Sony 18-200mm vs. Tamron 18-200mm

Started 3 months ago | Discussions
Jim Cummings Regular Member • Posts: 243
Sony 18-200mm vs. Tamron 18-200mm

Has anyone had experience with both of these or, if not can anyone tell me their experience with either. I have found some info but not a great deal and am considering a lens in this range for my 6400 and wonder which might be best. I have the 16-300mm Tamron for my Canon 7dMKII and have been very surprised at its quality.

-- hide signature --

Jim

Kogel
Kogel Forum Member • Posts: 84
Re: Sony 18-200mm vs. Tamron 18-200mm

Jim Cummings wrote:

Has anyone had experience with both of these or, if not can anyone tell me their experience with either. I have found some info but not a great deal and am considering a lens in this range for my 6400 and wonder which might be best. I have the 16-300mm Tamron for my Canon 7dMKII and have been very surprised at its quality.

Sony SEL18200LE and Tamron 18-200 are almost identical. The Tamron is cheaper (all electric controls and options like OSS, lens correction, ... work without problems)

Had a used Tamron 18-200, sold it. Quite average performance, not as good as my Sony 18-135.

 Kogel's gear list:Kogel's gear list
Sony a6500 Sony E 10-18mm F4 OSS Sony E 16-50mm F3.5-5.6 PZ OSS Samyang 12mm F2.0 NCS CS Sigma 30mm F1.4 for Sony E +4 more
Viewr Forum Member • Posts: 94
Re: Sony 18-200mm vs. Tamron 18-200mm

I have tried the Sony 18-200 LE which has been described as a rebadged Tamron 18-200.

I like to check out DXOmark field maps for sharpness:

https://www.dxomark.com/Lenses/Sony/Sony-E-18-200mm-F35-63-LE---Measurements

Under sharpness->field map tabs, you'll see that it's not a very good performer, especially at the long end. The 18-135 seems to be best bet for weight and size. For more reach but at a cost in weight, you could try the Sony 18-200 silver lens which performs better than the LE. Or even consider an EF-E mount adapter and use your existing Tamron lens.

 Viewr's gear list:Viewr's gear list
Sony a7 Sony a6000 Sony Vario-Tessar T* E 16-70mm F4 ZA OSS
Almazar80 Senior Member • Posts: 1,339
Re: Sony 18-200mm vs. Tamron 18-200mm
1

If you want an 18-200, buy the silver Sony 18-200.  It's better than the black version.  And better than the Tamron.  The difference between the silver one and the olther models are significant.  I would not consider the black or Tamron.  I had a silver 18-200, which I used for years, until I bought the 18-105 power zoom.

Joachim Wulfers
Joachim Wulfers Veteran Member • Posts: 3,428
Re: Sony 18-200mm vs. Tamron 18-200mm

Jim Cummings wrote:

Has anyone had experience with both of these or, if not can anyone tell me their experience with either. I have found some info but not a great deal and am considering a lens in this range for my 6400 and wonder which might be best. I have the 16-300mm Tamron for my Canon 7dMKII and have been very surprised at its quality.

I have been using the Sony 18-200 OSS (Silver version) since 2012 first on the NEX 5N and later on the A6000 and am very satisfied with its results. I do not have any experience with the Sony 18-200 E nor the 18-200 Tamron. The majority of the photos in my flickr albums were shot with the Sony 18-200.

If you need the reach, get the silver version, if not get the 18-135 which seems to have found wide acceptance.

-- hide signature --
 Joachim Wulfers's gear list:Joachim Wulfers's gear list
Fujifilm X100T Sony a6000 Sony E 18-200mm F3.5-6.3 OSS Voigtlander 21mm F4 Color Skopar Pancake II Sony Carl Zeiss Sonnar T* E 24mm F1.8 ZA +10 more
sinnerz2000 Regular Member • Posts: 272
Re: Sony 18-200mm vs. Tamron 18-200mm

Would anyone recommend the Sony 24-240? I'm looking for a cheaper alternative to the 70-300 and I'm looking for a longer reach and better quality than my 55-210.

 sinnerz2000's gear list:sinnerz2000's gear list
Sony a6400 Sony E 55-210mm F4.5-6.3 OSS Sony E 18-135mm F3.5-5.6 OSS LG V30
Almazar80 Senior Member • Posts: 1,339
Re: Sony 18-200mm vs. Tamron 18-200mm
1

One thing that I have learned is that it is possible to find good lenses in the used market.  Good lenses are probably the most important part of a photographer's kit.  I would say that the 70-300 is probably better than the 24-240 and that it's probably better to bite the bullet and get the lens you really want.  Saving money is great, but in the long run, you need to buy the tools that you want to use.  For me, I replaced my 55-210 with the 18-200 and then bought the 70-200 f4 G.  The difference in image quality is noticeable.  In the long run, lenses don't become obsolete as quickly as cameras (which do not become less useful unless they're broken - just newer models improve upon the old).  Good lenses are things that one will use for years, hopefully.  So spending the money is not a bad thing.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads