Up next in 10
Sony 50-150 GM vs Tamron 35-150 VXD | DA Showdown!
548 views
Apr 24, 2025
Sony's new FE 50-150mm F2 G Master is making waves, but is it worth more than twice as much as Tamron's also excellent 35-150mm F2-2.8 VXD zoom? Find out in Dustin's showdown! Sony Reviews | Text: https://tinyurl.com/50-150GMreview | Video: https://tinyurl.com/50-150GMvid Tamron Reviews | Video Review: https://bit.ly/A058Definitive | Text Review: https://bit.ly/A058DA Purchase the Sony 50-150mm F2 GM @ B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/442RIzd | Sony USA https://howl.link/1jswe8xh6ufnw | Adorama https://howl.link/b3oxjhygjl9m2 | Amazon https://amzn.to/42UAQte | Sony Canada https://tinyurl.com/Buy50-150GM | Camera Canada https://shrsl.com/4vu1q | Amazon Canada https://amzn.to/445HzSo | Amazon UK https://amzn.to/42laKj0 | Amazon Germany https://amzn.to/42I6Boj Purchase the Tamron 35-150mm F2-2.8 VXD @ B&H Photo https://bhpho.to/2Y5bXwA | Amazon https://amzn.to/316ycTM | Camera Canada https://shrsl.com/3892h | Amazon Canada https://amzn.to/3nKoTAx | Amazon UK https://amzn.to/31gHixv | Amazon Germany https://amzn.to/3mtDl0D Check out the DA Merch here: https://bit.ly/TWIMerch | Become a Patron: https://www.patreon.com/dustinabbott | On the Web: http://dustinabbott.net/ | Sign up for my Newsletter: http://bit.ly/1RHvUNp | Instagram: http://bit.ly/DLAinsta | Facebook: http://on.fb.me/1nuUUeH | Flickr: http://bit.ly/1UcnC0B | 500px: http://bit.ly/1Sy2Ngu Follow Craig @ https://www.instagram.com/craigstoffersen/ Want to support this channel? Use these affiliate links to shop at: B&H Photo: http://bhpho.to/1TA0Xge Adorama: https://howl.link/nt4zdz1goa7ql Camera Canada: http://bit.ly/DLACameraCan Sony Canada: https://www.thesonyshop.ca/?ref=abbott Amazon: https://amzn.to/3HrY64d Amazon Canada: https://amzn.to/3qG1p18 Ebay: http://bit.ly/DustineBay Into the AM Clothing: https://bit.ly/intotheAMda and use code DUSTIN10 for 10% off
View Video Transcript
0:00
[Music]
0:06
[Music]
0:10
sony's new 50 to 150 mm f2 G Master has
0:15
created a lot of buzz for being the
0:17
first full-frame zoom to reach 150 mm
0:20
with that constant maximum aperture of
0:22
f2 but Tamron was the first genre
0:26
boosting zoom like this back in 2021
0:29
where they coupled a bigger zoom ratio
0:31
from 35 to 150 mm with a still fast
0:35
variable maximum aperture of f2 to
0:39
f2.8 now obviously both of these lenses
0:42
are kind of unique on E-mount in that
0:46
there are very few other alternatives
0:48
that are quite like them sigma does have
0:50
a 28 to 105mm f/2.8 date however that
0:54
lens is not as fast and certainly
0:57
doesn't go as long and so in many ways
1:00
these are the closest two compet
1:02
competitors in this particular space so
1:05
the question is is this new G Master
1:08
lens worth twice as much as the existing
1:11
Tamron lens that's been on the market
1:13
for a while well this is another one of
1:15
our head-to-head videos and we're going
1:17
to jump in and we are going to find out
1:19
today so the Sony is a loaner from Sony
1:22
USA and we'll be going back to them
1:24
after this review the Tamron is my own
1:26
personal copy that I bought back in 2021
1:30
we're going to start by taking a look at
1:32
the similarities between the two lenses
1:34
because although they look pretty
1:36
radically different there are some
1:38
commonalities that I think are worth
1:39
exploring both of them have a thorough
1:42
weather sealing and you know you might
1:44
argue that well the the G Master is
1:47
probably the better sealed perhaps
1:48
that's true but they both have the same
1:51
ingredients here they both have a gasket
1:53
at the lens mount a flooring coating at
1:55
the front element and then seals at all
1:57
of the various rings and buttons inside
2:01
so they all have those similar kind of
2:03
capabilities they both have three of a
2:06
of the function buttons that are placed
2:08
at three different locations around and
2:10
so that you have the opportunity to have
2:12
one near at hand both of them have the
2:15
