Upgrade your telephoto image quality: Tamron 70-180 vs Sony 24-240

This video is geared towards the photographer looking to switch from their all-purpose 24-240 to something with a constant aperture and (arguably) better image quality. There are a whole lot of videos out there comparing the Sony 24-240 to the Tamron 28-200. These are all fine and good, but this video is geared more towards those wondering if moving away from the all-purpose super zoom is worth it. You lose some reach and lose everything below 70mm. But the improvement in image quality may be enticing. I go through photos with both lenses in this video so you can see the differences yourself.
I have landscape photos available at www.etsy.com/s...

[@naz7840]

Love these models!

[@ivanwong3261]

Thank you for the video

[@headwestphotos9615]

Thanks for watching!

[@FatihVideographer]

Exactly what I was looking for! A7iii with the Sony lens really sucks in low light straight out of the camera, and I really need a better telephoto lens, am thinking about the tamron. Does the tamron perform better in low light? I need to deliver straight out of the camera images on location to my clients while shooting conferences with crappy lighting. Thank u! Btw. The sony has too many artifacts while shooting long exposure photos even in lowest iso.

[@headwestphotos9615]

yeah, the Tamron is great in low light with the aperture set at 2.8. For sure, the Tamron is leagues ahead the 24-240 in terms of overall image quality. The sony would be useful if you really need the full zoom range from ultrawide to long telephoto, but if just need the telephoto reach, the Tamron is great way to go -- or if money isn't a concern, the new Sony 70-200 2.8 looks fantastic and is getting rave reviews.