The Tamron 35-150 as a more complete lens is a valid argument specially if you factor in your photography style. If you take a look at the most popular prime lens focal length, only the 24mm will not be covered by the 35-150mm. It will cover the 35, 40, 50, 85, 100, 135, and 150. Add a wide angle zoom like a 16-35 or 24mm prime and you have a very complete lens lineup.
Yes, it is a lot more expensive, however, if you're just starting and you don't have lenses yet, it might be more cost efficient if you plan it carefully because it covers more popular focal length. Another set-up to compare is this Sigma 24-70 ($900) + Tamron 70-180 ($1100) vs the 35-150 ($1900).
Great lens.
FYI for anyone with an older version of it - you can send it in and they replace the housing to the newer one which is supposedly better at keeping dust out. Just got mine back from them.
Tamron g2 has faster auto focus and the Sony 24-70mm GM II is coming out soon. Just something to consider. At this price, this is a great lens. It does have dust issue s though.
Not faster, also the tamron is 28mm wide end, not 24. 70 and 75 isn't a huge different but 24 vs 28 is. Agree on the dust issue.
Something to consider for those interested. This lens is:
1. Mostly metal, weather sealed and very well build.
2. Very creamy bokeh for portraits.
3. Very close minimal focus distance to allow you to shoot 18cm away from the subject.
Tamron makes fine lens but they are all plastic. Sigma is just higher end.
I don't know people's complaints, but in my case, it's super super even wide open at any zoom length. I used to have Tamron 28-75. After trying this lens, I gave up Tamron immediately. Now it's my on-to-go lens for most of my events.
I personally just plain found this lens too large to carry as someone who likes a minimal setup that encourages me to take it more places. I went with their new 2021 Sigma 28-70mm 2.8 instead, which is the smallest of its range at the loss of 4mm from the Art lens. I shoot video so for me, the Art's sharpness is not significant enough to justify hauling it around and paying higher for it.
Interesting choice. I'm looking at the Tamron 35-150mm too. I have this Sigma 24-70 that I'm planning to sell to get the 35-150. My set-up will be Zeiss 16-35 and Tamron 35-150. I might keep the 85 for it's small size and faster at f1.8.
I haven't really found too many situations where I need the 16-35 yet (don't really do landscape), but have found numerous situations where I take too long to swap my primes lol
Do you have the Sony 85/1.8? Grand bang for buck lens, one of my favs. Sharp and faster and very affordable
47 Comments
Your comment cannot be blank.
Featured Comments
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
FYI for anyone with an older version of it - you can send it in and they replace the housing to the newer one which is supposedly better at keeping dust out. Just got mine back from them.
https://www.adorama.com/tm2875vso...dl-gbase-p
1. Mostly metal, weather sealed and very well build.
2. Very creamy bokeh for portraits.
3. Very close minimal focus distance to allow you to shoot 18cm away from the subject.
Tamron makes fine lens but they are all plastic. Sigma is just higher end.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.
Very good lense, highly recommended. One owner emailed Sigma and Sigma said serial numbers starting with 55xxxxx has the dust issue resolved.
Mine is 54xxxxx. I haven't noticed any dusts in mine. Lense comes with a 4 year warranty so I'm not worried.
Do you have the Sony 85/1.8? Grand bang for buck lens, one of my favs. Sharp and faster and very affordable
Mine doesn't have any dust yet. Purchased almost 2 years ago from Amazon.
Sign up for a Slickdeals account to remove this ad.