ability to do a smooth aperture rack and
2:19
as you can see here the Tamron does a
2:22
good job with that and of course the
2:24
premium G Master lens also does a very
2:27
good job with that and so I don't know
2:30
that I I really saw a difference i do
2:32
prefer the G Master's setup for that and
2:34
we'll get to that in a moment but in
2:36
terms of doing aperture racks uh you can
2:38
do that just as easily on the Tamron as
2:40
you can on the G Master both of them
2:43
share a common flaw and that they both
2:46
have issues with flare particularly on
2:48
the telephoto end but even on the wide
2:50
end they do struggle a bit in certain
2:52
situations with having particularly
2:55
ghosting artifacts and on the telephoto
2:57
end more likely to have a little bit of
2:59
a loss of contrast and so unfortunately
3:02
they both share a weakness in that
3:04
regard now in the category of neutral
3:07
differences areas where they're
3:08
different but not with any kind of
3:10
particular benefit one way or another um
3:12
you could argue either direction one of
3:14
them is very obviously has the white
3:17
finish the other has a black finish
3:19
there are people who prefer the white
3:20
finish there are people that prefer the
3:22
black finish and it really comes down to
3:25
a matter of preference i don't actually
3:27
think that in any kind of clinical way
3:30
is better than the other but obviously
3:33
it is a difference so we're going to
3:36
look at some reasons to choose the
3:38
Tamron it's been on the market now for
3:40
quite a while and so it's a well-known
3:42
commodity particularly to myself because
3:44
this has been the lens that I have used
3:45
probably more than any other over the
3:47
last four years and so we're going to
3:50
look at it first and some reasons to
3:52
choose it the first of those is a
3:55
practical reason it is much much cheaper
3:58
and I mean much cheaper right now you
4:00
can get it for about $1,700 as of
4:02
today's pricing on B&H Photo the new
4:05
Sony is a pre-order at
4:09
$3,898 and so if you're doing the math
4:12
that means that there's about $2,200
4:15
difference between the two lenses you
4:17
could buy two of the Tamron lenses and
4:20
still have a pretty fair chunk of change
4:22
left over to buy something else before
4:24
you could pay for the G Master that's a
4:27
practical consideration for a lot of
4:29
people furthermore the Tamron has a
4:32
bigger zoom range it starts at 35 rather
4:34
than 50 millimeters and as I zoom in and
4:37
out here you can see you have the
4:39
ability to go considerably wider than
4:42
what you you have and I will say also in
4:44
lining things up at around 50 mm and so
4:47
let's just say that the Tamron at 50 mm
4:50
is wider than what the Sony is at 50 mm
4:53
as you can pretty obviously see the
4:55
Tamron is much smaller it is 89.2
4:59
uh millimeters in diameter by 158
5:03
millime in length meanwhile you can tell
5:05
even from the front diameter
5:08
102.8 mm for the Sony lens that is a
5:12
significant difference in diameter and
5:15
it is 200 millimeters long and so that's
5:18
about 32% less lens volume in the Tamron
5:22
now to be fair the Tamron is an
5:24
externally zooming lens so when you zoom
5:26
it out it's not really any shorter but
5:30
the difference is of course for travel
5:32
for packing it's a much easier lens to
5:35
pack along because it is much smaller in
5:37
its retracted state it is also
5:39
considerably lighter it weighs in
5:42
at,65 g whereas the Sony is 1340 g not
5:48
terrible for what the Sony is however
5:50
the Tamron is considerably lighter if
5:53
you're going to need to buy filters it's
5:55
going to be much cheaper to buy them for
5:56
the Tamron which has an 82mm front
5:59
filter thread that is a a pretty common
6:03
filter size and there's a lot of filters
6:06
that come in that particular size
6:07
whereas here on the Sony we're jumping
6:10
up to a 95 mm front filter thread so not
6:14
only are filters going to be less common
6:15
at 95 millimeters they are going to be
6:18
more expensive as well interestingly I
6:21
actually found in a lot of different
6:23
tests that the Tamron is the one that
6:25
has the lower levels of fringing the
6:28
Sony isn't bad but in head-to-head
6:30
comparisons I certainly found that the
6:32
Tamron was even better corrected in that
6:34
regard i also found that the Tamron
6:38
produced more consistently round um call
6:41
them bokeh balls specular highlights
6:43
across the frame and the Sony is very
6:46
good at maintaining a circular aperture
6:48
as the aperture is stopped down however
6:50
it does exhibit far more clipping near
6:52
the edges of the frame and some of that
6:54
clipping is not overly organic looking
6:57
it's a little bit harsher kind of more
6:58
of a straight line whereas the uh the
7:01
Tamron does a little bit better job
7:02
maintaining those specular highlights i
7:05
also found in doing head-to-head shots
7:07
and I'll tell you this as you'll see in
7:09
the optical breakdown at the end there's
7:11
some give and take in this but
7:13
particularly at the 150 mm end I found
7:16
that the Tamron's overall rendering was
7:19
nicer to my eye the there's just
7:21
something about the defocused areas that
7:22
are more pleasing than what I saw out of
7:25
the Sony lens i also found that in
7:28
head-to-head comparisons I actually
7:30
preferred the Tamron's colors to the
7:32
Sony and I feel like the Tamron has a
7:35
little bit more of an organic look to it
7:38
while the Sony is just a little bit more
7:41
clinical i'm don't blow that out of
7:43
proportion it's a minor variance but I
7:45
did just kind of instinctively in
7:47
head-to-head shots I instinctively
7:49
preferred what I saw out of the Tamron
7:52
so there are definitely some very valid
7:54
reasons to choose the Tamron over the
7:56
Sony but of course you can flip that
7:58
around and there are a lot of equally
8:00
valid reasons to choose the Sony over
8:03
the Tamron the first of those is a
8:05
faster maximum aperture remember that
8:07
the Tamron while it starts at f2 it is a
8:10
variable aperture zoom and the truth of
8:12
the matter is that by the time you get
8:13
to 50 millimeters where the Sony starts
8:15
in its focal length the Tamron has
8:17
closed to f2.2 by the time you get to 85
8:21
millimeters it is already at its
8:23
smallest maximum aperture of f/2.8 which
8:26
means that over a fair portion of the
8:28
zoom range the Sony is going to be a
8:30
full stop faster than what the Tamron is
8:34
and that has all kinds of implications
8:36
shallow depth of field light gathering
8:38
potential etc etc
8:41
not as significant of a difference but
8:43
there is a little bit higher level of
8:46
magnification on the Sony lens than what
8:48
there is on the Tamron the Tamron has a
8:51
0.18 times magnification the Sony has a
8:54
0.20 times magnification and so no
8:57
that's not a huge difference and neither
8:59
one of these lenses are going to be
9:01
mistaken for a macro lens but the Sony
9:03
does a little bit better in that regard
9:06
now while I noted that you could do just
9:09
as good of aperture racking on the
9:11
Tamron lens the truth of the matter is
9:13
is that the Tamron it kind of has a a
9:16
backwards way of going about giving you
9:19
aperture control if you want to control
9:21
it that way what it does is gives you a
9:23
custom switch that allows you to change
9:25
the manual focus ring into an aperture
9:27
ring so it means it's always going to be
9:30
decllicked because it's just a
9:31
constantly moving ring the damping feels
9:34
fine nothing wrong with that overall
9:36
however I have found that I actually
9:38
don't love the aperture control through
9:40
this i end up doing a lot of times just
9:42
controlling aperture from within the
9:43
camera because I find that it just moves
9:45
way too quickly too quickly and so you
9:48
don't have as precise control as what
9:49
you would like the G Master has Sony's
9:52
full G Master approach to aperture or
9:54
traditional aperture ring you can either
9:56
click or declick it's got an iris lock
9:59
