Tamron 28-75 vs Sony 24-70 GM Part 2: Rendering | 4K

0:00
Hi, I'm Dustin Abbott and I'm here to give you the second part of our series where we are
0:10
breaking down the difference between the Tamron 28-75mm f2.8 RXD and the premium lens in the class
0:21
the Sony 24-70mm f2.8 G Master lens. Now in our first episode, if you missed that
0:28
we broke down the difference in the resolution between these two lenses, how they resolve both at portrait-type distance and then out at infinity or a landscape distance
0:39
And so if you missed that, you might want to take a look at that episode here. Today we're here to look at the other metrics that come into play
0:45
because lenses are far more than just about resolution. And in fact, with the G Master series, Sony actually had two different kind of stated goals
0:54
One of those was resolution and they wanted to make the G Master series ready to resolve for extremely high resolution bodies, kind of future proofing so to speak
1:05
And of course we already are working with, for example, I'm doing this review on a Sony a7R Mark III which is a 42 megapixel body
1:13
So already very high resolution but G Master series is supposed to be ready for even higher resolution than that
1:19
But the other stated goal was to simultaneously provide very good bokeh quality and overall rendering out of the lens, which is a much more challenging proposition
1:32
I've noted, for example, with some, not all, but many of the Sigma Art Series lenses is that they resolve exceptionally well
1:41
But they're not always fantastic when it comes to the rendering or the bokeh quality
1:46
And so Sony set out to, for those that kind of want to have both
1:51
And so we'll see if they succeeded in this episode. We're going to look at things like bokeh quality, chromatic aberration, flare resistance, rendering in portraits, how they hold up, all of those things
2:02
So let's jump in. Let's take a look. Okay, we're going to start off with a look at magnification and just kind of general rendering here from the two lenses
2:12
So our first look is at 70 millimeters versus 75 millimeters. And so as you can see visually, there's not a huge amount of difference between these two images here
2:24
A couple of things to note, however, is that number one, you can see that while because of framing
2:29
it's a little bit further from the edge of the frame than it is on the Tamron, you can see that the GM lens does a better job of retaining a circular shape to defocused highlights
2:39
than what the Tamron does, which they're a little bit deformed here towards the edge of the frame
2:45
Now, if we're taking a look at the framing here and the magnification at minimum focus distance
2:51
on the telephoto end, there is a very, very minor difference. There is a 0.25 magnification for the
2:59
Tamron lens and a 0.24 times magnification for the GM lens. So not enough to make a real difference
3:08
in any kind of real-world shooting. And as far as we can't draw too many conclusions here
3:15
because this is not a formal, so much a resolution type test here
3:21
But if we put these two images side by side, we can see that focus point is probably not identical on these
3:29
As you can see, different areas are in focus. But one thing that we can see here
3:34
is that in terms of chromatic aberration, You can see a little bit of fringing here on the GM lens that you can't see on the Tamron
3:43
But again, that could be due to the focus. What we can also tell is that even at minimum focus, the Tamron is resolving very, very nicely in its plane of focus
3:54
And so there's good contrast there. That looks good. But a little more apples to apples is if we look at the edge of this chest piece here and look for chromatic aberration there
4:06
What we can see is that while both of them are quite neutral, if anything, I'm going to suggest that the Tamron is even a little bit more neutral in that transition area there, where there is a little bit of a color fringing that is showing up on the GM lens
4:22
And so certainly that is of interest. similarly here that if you look at the Tamron in that kind of transition area
4:30
it's very very neutral towards the background whereas you can see a little
4:34
bit of color tones that are showing up there so this is mostly about the
4:38
magnification which as you can see is not significantly different here but what
4:45
is interesting is when you go to the wide end now the Tamron is very unique in that it actually has two minimum focus distances and so there is one for the
4:53
telephoto end which is basically identical to that of the Sony but on the
4:59
wide end you actually have a very close 19 centimeter or about seven and a half
5:05
half inch minimum focus distance and a resulting extremely high degree of
5:10
magnification 0.34 times which as you can see this is the minimum focus
5:15
distance on both of these lenses and as you can see on the Tamron it produces a
5:20
a radically different type of result. So what this allows you to do is to have kind of
5:25
two framing choices for how you wanna shoot close up shots. With the previous example, you'll be able to have
5:33
a tighter framing that kind of narrows down on the subject. In this case, you can get very, very close
5:38
and have a very nice magnification, while still including some storytelling elements
5:44
as a part of that. And as we can see here, looking at a pixel level
5:49
and this is on a 42 megapixel Sony a7R III, you can see that there's actually a fantastic amount
5:55
of detail there even at minimum focus. Though depth of field is obviously very, very shallow
6:01
we have got a nice amount of focus. And we also have a very surprising amount of background blur here And so this further extends the usefulness of this lens Now I will note a negative here in that I perceive this bokeh quality along the right edge is a little bit distracting
6:20
You can see some deformation of the geometric shapes, and it has a little bit more edging than what I would like
6:27
but at the same time, obviously, this is a very, very useful feature that the G Master lens does not have
6:34
Now, in this next comparison, this is really more about looking at various sized bouquet circles
6:40
And so, first of all, of course, G Master on the left, Tamron on the right
6:45
Looking at our chief plane of focus here, we can see that both of them have done a fabulous job
6:53
in terms of controlling chromatic aberration with all of these shiny reflective surfaces
6:57
And so in areas like this, you can see the very, very slightest bit of fringing
7:03
in some of these areas. Once again, I think the Tamron is even better in terms of the neutrality
7:08
of those circles. You can also see that there is a little bit better micro contrast for the GM lens
7:14
on the primary area of focus. It's not significant, but you can see that the resolution and the
7:19
micro contrast is a little more pronounced there on the much more expensive GM lens
7:25
What is more interesting, however, is when you begin to look at circles, bokeh circles
7:31
as we progress further out. And what you're going to see with the GM lens is that while these become fairly soft
7:38
by comparison with the Tamron, there is a very definite outlining. And it's kind of interesting
7:45
It almost has a very abstract type quality here and that it looks like these have almost been
7:50
you know, penciled or sketched in. It's a different look. And of course, bokeh is a very subjective subject
7:56
So some people are either going to think this looks fantastic. Other people are going to think it looks like garbage
8:01
But I wanted to show you and so you can draw that conclusion for yourself. What is very obvious, however, is that the two lenses handle out of focus, circular highlights very, very differently
8:16
Now, as we move up towards the top of the frame, what becomes obvious and I think indisputable is that the Tamron displays a more, you might call it nervous quality
8:28
That's the adjective I've heard used sometimes in that things look a little bit stretched, almost like a little bit of motion blur that's happening as they're stretched and shaped
8:40
Whereas you have a fairly consistent circular shape that's heading into this area on the GM lens
8:47
And so it does quite a great job of retaining circular highlights right off to the very edge of the frame
8:52
Now some of you that engage on the community section here on YouTube saw me share these two images blindly and ask you which belonged to which
9:02
And of course some of you guessed back and forth, but the majority of you guessed the number one image, which is this image here, as belonging to the GM lens
9:13
Which as you can see, the opposite is actually true here. And so in this kind of scenario, you're pretty hard pressed to say that one looks better than the other
9:24
The fact that both of them control chromatic aberration very well, and in fact, if you're using that as your only metric
9:30
I would say that the Tamron is the better of the two when it comes to that
9:35
Looking at an object like this, this pawn out here, you can see that kind of drawing abstract circular lining that's there
9:45
that's somewhat unusual, and I might say it kind of has a somewhat vintage quality to me
9:52
And so again, that's either a good thing or a bad thing, depending on your personal preferences
9:57
But in terms of the color rendition and the richness of color, they're very, very similar
10:02
I'm going to give a very slight edge to the GM lens, but the Tamron is doing a pretty compelling job here
10:09
Now, if we go out into the real world and begin to look at some three-dimensional objects here
10:14
we can see that if you compare these two images, they obviously look much more similar than they do different
10:22
And so in terms of the actual micro contrast and resolution, they look pretty similar
10:30
However, you can see there is a little bit more of that micro contrast on the GM lens
10:36
just a little bit more fine rendering of details. and also if you look, for example, here
10:45
you can see that focus is maybe not identical, but it's very close
10:49
There's not a lot to distinguish these, but I do think that there is a little bit better
10:53
color saturation in this area on the GM and a little bit more micro contrast
10:59
But again, if you didn't have these two images side by side
11:03
in direct comparison, I doubt that you would be able to say, I like one more than the other
11:09
In this case, because there's not really too many hard edges, while the bokeh is a little bit softer from the GM lens
11:17
it's not appreciably so than the Tamron. It is a little bit softer all throughout this
11:22
and you can just see there's less edges that are picked up. But looking at it globally, you would be hard-pressed to see that
11:29
Now, in this particular image, you can see a little bit more of the color differences here
11:34
The look of the image on the right is a little bit warmer
11:38
and maybe a little bit more deeply saturated than it is from the GM lens
11:43
And so, again, both of them are delivering a really nice looking result here
11:49
viewed on a global level. And in terms of the micro contrast here
11:53
I would say in this particular image that I consider them to be very, very similar
11:58
They're both great. In this particular image, I actually visually prefer the Tamron's extra bit of warmth
12:05
That's not always the case. But again, it's pretty specific to Subdu
12:10
Now this area here shows that the bokeh quality is smoother on the GM lens once again than it is on the Tamron where it trend tends just a little bit more busy there compared to the GM lens Finally
12:25
here if we look at this circle area not a significant difference there so we
12:29
begin to move off into this area once again you can just see it's a little bit softer on the GM. Now if we look at the flare resistance from the two lenses
12:37
we're going to find that there is some give and take on both of them and so in
12:42
this case the GM lens. It's done a pretty good job here with the bright sun right in the frame
12:48
The Tamron has one kind of stray shaft that is coming off of that, but I also note that there's
12:56
maybe a little bit more pronounced of a ringing effect here, kind of a ghosting effect around the
13:01
GM image than there is on the Tamron. Both of them obviously have retained contrast. There's not a
13:08
lot of veiling here what we'll do is we'll raise the shadow levels in these trees and see if there's
13:14
any hidden secrets there what we find is that both of them did have a bit of a ghosting artifact
13:20
hidden in there however you can definitely see it is more pronounced wide open on the gm lens than
13:25
what it is on the tamron and so i'm going to give a very very light win to the tamron neither one of
13:33
them are perfect here but there is a little bit less ghosting than on the Tamron than there is on
13:39
the GM lens. Now I'm going to show you the example with the shadows raised here from both of them
13:44
Both of them you know deliver when they're stopped down here at f11. They both give an imperfect
13:51
performance here. The GM lens it to my eye has the nicest most clearly defined sunburst effect
13:58
which is really quite nice from it. It also though, however, has some fairly pronounced
14:04
looking flare artifacts, ghosting artifacts going up this way. You can see that there is also kind of
14:11
a general ghosting veiling pattern that's going here through the trees. On the other hand, the
14:16
Tamron, it delivers a little less clean sunburst. Not a bad looking one, but not quite as beautiful
14:24
as what that is. We also find that it shows some ghosting effects down towards the lower part of
14:30
the frame. And so, you know, neither one of them give a fabulous performance here with the sun in
14:37
the frame. Now, if we look at portraiture, I found when shooting this series that using IAF on both
14:46
lenses, I got roughly equal results. And so not a huge advantage for either one, both of them
14:53
delivered, you know, good, reliable results with maybe one imperfectly focused. And when I say
15:00
imperfectly, just not a hundred percent nailed, not bad in any way. So if we look at the actual
15:06
face rendering on both of these lenses, it's not hugely different. There is a little bit
15:12
more of a warm tone to the Tamron. It's not highly pronounced, but I do think that skin tones are a
15:19
little bit more accurate with the GM lens. Looking towards our defocused area, you know, a lot of the
15:25
same things that we have seen before. Just a little bit busier end result out of the Tamron
15:33
But at the same time, you know, it's not significantly different. It is a little busier
15:39
looking at the lens or the image globally. You're not able to see a whole lot of that. I mean
15:45
frankly the two images they look more similar than different. Here's another shot where I had
15:51
the subject turn away from the camera and you know IAF doesn't work as well with subject and profile
15:57
in this case however on both lenses we've got a pretty good focus result. What we do have however
16:03
is a little bit more micro contrast in the hair. You can just see a little bit more of a variation
16:08
between the dark and the light areas of the hair and on the edge of the face. Just a little bit
16:15
tighter, more pronounced look from the GM lens. But again, you know, that's nitpicking. Looking
16:23
at the images globally, I doubt many people would be able to tell the difference. Now we noted in
16:29
our resolution comparison that the Tamron is particularly strong around the 50 millimeter mark
16:34
and I think that that bears up here in this particular comparison with subject fairly near
16:40
the center of the frame. I would say that the micro contrast and the general punch here is a
16:46
little bit more pronounced on the Tamron than it is on the GM lens. At the same time, however
16:52
again, skin tones are just a little bit truer with the GM lens. And so anyway, you can look at the
16:59
image globally there as well. Now, if I move in a little bit closer, you can see the slightly
17:05
warmer rendering of the Tamron here. And so let's just jump in, take a quick look here close at the
17:12
face. And so as you can see, both of them are accurately focused, a little bit better micro
17:19
contrast, and that's a beautiful amount of detail like on the lips there from the GM lens, which you
17:24
can see that the micro contrast is not quite as good on the Tamron. I mean, both of these are a
17:30
great result, but the GM result is just a little bit better. One final result before we wrap this
17:36
up. And so again, this is more full on facing the camera, fairly close, about six feet away
17:42
And, you know, the telephoto end of both of these lenses, 70 or 75 millimeters. And so we can see
17:50
that once again we have got a nicely focused result from both of them. The micro contrast from
17:57
both looks quite good. There is just a slight bit more detail rendering you can see around the eyes
18:04
although once again if you don't have these images side by side and you're looking at this from the
18:09
perspective of saying you know I don't have that kind of money to spend for the GM lens, will the
18:14
Tamron work? Well, pretty clearly the Tamron is pretty close for this kind of
18:20
work and if you look at the images globally yes there is a little bit more busyness in the defocus region on the Tamron but viewed globally it is really not significant Both of them have a really nice three separation from
18:35
the background, and frankly, both of them are quite nice portrait lenses. So as you can see
18:41
there are some interesting conclusions that we found as a part of this series. First of all
18:45
we did see that Tamron actually has a couple of advantages. One of those is, I would say
18:50
relatively slight in that it has very minor, better chromatic aberration performance. And
18:58
don't get me wrong, both of these lenses are exceptional. For real world field use
19:02
neither one of them is going to give you one ounce of issues with chromatic aberration. So that's
19:08
huge. That's a great advantage for both these lenses. But the Tamron manages to handle those
19:13
transition areas, particularly where you might see longitudinal chromatic aberration. It handles
19:19
them as good as any lens that I've ever seen. It is basically essentially completely neutral
19:25
In that sense, it's pretty similar to lenses even as good as the Zeiss Otis series. And so a very
19:31
strong performance there. And of course, the Tamron does have that unique magnification advantage
19:36
in that while there's not really a meaningful difference between the two at the typical
19:42
telephoto end of the frame. It's 0.25 times versus 0.24 times, so not significant
19:51
But when you're at the wide end, the Tamron actually has a really unique
19:57
0.34 times magnification, whereas the Sony's magnification would be under 0.10. And so it's an extreme difference
20:06
and it gives you a completely different option if you are someone, for example
20:11
I think of wedding photographers and the different framing options that that provides when shooting bridal setups or rings and things like that
20:20
So certainly an interesting advantage there. We also saw that the GM has some advantages
20:25
And I think taken as a whole, I would say that it's indisputable that as a whole, the GM produces the better images
20:34
If you look at the combination of resolution, micro contrast, and bokeh quality, general rendering
20:43
But certainly when it comes to the bokeh, the GM bokeh is indisputably smoother, creamier
20:49
It retains better geometric shapes towards the edge of the frame. It's softer, it grabs less hard edges
20:56
And I would say that out of all the 24-70mm lenses that I've reviewed at this point
21:01
Which is a fair number of them I would say that this is at the very top of the heap in terms of that quality
21:08
Hello Cherokee And so another advantage that it has There's a moment you gotta love when the cat comes and knocks over a $2,200 lens
21:19
Anyway, moving on The other advantage that it has is when it comes to color accuracy, where the GM lens, it produces really beautiful color, great levels of saturation, very accurate color rendition
21:32
It's just, it handles color very, very well, and it's certainly deserving of its lofty master moniker when it comes to that
21:40
And then finally we saw that in general micro contrast, when we look at the fine details
21:45
in most every case at most focal lengths, maybe outside of the 50 millimeter range
21:52
the GM lens provides superior micro contrast. And we saw it on faces with details like around the
21:59
lips or around the eyes where you have levels of contrast. We saw it in hair, for example. But then
22:06
And of course, in typical scenes, be they landscape or nature or close-up shots, there's
22:12
just a little better performance when it comes to the micro contrast. And so you might have two different ways of looking at this
22:18
If you're on a budget, you're going to look at the Tamron as being nearly as good in a
22:23
number of areas and say, you know, there's no way the GM lens is worth the money
22:28
And for you, that's true. For those of you that are saying, I want the absolute best, best performance, I don't care
22:34
about the price. I don't care about the size. Well, the GM lens is the best
22:39
And frankly, combined with the image stabilization on a Sony body, I suspect you're going to get better real-world results
22:46
out of this 24-70mm lens than any other because you have image stabilization
22:53
Whereas, you know, the Canon 24-70mm L Mark II, it's a fantastic lens
22:59
And I would say in terms of resolution, it's at the top of the heap. I'm not so sure when it comes to the bokeh quality
23:04
and overall rendering, I think that the GM lens is very, very close to it there
23:09
But when we're talking about real world, not in a lab, not on a tripod, shooting at a wedding
23:15
for example, where you need that image stabilization, Sony's in-body image stabilization is an
23:21
advantage there. And I would say also when it comes to filming, the GM lens is superior in that
23:27
its focus motor is going to be quieter. It's going to be smoother for video work. And so I
23:33
certainly see an advantage for it there. Is it worth $2,200? Well, you're going to have to decide
23:39
that for yourself. Here in Canada, the price is closer to $3,000, so it's a significant investment
23:45
but at the same time, it is a very strong lens. The Tamron, on the other hand, is a pretty amazing
23:51
value proposition in that it's a very, very good lens at a very reasonable price. Stay tuned for my
23:57
final ysis and final review on both of these lenses, and I'll be back shortly with that
24:02
In the meantime, take a look in the description down below. And there you can get linkage to the image gallery from both of these lenses
24:09
Take a look at some real world photos from them. And of course, you can also there, you can find buying links for either lens
24:16
You can follow me on social media. You can sign up for my newsletter. You can become a patron
24:20
And of course, if you haven't already, please click that subscribe button. Thanks for watching
24:25
I'm going to get out of the rain now. You have a great day

This livestream is currently offline

Tamron 28-75 vs Sony 24-70 GM Part 2: Rendering | 4K

Dustin Abbott

35mm Shootout! Episode 3: Autofocus Accuracy

Clash of the 85mm Titans: Sigma DN vs Sony GM | 4K

GM vs DN | Sony 50mm F1.4 GM or Sigma 50mm F1.2 DN for under $1400?

DISPLAY Comparison of UMIDIGI A3 & VERNEE M5 – Screen Quality

Florence Pugh | DISNEY THIS DAY | January 3, 1996

Movie Bloopers That Were Too Good To Cut

The Simplest Things That Robert De Niro Cherishes the Most | AWAKENINGS

O’Shea Jackson Jr. Made Hollywood Eat Their Words 🔥 | SWAY’S UNIVERSE

Quaritch Vs Ikran Scene | AVATAR: THE WAY OF WATER (2022) Movie CLIP HD

Mistakes That Make These Movies Better

Adventures in Movies! Looks at... 'WrestleMassacre'

Christmas Couple Challenge | Challenge #23 | Fancy Date at Home | Better Topics

Misconceptions about Movie Making - mental_floss on YouTube (Ep. 43) | Mental Floss

Rebel Wilson revives her ICONIC Pitch Perfect dance move | Capital

Star Wars: Starfighter (2027) — Why Ryan Gosling’s Film Could Redefine the Franchise

This livestream is currently offline

Up next in 10

Tamron 28-75 vs Sony 24-70 GM Part 2: Rendering | 4K

Dustin Abbott