haven't tested the RX, but I would be shocked if it isn't. It's a very good lens designed for a much larger sensor.

[@sukhmeetchhabra9218]

Yeah I am interested to know this too ..

[@Trojan0304]

Like your split screen comparison & detailed breakdown, thanks

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@CC-gt3ro]

The choice is difficult between sony 24-105 f4 with oss and this tamron 28-200 2.8-5.6. They have both advantages. Sony is the 24 range at f4 and stabilization, autofocus faster and constant aperture f4 and great sharpness. And the Tamron has the bigger range to 200mm for compositing, smaller and a bit less weight, same 67mm filter than 17-28 that i already have with the sony a7c

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

don't forget the Tamron is much, much cheaper!

[@steven.n.friends]

Really clear for me. Thank you.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it helped out!

[@kyleheaser1089]

Great material, wonderful explanations, only issue I had with this video is you repeated yourself many times. Well spoken and articulated, thank you

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@DavidB-tj3rj]

Great review! Still undecided though. I just got into FF and only have the A7c and samyang 45 1.8 (based on your review). Not a pro, just a family guy that take mostly pictures of my kids and places we go. The all in one is appealing but often my type of photography is the most challenging. Low light, fast moving, little time for planning the shot and so on. So the 2.8’s or at least the 70-180 plus a WA prime might be better. Ugh, decision paralysis!

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

It is a tough decision, though I will say that the a7C does have good low light performance.

[@HighFlyingPhotography]

Very helpful as always

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad to hear it!

[@joakimolsson1024]

Considering how much brighter the other lenses are at the same aperture setting, adding that the bokeh is softer, one might wonder if the 28-200's stated apertures are really true...? It would be interesting to see what the bokeh looks like, comparing the same light transmission apertures. I mean, considering the above, in real world use, the 28-200 is more like a f/4-f/8 lens.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I don't think that's true. The light transmission is more like a third stop...not a full stop. The bokeh softness is more about the character than the size of the bokeh...which wouldn't be true if there were a major aperture difference.

[@nohandle-01]

Great video. Thanks 👍🏾

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

You're welcome.

[@RoyAlf]

Thanks for the video. Now in 2024, the 28-200 is still the only super zoom this capable. I shoot only on primes, 20, 35, 55, and 85, all 1.8s. I started to think about a zoom lens for versatility and convenience. The only immediate options are the 24-70 2.8s (I like the Sigma), but the cost of Sony GMs, or even some of the main alternatives, are way beyond my capabilities. During the search, I found the 28-200, and the reviews are great for an everyday outing and for most conditions. If I know I'm going for something specific I take a couple of primes. But for going out and about, the 28-200 looks amazing.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Agreed. It’s still tops for actual performance

[@henryne]

Chapeau, Great review. Just what I wanted to know, Thx

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad to help

[@XiaoZhuXXVII]

Thanks for this review! I already have the T2875 mostly for everyday shooting with my young kids. I don't do any professional work, so I am thinking of selling the T2875 for the T28200 to have a lighter load when we travel. The 28200's 28mm will allow me to shoot indoor shots at restaurants or etc. One thing that hesitates me is kid sports. T2875 will give me 2.8 and high shutter speed when I am close to the field. Maybe it's a complimentary lens after all.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

That's the way I view it...as complimentary.

[@WilliamWallaceRoss]

My A7III is paired with the 28-200mm and so far, I have been pleased at the photos I have been able to capture. I will probably add the Tamron 17-28mm and the 70-300mm to round out my cityscape/landscape, although, the Tamron 24mm f/2.8 might be a viable option. We shall see after I have had the opportunity to try out the 28-200mm in the city. For landscapes, so far, it works. The 70-300mm would allow me to capture moon shots and some animal life. My software, with AI, is able to correct any issues with the Tamron 28-200mm, plus, updating the firmware of the Sony A7III to the latest 2022 update had to have helped.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

Ok Tnx how would the Tamron 28-200 measure against the Canon RF 24-105 f/4

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hmmm, I'm not sure why that's relevant. Two different focal lengths on two different camera systems. I suspect the Tamron is fairly competitive with the RF, however, and probably even a bit sharper at some points in the zoom range.

[@dimitristsagdis7340]

Dustin Abbott Tnx , well the issue is one of picking a combo for as a walk about or as tourist sightseeing, etc. Would you be happy with something like the The EOS R+24-105 or a a7iii+28-200 if that was the only combo you were to carry in your outing?

[@wholeshirimpwhopper]

wow perfect review! this video is very helpful

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Glad it was helpful!

[@cohoonatube]

Great review Dustin, as always! I think this lens actually seals the deal on the eco-system I’ll choose. I’ve been waiting out the MILCs war for the last two years having sold all my DSLR glass to see which system I would ultimately buy into. At the price point for this lens with a used A7III... it solidly bests the others... including the XT4 which I was heavily considering. With a glimpse of the possible refinements to the A7IV that we see on the A7SIII (Menu update/touch, Vari-tilt Screen), overall I think the Sony will be the most cost-effective and flexible system for me. The only aspect to the A7III while renting that was a real challenge was the low resolution on the rear screen... maybe a used A7RIII would be the better choice? Excellent content, Thanks Brother.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

I think a used a7RIII is a nice choice for all-round performance.

[@cohoonatube]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for the input, have a blessed morning!

[@gaoldias]

Hi Dustin. Do you do workshops or photo courses? Love the channel.

[@DustinAbbottTWI]

Hi Andrew, I don't, really. I stay incredibly busy!

[@gaoldias]

@@DustinAbbottTWI Yes, I can see that! Well, if you ever need anyone to carry your camera bag, I'm just down the road in Ottawa :)