it's just got a whole lot better
10:01
implementation of aperture control
10:04
i would also say that both while both of
10:06
these lenses are very nicely built the
10:08
Sony is next level i mean it does have a
10:11
build quality that in many ways kind of
10:13
suggest their high-end super telephoto
10:16
lenses and so it's just it's a little
10:18
bit better constructed a little bit more
10:19
featurerich now to the Tamron's credit
10:22
it also has a nice metal body i've had a
10:24
copy that I've been using for years and
10:26
it's held up very well i have zero
10:28
complaints about it however in just the
10:31
overall feel of the lenses I would say
10:33
that the Sony is the more premium of the
10:35
two one big advantage when you're in the
10:38
field is that it is an internally
10:40
zooming lens and we've already seen that
10:42
the Tamron is an externally zooming lens
10:45
but it just means that you're going to
10:46
be able to do things like zooming during
10:49
video for example you can do that more
10:51
smoothly here you can make more quick
10:53
changes means that there's far less
10:56
likelihood of ever sucking in any kind
10:59
of dust into the lens because it's much
11:02
easier to seal overall i mean I so far I
11:05
think the Tamron's actually done well i
11:06
can't really see dust inside my copy
11:09
however the there's just definite
11:12
advantages to having that internally
11:14
zooming design the Sony does have a
11:17
tripod foot whereas the Tamron does not
11:20
i have found that the Tamron while it's
11:22
heavy it's not so heavy that I feel like
11:24
I definitively needed a tripod collar or
11:27
foot on it but obviously that is better
11:29
implemented into the Sony design and so
11:32
it definitely with this lens I feel like
11:34
it's going to balance better and perform
11:35
better if you're using the tripod foot
11:37
and so that certainly is an advantage
11:40
there less of a big deal because they
11:43
both keep a good circular shape but I
11:45
did find that there are 11 blades on the
11:48
Sony lens there are nine blades on the
11:51
Tamron lens and so it just means that it
11:54
is a little bit better in terms of
11:56
keeping that circular shape as you stop
11:58
it down now there is a more significant
12:01
advantage for the Sony lens when it
12:03
comes to the uh autofocus capabilities
12:06
this is I mean for a fast lens like this
12:09
this is as good as what I've seen it's
12:11
got quad XD linear motors and so
12:14
autofocus is pretty much instantaneous
12:16
there is a single VXD motor in the the
12:20
Tamron and while it's a similar type
12:22
motor and it does focus quickly um it
12:25
isn't at the level of the Sony and the
12:26
Sony can track just effortlessly it
12:29
picks up from the very first frame and
12:31
on my Alpha 1 for example it was just
12:34
flawless in tracking across the frame
12:36
very very impressive in that regard on
12:39
the video side of things I also found
12:41
that there is less focus breathing
12:43
actually the Tamron is is better than
12:45
what I expected in this regard but the
12:47
Sony is both natively better and then it
12:50
also has the advantage of Sony's focus
12:52
breathing compensation um that only
12:55
works for Sony lenses and so any kind of
12:57
breathing that was there you can just
12:58
mathematically eliminate through those
13:00
algorithms and the Tamron doesn't have
13:02
that advantage also you're going to find
13:05
that that f2 aperture means that there
13:07
are plenty of situations where you can
13:09
create a more shallow depth of field and
13:11
again it's a fairly significant
13:13
difference at f2.8 and so that just
13:15
means that backgrounds are going to be
13:17
more out of focus there's a little bit
13:18
more separation of your subject from the
13:21
background in my optical test I found
13:24
that while both of these lenses are
13:25
extremely sharp and extremely high
13:27
contrast the Sony is more consistently
13:30
so and I I found that in a lot of shots
13:35
particularly in my chart test that there
13:36
were just areas where the Sony sharpness
13:38
was more consistent across the frame
13:40
it's definitely sharper in the corners
13:42
almost all the time and so it has some
13:46
definite optical advantages in terms of
13:48
sharpness it also typically has better
13:51
contrast relative to the Tamron when it
13:54
comes to just to head-to-head
13:56
comparisons now that higher contrast may
13:58
be part of why I like the defocus
14:01
backgrounds a little bit better on the
14:03
Tamron uh sometimes a higher contrast
14:06
lens there's a trade-off when it comes
14:07
in that regard but anyway uh there's
14:10
definitely better contrast if that's a
14:11
priority for you and then of course
14:13
there are a number of bakedin Sony perks
14:16
that are really important here uh
14:18
unfortunately the use of teleconverters
14:20
is not one of those things so I will
14:21
give another dig over that but you can
14:24
unlock the full burst potential of your
14:26
camera so even if you're shooting on an
14:28
A9 Mark III you can shoot all the way up
14:29
to 120 frames per second you put this
14:33
Tamron lens on the same camera and
14:35
you're going to be capped at 15 frames
14:36
per second because that is going to be
14:38
the cap across all of Sony's camera
14:40
bodies and so it just means that if
14:42
you're happen to use the lens for sports
14:44
this is going to be a more obvious
14:46
choice because you're going to get that
14:48
full potential from it so my conclusion
14:51
is this while there are similarities
14:53
between these two lenses there's also a
14:56
lot of differences and I would say that
14:59
if you are a portrait shooter or even a
15:02
basic event shooter and you already own
15:04
the Tamron lens I I still think that the
15:06
Tamron is perfectly adequate for that
15:09
however if you are someone who shoots
15:12
sports particularly court sports or you
15:14
know smaller venue sports this Sony lens
15:18
is I think it's an amazing lens for that
15:21
and I think that it would be fantastic
15:23
in that setting i think that it it
15:26
really can become the most desirable
15:28
lens that's out there for that setting
15:30
and I think it's got a lot of advantages
15:32
over a 70 to 200 millimeter f2.8 and so
15:35
I think it's well worth considering on
15:36
that
15:37
front as probably an event lens I would
15:40
also consider it as being superior it's
15:43
going to allow you to just have you know
15:45
a brighter uh light intake in all of
15:48
those settings so if you're shooting in
15:50
dim venues you combine that with a
15:52
superior autofocus system and it just
15:53
means that you're going to be able to
15:55
work in the margins more effectively
15:57
than what you can with the Tamron and so
15:59
I think in a lot of ways the Sony is the
16:01
better lens but of course it begs the
16:04
question is it more than two times
16:06
better and the I think the answer for
16:08
some photographers will be yes probably
16:11
for a equally if not larger amount of
16:14
photographers the answer will be no it
16:17
actually depends on what you need out of
16:19
the lens and what you plan to do with it
16:21
both of these are very very capable
16:23
lenses and as always we are an extremely
16:26
spoiled to have such amazing options
16:29
available to us at radically different
16:30
price points and so I hope that this has
16:33
helped you to kind of quantify which one
16:35
of these lenses maybe makes more sense
16:36
for you now if you want even more
16:38
information you can either check out my
16:40
full reviews of both lenses and I've got
16:42
both the video and text reviews linked
16:44
in the description down below or you can
16:46
stay tuned with me right now and we'll
16:48
go into an optical breakdown and I'll
16:50
demonstrate to you how I arrived at the
16:52
conclusions I did previously so let's
16:54
dive in and let's take a look okay for
16:56
this comparison I'm going or series of
16:58
comparisons I'm always going to have the
17:00
Tamron on the left and the Sony on the
17:01
right so you know what you're looking at
