Kaufen Sie Tamron bei Europas größtem Technik-Onlineshop Kostenloser Versand verfügbar. Kauf auf eBay. eBay-Garantie! Schau Dir Angebote von Tamron 17- auf eBay an. Kauf Bunter
Ich habe das Tamron 17-28 gehabt und das 16-35GM mal kurz ausprobiert (beide an einer RIII). Das Tamron fand ich ok, aber nicht umwerfend. Das GM schien mir besser zu sein, vor allem aber gefielen mir die Farben vom Tamron nicht, dagegen die vom GM sehr gut. Ich habe aber keine direkten Vergleichsbilder. Dann gibt es natürlich noch andere Faktoren wie den anderen BW-Bereich, die Verarbeitung und das Gewicht After seeing the results, I'm SHOCKED by how this lens performs! Most people should buy this lens (Amazon) http://geni.us/4AuYAPa Wider alternative for RE.
Tamron 17-28mm f2.8 vs Sony GM 16-35mm f2.8 vs Zeiss f4 Lens | Ultimate REVIEW. Watch later better Bokeh. Reasons to choose Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD over Sony FE 16-35mm F2.8 GM. 5 advantages. Price. $0 vs $1,998. Cheaper by $1,998. Weight. 420 g vs 680 g. 260 g lighter Tamron just released their brand new 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD lens for Sony E-Mount, and it's a very intriguing offer from Tamron. The lens retails for $899, which is $450 cheaper than the Sony/Zeiss 16-35mm f/4 OSS that is involved in this comparison, and a whopping $1,300 less than the equal aperture (but wider range) Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 GM The 999 Euro Tamron 17-28mm FE versus the 2400 Euro Sony 16-35mm GM The German folks from Krolop&Gerst posted the world's first full review of the new Tamron 17-28mm FE lens. It's a 30 minute long video in German (activate auto translation if you don't speak german). In Summary this is what the reviewer had to say
I have the Tamron 17-28, which I chose narrowly over the Sony 16-35 f4. I appreciate the much lower price, the 2.8 maximum aperature and the relatively light weight. The pictures look good and all the Sony functions, including autofocus, work well. scarlet knight's gear list Probably not advisable to buy the Sony with the intent of resale upon acquiring the Tamron as the release of the Tamron will probably cause a dip in resale value of the Sony. I'm personally going for a kit that uses Tamron for zooms (hoping for an eventually 75-200 (ish) option) and Sony for primes. level 2. Just4L0lz focal range (17-28, instead of a fixed 24) light (420g, Sony 24 GM is 445g) Net ~$600 CAD profit, plan to put towards a trip for some good photos to shoot (Iceland?) according to reviews, as sharp as the 16-35GM. Cons: 1.4 vs 2.8 aperture (4X more light, shallower DoF, although I don't often shoot at 1.4 unless for portraits Warum ist Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD besser als Sony FE 16-35mm F/4 ZA OSS Carl Zeiss Vario-Tessar T*? 30% größere Blende bei minimaler Brennweite ? f/2.8 vs 4
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · Tamron 17-28/2.8 compared to FE 16-35/4 ZA at Admiringlight. 17mm appears to be 17mm. However, the 28mm end is a bit shorter than the 28mm on the Sony. Whether that's because the Tamron is closer to 27mm or the Sony just hits Exif at the wrong spot, it's hard to tell. Jul 29, 2019 at 12:05 AM I should buy my first wide angle lens and I'm very undecided betwen the Sony Vario Tessar 16-35 F4 and the new Tamron 17-28 f2,8. From the Sony side the more focal range is a plus, the 35mm is very usable in some circustances and for composition. But the other side the f2,8 aperture and flare control of Tamron s a plus. Which one would you recommend? Wha's the opinion about the quality of extreme borders ? Are very soft the border of Sony or are acceptable
Main differences: • The Sigma is faster (f/2.8 vs. f/4) • The Sony is longer (35mm vs. 24mm) • The Sigma is wider (14mm vs. 16mm) • The Sony is lighter (518 grams vs. 795 grams) • The Sony is shorter (98.5 mm vs. 131 mm) - but that difference disappears when zoomed in to 16mm. The Sigma zooms.. The Sony Vario-Tessar® T* FE 16-35 mm F4 ZA OSS version has the lower price, with a current retail price of around 1200 euros; the bright Sony FE 16-35 mm f/2.8 GM has a suggested retail price of no less than 2700 euros. The Tamron 17-28 mm f/2.8 Di III RXD is just as bright as the GM version. It's the same length and not as fat as the Vario-Tessar® T* FE 16-35 mm F4 and almost 100 grams.
Sony FE 2,8/16-35 mm GM (SEL1635GM) Voll-format: 16/13: 0,28 m: 22: 82 mm: 121,6 mm: 680 g: Autofokus, zwei Direct Drive SSM-Systeme (DDSSM), Floating Fokus, Fokushaltetaste, Staub- u. Spirtz-wasserschutz, Steulichtblende : Sony ILCE-FE: ca. 2700 Euro Tamron SP 2,8/15-30 mm Di VC USD (A012) Voll-format: 18/13: 0,28 m: 22-145 mm: 1100 g: Bildstabilisator, Ultraschallmotor, Staub- u. Le Tamron 17-28mm F2.8 Di III RXD (1000 euros) est un excellent complément au Tamron 28-75mm F2.8 Di III RXD, il offre de très bonnes à excellentes performances pour 2,5 x moins cher que le Sony FE 16-35 mm F2.8 GM (2700 euros I have the Sony 16-35 F4, and am debating selling it and getting the Tamron. My conundrum is that it will probably cost me about $120 to sell this lens and get the Tammy. I can probably sell the.
This is an approximative size comparison between the new Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 and the Sony 16-35mm f/2.8.. Note: It's a bit difficult to make an accurate size comparison. We only have one image of the new 17-28mm lens which has a slight tilt that is different from the Sony. Please let me know in the comment system if you have a 100% accurate comparison Dieser Artikel Sony FE 16-35 mm f/2.8 GM | Vollformat, Weitwinkel, Zoom Objektiv (SEL1635GM) Tamron 17-28 mm F/2.8 Di III RXD - für Sony E-Mount Sony SEL-1635Z Zeiss Weitwinkel-Zoom-Objektiv (16-35 mm, F4, OSS, Vollformat, geeignet für A7, A6000, A5100, A5000 und Nex Serien, E-Mount) schwar As a result, the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN Art for Sony E mount and the Sony FE 16-35mm f/2.8 G Master both didn't end up getting a look-in (I went with the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD.