Thoughts on the Tamron 35-150mm f2/2.8?

[snegron]

I've read several online reviews of the Tamron 35-150mm f2/2.8, and most of them are positive. The focal length, wide aperture and weather resistance of this lens seem to be exactly what I need. However, I'd like to hear from real people who have actually used this lens (as opposed to online bloggers who most likely get paid to say wonderful things about photography equipment).

I currently own a few Tamron lenses (17-28mm f2.8, 20-40mm f2.8, 28-200mm f2.8/5.6), and I absolutely love them! However, I have also owned (but subsequently sold) Tamron lenses that weren't as great as online reviewers painted them to be (28-75mm f2.8 G2, 24mm f2.8 prime). Also, my current 20-40mm f2.8 doesn't render colors as great as my first 20-40mm f2.8 that I regret having sold some time ago.

Before I "take the plunge" and buy the 35-150mm f2/2.8, I'd like to hear from those of you who actually used this lens.

 

[AlphaWorld]

I have not used the Tamron lens. I own and delight in using the Sony lens that people put up against the Tamron: the Sony 50-150mm f/2. It's an amazing lens, but a tad larger and heavier - but it's f/2 all the way to 150mm. Oh, it is also just a teeny bit more expensive

 

[iamdlewis]

I don't know what you photograph so I have a question for you, what will the 35-150 get you that the 28-200 doesn't?

 

[snegron]

I don't know what you photograph so I have a question for you, what will the 35-150 get you that the 28-200 doesn't?

Larger aperture for low light captures and shallower depth of field for subject isolation/blurred backgrounds. The 35-150mm f2/2.8 would pair well with my 17-28mm f2.8 for use in evening street shot captures where low light prevails. My 28-200 works very well in daylight, but f5.6 at the long end is not ideal for low light capture.

 

[lerwa]

I've read several online reviews of the Tamron 35-150mm f2/2.8, and most of them are positive. The focal length, wide aperture and weather resistance of this lens seem to be exactly what I need. However, I'd like to hear from real people who have actually used this lens (as opposed to online bloggers who most likely get paid to say wonderful things about photography equipment).

I currently own a few Tamron lenses (17-28mm f2.8, 20-40mm f2.8, 28-200mm f2.8/5.6), and I absolutely love them! However, I have also owned (but subsequently sold) Tamron lenses that weren't as great as online reviewers painted them to be (28-75mm f2.8 G2, 24mm f2.8 prime). Also, my current 20-40mm f2.8 doesn't render colors as great as my first 20-40mm f2.8 that I regret having sold some time ago.

Before I "take the plunge" and buy the 35-150mm f2/2.8, I'd like to hear from those of you who actually used this lens.

Hi Bro. I do photography as a hobby . 4 years ago I bought the A7iv with the 35-150mm thru online research. To date, I have no regret; except for the weight as my spondylosis is becoming acute.

 

[GvilleRick]

I looked at the Tamron 35-150 f/2-2.8 and the Samyang. I decided to save a little money and get the Samyang since I was not sure how I would like it compared to a 70-200 f/2.8 which has always been my workhorse. I have not been disappointed and use it for so many things. It works great for indoor sports such as basketball/wrestling/volleyball since I can get the wider shots as well as zooming in to get faces. I also used it on vacation a lot. While heavy it did work well to have only one lens for touring cities and getting low light shots in churches or museums.

 

[snegron]

Hi Bro. I do photography as a hobby . 4 years ago I bought the A7iv with the 35-150mm thru online research. To date, I have no regret; except for the weight as my spondylosis is becoming acute.

That's exactly the combo I'd be using if I get the 35-150mm for my A7iv! I have heard that it is heavy, and that's something I definitely have to consider. How well does it perform with AF tracking on your A7iv? Is it sharp (contrasty) wide open? Any signs of vignetting at wider apertures? Thanks!

 

[Sean2260]

I did get the Tamron 35-150 just to cover the range from 35-100mm. I had previously purchased the 28-200mm, but I had serious 'concerns' about the auto-focus and the speed to focus. Worst was after a trip and thoroughly comparing images I found the 28-200 were often in the "wish I could do over" pile. With that in mind I watched & read reviews, read the comments, then picked it up at Best Buy with the intention of trying it first and returning after.

Soon after I did take one trip where this lens did get used a lot, and overall I was happy with it. Second trip, I came back glad that I had this in my bag. That trip this was the most used lens. Actual image quality between the 35-150 vs 28-200 is not really there, more the 35-150 focuses better and faster. In focus images with the 28-200 are good though.

The only downside or con to this lens, it is heavy. In most use cases this was not a problem, either the camera sat on seat next to me or it was on a tripod. But the times I needed to hand hold for periods of time did start to bother me. If years and years down the road there is an equivalent 35-150 by either Tamron or Sony that is significantly lighter, this may be the only lens I would think to replace.

 

[snegron]

I did get the Tamron 35-150 just to cover the range from 35-100mm. I had previously purchased the 28-200mm, but I had serious 'concerns' about the auto-focus and the speed to focus. Worst was after a trip and thoroughly comparing images I found the 28-200 were often in the "wish I could do over" pile. With that in mind I watched & read reviews, read the comments, then picked it up at Best Buy with the intention of trying it first and returning after.

Soon after I did take one trip where this lens did get used a lot, and overall I was happy with it. Second trip, I came back glad that I had this in my bag. That trip this was the most used lens. Actual image quality between the 35-150 vs 28-200 is not really there, more the 35-150 focuses better and faster. In focus images with the 28-200 are good though.

The only downside or con to this lens, it is heavy. In most use cases this was not a problem, either the camera sat on seat next to me or it was on a tripod. But the times I needed to hand hold for periods of time did start to bother me. If years and years down the road there is an equivalent 35-150 by either Tamron or Sony that is significantly lighter, this may be the only lens I would think to replace.

Thank you!! According to the specs, it looks like this lens weighs almost twice as much as my A7iv!

 

[cimman]

Thank you!! According to the specs, it looks like this lens weighs almost twice as much as my A7iv!

Don't get the tamron. You will not take it out much because of the weight. It will be an expensive paperweight

 

[lerwa]

That's exactly the combo I'd be using if I get the 35-150mm for my A7iv! I have heard that it is heavy, and that's something I definitely have to consider. How well does it perform with AF tracking on your A7iv? Is it sharp (contrasty) wide open? Any signs of vignetting at wider apertures? Thanks!

I use it as my goto lens, to date no issues on the technical side, actually it has just been updated thru usb-c on the lens itself...please read the reviews.