17:04
here I'm going to start comparing at 50
17:06
millimeters so at 50 millimeters this is
17:08
on 61 megapixels A7R Mark 5 and 200%
17:12
magnification you can see looking at the
17:14
center of the frame they're both
17:15
extremely sharp they both have good
17:17
contrast but the Sony has superior
17:19
contrast and you can see that the text
17:21
definitely looks more crisp than what it
17:24
does on the Tamron the mid-frame I would
17:27
say there is a very slight advantage for
17:29
the Sony however it's largely in
17:31
contrast you'll see the ink here looks
17:33
inkier than what it does here a more
17:36
significant advantage is down here in
17:38
the right corner where you can see that
17:40
the Sony really looks superior that's
17:43
less true up here on the left corner
17:46
however where the Tamron looks I would
17:48
say about equally good and so not much
17:52
of a difference there if we pop down
17:53
here I would say that they're close i
17:56
like the Sony a little bit better and
17:58
then in the upper right corner again
18:00
they're close but I slightly prefer the
18:03
Sony performance if we stop both lenses
18:06
down to f2.8 we can see that they both
18:10
have improved but I would say that the
18:12
Sony still has an advantage in the
18:15
center of the frame in the mid-frame I
18:17
would say there's a very very slight
18:19
Sony advantage up in this corner i look
18:22
at them and they're very very close it's
18:25
hard to distinguish much of a difference
18:27
between the two there but still in this
18:29
lower right corner the Sony has the
18:31
advantage now if we move on to 100 mm
18:35
you'll see that the Tamron's already at
18:37
f2.8 the Sony is still at f2 at least
18:40
for this comparison again they're close
18:42
but contrast favors the Sony there and I
18:45
would say looking at the text it's not
18:47
just contrast it's resolving at a little
18:49
bit higher level and the mid-frame again
18:52
the Sony is giving just a little bit
18:54
more detail look in the hair here
18:56
compared to where it looks a little bit
18:57
more smeared on the Tamron they're both
18:59
good don't get me wrong but the Sony is
19:02
better up here in the corner I see a
19:04
Sony advantage there higher contrast and
19:07
higher detail right out to the edge of
19:09
the frame and in the lower right corner
19:11
definitely Sony that is a superior place
19:15
more similar on this side though a
19:17
little bit Sony advantage and up in this
19:20
corner again it's closer but it's a Sony
19:24
advantage here as well now if we stop
19:26
the Sony down to f2.8 you would expect
19:29
that advantage to grow even more and I
19:32
think that it does you can see that it
19:34
looks better everywhere that we've
19:36
looked so far up in this corner it looks
19:38
better and down here it was already
19:41
better and it looks much better now over
19:43
on this side it's a more clear advantage
19:45
so at equivalent apertures the Sony is
19:48
definitely the sharper higher contrast
19:50
lens at 100 millm now at 150 mm Tamron
19:53
at f2.8 Sony at f2 you can see once
19:56
again that the uh Sony lens is sharper
20:00
and higher contrast again the Tamron is
20:02
extremely good this is 200%
20:04
magnification so it looks great but the
20:06
Sony is clearly demonstrabably better
20:09
and here again the margins are close but
20:12
you can just see all of that text the
20:14
fine detail here contrast definitely
20:16
favors the Sony lens up in this corner
20:20
the Sony looks to be the sharper higher
20:23
contrast of the two and down in this
20:25
corner for once it's not a huge
20:27
advantage for the Sony it's very very
20:30
close over on this side it's close but I
20:33
think the contrast is better on the Sony
20:35
lens and up in this corner the same is
20:38
true you can see that just the text
20:40
looks a little bit crisper there and as
20:42
before if you stop the Sony down to f2.8
20:44
it definitely has an advantage that
20:46
contrast advantage grows and it's also
20:49
just resolving higher you can see that
20:51
that's just popping off the page where
20:53
it looks just a little dingier on the
20:55
Tamron lens likewise up here looking
20:58
better there and down into this corner
21:00
looking better with better contrast
21:02
though not significantly so but a little
21:05
bit more obvious difference here so the
21:07
big question is are you going to see
21:08
that difference out in the real world
21:11
well the answer is complicated at 100%
21:14
magnification which is the typical way
21:16
you're going to look at things you can
21:17
see that really the detail and contrast
21:20
looks really quite similar and there's a
21:23
little bit of give and take as I pan
21:24
around but they are a very very similar
21:28
performance this is of course f2.8 for
21:32
the Tamron lens and f2 for the Sony i
21:35
also feel like at this stage that Sony's
21:37
bokeh looks relatively good compared to
21:41
the Tamron now where I think that's less
21:44
true is if you'll see in the Tamron in
21:46
the transition towards defocus even
21:48
though it's got uh not as you know
21:51
shallow a depth of field and so this
21:53
should favor the Sony you can see in
21:56
that transition towards defocus that
21:58
it's handled more smoothly on the Tamron
22:00
whereas on the Sony there's just a
22:02
little bit more distracting elements
22:04
that are there now as you get more
22:07
deeply out of focus for example here the
22:10
advantage of having that more shallow
22:11
depth of field favors the Sony where
22:13
things are just a little bit more out of
22:15
focus and thus attract the eye a little
22:17
bit less and so even in this zone I
22:20
think that it looks a little bit softer
22:22
on the Sony if I move on to 150 mm again
22:25
Tamron being f2.8 date Sony being F2 you
22:30
can see here that in the area of focus I
22:33
actually think that the Tamron has
22:35
higher contrast and more detail in the
22:37
real world shot here and if we pan
22:40
around a little bit you can see that
22:42
that remains true it's a little bit
22:45
better here for the Sony and again as we
22:47
get towards these transition areas some
22:50
of this stuff is just a little bit more
22:51
distracting on the Sony as we transition
22:54
towards defocus now if I stop the Sony
22:56
down to f2.8 you can see that now they
22:59
look pretty much identical and I don't
23:02
think that there's any advantage for the
23:03
Tamron any longer in the areas of
23:06
texture and sharpness and as we move
23:08
towards defocus you know they're they're
23:11
just highly similar in many ways in this
23:14
shot for example looking at them
23:16
globally you can see that the Sony's
23:17
background is more defocused at f2
23:20
versus f2.8 as far as the real world
23:23
sharpness and contrast I do think it's a
23:25
little bit higher on the Sony but as you
23:27
can see at 100% magnification you know
23:30
without them side by side I don't know
23:32
that you would see that difference now
23:34
in this comparison the more shallow
23:36
depth of field provided by the Sony you
23:39
can see globally it does have an
23:40
advantage if we look at the contrast and
23:43
detail here I think the Tamron is
23:46
holding up a little bit better here and
23:48
more importantly in the transition
23:50
towards defocus here I do feel like it's
23:52
a little bit smoother on the Tamron than
23:55
what it is on the Sony once again
23:58
however if I stop the Sony down to uh
24:01
f2.8 you can see that now the contrast
24:04
and detail it definitely matches that of
24:07
the Tamron though I still like the
24:09
overall look of the Tamron's transition
24:11
zone to defocus and that's where I think
24:13
the Tamron wins is in that uh transition
24:16
zone there's just more edging more
24:18
circular shapes and so you can see that
24:21
the background area it looks busier on
24:24
the Sony relative to the Tamron which
24:26
transitions to a nicer defocus now
24:28
looking at the images globally I don't
24:30
know that you see that as much i mean
24:32
you can jump in here and look at that
24:35
