The 28-200 could be a lens for someone to come to Sony FF!

[Yannis1976]

I am currently using both Sony and Fuji, but have to admit that Fuji is like an old love you resist to leave whereas Sony is the new girl ticking more and more boxes ;-)

One of those boxes is the Tamron 28-200, a lens that can do almost everything and at a pretty good standard (at least for my standards). Here are some recent ones from a snowy weekend in February...















































--
Yannis

Yannis Tzevelekos

Explore Yannis Tzevelekos’s 969 photos on Flickr!

www.flickr.com

Login • Instagram

Welcome back to Instagram. Sign in to check out what your friends, family & interests have been capturing & sharing around the world.

www.instagram.com

https://www.viewbug.com/member/Yannis76

 

[Rluizsm]

These photos are amazing! I’m not a big fan of Fuji. But, OTOH, the 28-200 is incredible. I used it a lot with my Sony PZ 16-35 f4 as a travel kit.

 

[rashid7]

nice pix! Agreed, the 28-200 is a Swiss army knife, and has that "Victorinox quality"

 

[rashid7]

These photos are amazing! I’m not a big fan of Fuji. But, OTOH, the 28-200 is incredible. I used it a lot with my Sony PZ 16-35 f4 as a travel kit.

hah, that's my fav travel kit too

 

[dmanthree]

These photos are amazing! I’m not a big fan of Fuji. But, OTOH, the 28-200 is incredible. I used it a lot with my Sony PZ 16-35 f4 as a travel kit.

Same, but I'm considering swapping the 16-35 for the 12-24 f4. Still waffling, though.

 

[rashid7]

These photos are amazing! I’m not a big fan of Fuji. But, OTOH, the 28-200 is incredible. I used it a lot with my Sony PZ 16-35 f4 as a travel kit.

Same, but I'm considering swapping the 16-35 for the 12-24 f4. Still waffling, though.

unless you really have to have 12mm, I can't see adding 200g and losing the 35 which gets you closer to "normal"

 

[Rluizsm]

These photos are amazing! I’m not a big fan of Fuji. But, OTOH, the 28-200 is incredible. I used it a lot with my Sony PZ 16-35 f4 as a travel kit.

Same, but I'm considering swapping the 16-35 for the 12-24 f4. Still waffling, though.

unless you really have to have 12mm, I can't see adding 200g and losing the 35 which gets you closer to "normal"

Absolutely!

 

[dmanthree]

These photos are amazing! I’m not a big fan of Fuji. But, OTOH, the 28-200 is incredible. I used it a lot with my Sony PZ 16-35 f4 as a travel kit.

Same, but I'm considering swapping the 16-35 for the 12-24 f4. Still waffling, though.

unless you really have to have 12mm, I can't see adding 200g and losing the 35 which gets you closer to "normal"

Yeah, that's the trade off. But, well, I really like WIDE. Haven't done it yet, still waffling.

 

[dmanthree]

These photos are amazing! I’m not a big fan of Fuji. But, OTOH, the 28-200 is incredible. I used it a lot with my Sony PZ 16-35 f4 as a travel kit.

Same, but I'm considering swapping the 16-35 for the 12-24 f4. Still waffling, though.

unless you really have to have 12mm, I can't see adding 200g and losing the 35 which gets you closer to "normal"

Absolutely!

I guess the question is "can I live with the gap between 24 and 28? Hmm..

 

[jimrpdx]

If only it would unscrew and become a 28-80/2.8-4, and an 80-200/4.5-5.6! For family events I'd prefer not to carry the telephoto part.

Strangely enough, NO mirrorless system other than μ43 carries a 50-200ish compact tele that isn't f/4 or faster i.e. heavier than I'd cheerfully carry for 'just in case' shots. One would think the α7c, BF and S9 would force someone to act!

 

[Rluizsm]

If only it would unscrew and become a 28-80/2.8-4, and an 80-200/4.5-5.6! For family events I'd prefer not to carry the telephoto part.

Strangely enough, NO mirrorless system other than μ43 carries a 50-200ish compact tele that isn't f/4 or faster i.e. heavier than I'd cheerfully carry for 'just in case' shots. One would think the α7c, BF and S9 would force someone to act!

I totally get your point. Wouldn’t it be awesome if all those big and heavy zooms could be split into two separate lenses without any loss of picture quality?

 

[wheresrunnicles]

If only it would unscrew and become a 28-80/2.8-4, and an 80-200/4.5-5.6! For family events I'd prefer not to carry the telephoto part.

Strangely enough, NO mirrorless system other than μ43 carries a 50-200ish compact tele that isn't f/4 or faster i.e. heavier than I'd cheerfully carry for 'just in case' shots. One would think the α7c, BF and S9 would force someone to act!

Sadly the compact short tele market is badly served in e mount. I’d love a 135/3.5. Or even a 50-150/4. There’s the 90/2.8 and the 75/1.8 (although that’s too short for me) and think samyang also has a cine lens, something like 100/2.3 but that’s about it.

I’m currently trying to use APSC to get round this. It gives me my 135/4.2 with the Sigma, or a more sensible 2.8 option if I use my Batis 85. But wish one of the millions of manufacturers in the e mount would make a FF lens for this niche.

 

[jimrpdx]

If only it would unscrew and become a 28-80/2.8-4, and an 80-200/4.5-5.6! For family events I'd prefer not to carry the telephoto part.

Strangely enough, NO mirrorless system other than μ43 carries a 50-200ish compact tele that isn't f/4 or faster i.e. heavier than I'd cheerfully carry for 'just in case' shots. One would think the α7c, BF and S9 would force someone to act!

Sadly the compact short tele market is badly served in e mount. I’d love a 135/3.5. Or even a 50-150/4. There’s the 90/2.8 and the 75/1.8 (although that’s too short for me) and think samyang also has a cine lens, something like 100/2.3 but that’s about it.

I’m currently trying to use APSC to get round this. It gives me my 135/4.2 with the Sigma, or a more sensible 2.8 option if I use my Batis 85. But wish one of the millions of manufacturers in the e mount would make a FF lens for this niche.

I get this exactly. My small tele is the Pentax-M 135/3.5, a very nice copy even wide open. I have a Kmart 'Focal' 80-200/3.5 when I want to lift weights, about a kilo but lighter than any f/2.8 AF type!









As to aps/c I have a 50-200dt coming. I used one before on the α7² and it barely cut off the corners. Add the ea3 or ea4 though, and it's close to my Tam 70-300rxd weight anyway. :-|





--
Jim R, Cowlitz county US | a7³ & e-P5
https://granitix2.blogspot.com/2020/11/kit.html

 

[wheresrunnicles]

If only it would unscrew and become a 28-80/2.8-4, and an 80-200/4.5-5.6! For family events I'd prefer not to carry the telephoto part.

Strangely enough, NO mirrorless system other than μ43 carries a 50-200ish compact tele that isn't f/4 or faster i.e. heavier than I'd cheerfully carry for 'just in case' shots. One would think the α7c, BF and S9 would force someone to act!

Sadly the compact short tele market is badly served in e mount. I’d love a 135/3.5. Or even a 50-150/4. There’s the 90/2.8 and the 75/1.8 (although that’s too short for me) and think samyang also has a cine lens, something like 100/2.3 but that’s about it.

I’m currently trying to use APSC to get round this. It gives me my 135/4.2 with the Sigma, or a more sensible 2.8 option if I use my Batis 85. But wish one of the millions of manufacturers in the e mount would make a FF lens for this niche.

I get this exactly. My small tele is the Pentax-M 135/3.5, a very nice copy even wide open. I have a Kmart 'Focal' 80-200/3.5 when I want to lift weights, about a kilo but lighter than any f/2.8 AF type!



As to aps/c I have a 50-200dt coming. I used one before on the α7² and it barely cut off the corners. Add the ea3 or ea4 though, and it's close to my Tam 70-300rxd weight anyway. :-|

I feel you. I use a vintage 135/3.5. Several actually. My favourite is the Carl Zeiss Jena (beautiful rendering). I also have the Olympus OM and the canon nFD. The last is impressively sharp. Haven’t tried the Pentax yet…

 

[Maxmolly7]

This lens sealed my switch from Canon APS-C to Sony full-frame. I love its versatilty to jump from wide to tele and back. IQ is very good and at tele end you are able to throw back the background enough for some bokeh shots.

Add a fast prime to your preferences plus Sony 16-35mm PZ and you are set for travel photography.

 

[Yannis1976]

This lens sealed my switch from Canon APS-C to Sony full-frame. I love its versatilty to jump from wide to tele and back. IQ is very good and at tele end you are able to throw back the background enough for some bokeh shots.

Add a fast prime to your preferences plus Sony 16-35mm PZ and you are set for travel photography.

Exactly!!

 

[Impulses]

I love your use of the tele end of the 28-200 in these shots, it may seem like a no brainer but that's the sole reason I've ever considered a super zoom, being able to quickly snap those compressed landscapes or candids without a lens swap...

I noticed more than a few shots in the bunch were at 100mm+ which is well out of the range of most standard zooms, and even of the primes I usually carry if I'm not bringing a 135mm or cropping into 75mm. Still wish we had some more teles >100mm but lighter than the 28-200.

 

[wheresrunnicles]

I love your use of the tele end of the 28-200 in these shots, it may seem like a no brainer but that's the sole reason I've ever considered a super zoom, being able to quickly snap those compressed landscapes or candids without a lens swap...

I noticed more than a few shots in the bunch were at 100mm+ which is well out of the range of most standard zooms, and even of the primes I usually carry if I'm not bringing a 135mm or cropping into 75mm. Still wish we had some more teles >100mm but lighter than the 28-200.

This is the main attraction of the lens for me. There’s nothing like having 28, 50 and 135 all in one lens. But… my main reservation is that I find the bokeh can be quite busy. It’s a real shame they never did a G2 of this lens which gave us improved rendering (as they did with the 28-75) as well as image stabilisation and a function button (I’d ask for an aperture ring as all but that’s a bit of a lost cause with Tamron). Sadly we got the 28-300 instead.

 

[Craig Gillette]

While there's "gap," I'd think cropping could handle it much of the time?

 

[Craig Gillette]

When compared to the Tamron 28-75/2.8 or Sigma 28-70/2.8, I think of it as more a "free" 70/75-200mm lens carry without the space, etc., for the second lens. But I get a fair amount of use out of that range in my typical times with the lens. Two smaller lenses could be nice but some of that comes around to how often what might be swapping them around.