and a lot of this is just out of focus
24:37
and so it's hard to determine too much
24:39
from that here's another good example
24:41
overall and so again looking at the
24:43
image globally you can tell that the
24:44
background is more defocused from the
24:46
Sony looking at the contrast and the
24:48
detail on the subject you know they both
24:51
look good is the Sony better it very
24:53
likely is slightly better but you can
24:56
tell when you get into these real world
24:57
images and away from the test chart it's
24:59
it's a little bit harder a read but
25:02
where again the Tamron I prefer is in
25:04
these transition zones so as you move
25:06
towards the defocus if you look in this
25:08
area here the Sony is kind of busy
25:11
whereas you get more of just that kind
25:13
of glow creamy background on the Tamron
25:16
as it moves towards defocus now when you
25:19
get you know seriously defocused I don't
25:22
know that there is much of a difference
25:23
there it's more in that kind of
25:25
transition area where the Tamron just is
25:27
a little bit smoother than what the Sony
25:29
is even though the Sony has the
25:31
advantage of the more shallow depth of
25:32
field if I swap to the f2.8 8 version of
25:36
the image you know it gives the Sony
25:39
more contrast and detail i'm not sure
25:41
that that was needed all that much but
25:44
what it also does is you can see that at
25:47
apples to apples f2.8 to f2.8 that
25:50
transition zone is definitely smoother
25:51
on the Tamron lens and now of course the
25:54
Sony doesn't have the advantage of
25:56
having a more defocused background and
25:58
so I think that some of these things
26:00
just become a little bit more obvious a
26:02
little busier looking on the Sony versus
26:05
the Tamron lens and it's really that
26:08
transition zone above all so how about
26:10
for a portrait shot and so here looking
26:13
at the overall backgrounds backgrounds
26:16
uh obviously the Sony is more defocused
26:18
at f2 then look tremendously different
26:21
in this kind of setting as we've seen
26:24
previously when there it's f2.8 versus
26:27
f2 i do feel like the Tamron often shows
26:30
just a little bit more contrast and
26:31
detail part of that has to do with the
26:33
fact that the depth of field is very
26:35
very shallow on the Sony lens if I swap
26:38
to the f2.8 shot you can see that now
26:41
the contrast I would say in detail
26:43
favors the Sony lens and if we look at
26:46
the background again in this case I
26:48
don't think that it's really all that
26:50
radically different you're probably not
26:52
going to see much of a difference just
26:54
kind of looking at what's defocused here
26:57
and they look more similar than
26:58
different I would say now finally on the
27:00
note of magnification you can see that
27:03
there is very slightly higher
27:04
magnification for the Sony image here
27:08
however it's not radically different you
27:10
know neither one of these is going to
27:12
fill the frame even with this mediumsiz
27:14
lens so don't mistake them for macro
27:16
lenses probably more significant if you
27:18
buy either one of these lenses that you
27:20
can see that there is slightly higher
27:22
magnification here on the GM lens on the
27:25
50mm versus the Phil 50mm end but you
27:28
can see that it's there's a little bit
27:31
of a perspective distortion just for
27:33
being so close um here at 50 mm whereas
27:36
you've got a flatter plane of focus at
27:39
150 mm and a more compressed blurred out
27:42
background even though the magnification
27:44
is lower so in some ways I kind of favor
27:46
this than getting here where I feel like
27:49
it feels a little bit stretched and
27:51
distorted so as you can see these are
27:53
very different lenses and there are
27:56
certain similarities and other areas
27:57
where they're not similar at all and
27:59
hopefully the optical breakdown has
28:00
helped you to decide which one is the
28:02
lens for you as always thanks for
28:04
watching have a great day and let the
28:06
light in
28:08
[Music]