Tamron vs Sony | 17-70mm f/2.8 vs 16-55mm f/2.8 zoom lens comparison

Fast standard zoom lenses absolutely rule - let's see how these two popular choices compare.

Links to full reviews:

Buy them here (Amazon affiliate links - thank you for your support!):

All pictures taken by me on Sony a5100 and a7R III cameras.

Equipment I use to make my videos (Amazon affiliate links):

Music:
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0

[momchilyordanov]

In terms of sharpness, they are so close, I believe the difference would be unperceivable in real life use. For me the deal-breaker is the IS system. Very useful for both stills and video.

[beachdweller]

The optics and smaller size of the sony16-55 look incredible. I didnt know the sony had that kind of barreling 16-19mm. I went with the tamron because I have an a6000 and the tamron has built in stabilization, the weather sealing, and price. They both look like phenominal lenses. The tamron really brought my a6000 to life and pics are clean and sharp as my 50 prime in some cases. which after comparing my prime shot photos with non prime shot photos, I realized I need a mid range lens with a lower aperture like the tamrons 2.8. Other lenses I used were the sony 18-55 f3.6-5.6, 18-135 f3.5-5.6, and 55--210 f 4.5-6.3 kit lenses but they were both slower lenses compared to tamrons f2.8. I dont mind the weight of the tamron either, i think it helps keep the camera stable while taking photos. With the money I had left from buying the tamron over sony I put it towards buying a sony g 70-350mm. now Im covered from 17-350mm and I feel like I have a new camera.

[cvbattum]

Will you test the new Tamron 11-20 that's coming out soon? Would love to see your review on that one!!

[keystonebrotherb]

The Tamron rarely leaves my 6400. It’s a phenomenal value at $800. Can’t wait for the 24 1.8 FF lens to arrive. Tamron is really making a splash. 🌊

[jochenpaulissen]

Great comparison. The Sony 16-55 is now available for 1029€ where I live. The Tamron costs 869€. Only 160€ difference! Still people keep saying the Sony costs almost double? :-)
I sold my 18-105 and bought the 16-55. Never looked back, it's a great allrounder. Perfect for landscape, portret, and everything in between.

[yellit]

I got the 16-55 when it first came out, very happy with it but wished that I’d waited a bit longer for the Tamron.

[muratbasc]

Tamron kills the competition in my opinion, even both were the same price

[TexpatOTG]

I had been looking at the Tamron ... the Sony is not in my budget. I really appreciate the comparison. The VC feature in the Tamron is really a big benefit. Cheers.

[ShanShiuam]

The Tamron really did a good job!
Is the review of Tamron 11-20 f2.8 coming soon?

[sushi_donut]

I wish Sigma would make/adapt their 18-35mm f1.8 for sony native :*( That is, if they address the focus noise lol

[HappyHubris]

It's a shame you didn't compare 55mm vs 55mm instead of pushing the Tamron to 70mm.

[professionalpotato]

Any chance of a Fuji 16-55 vs Sony 16-55 and Tamron 17-70? Would be interesting to see the top 3 standard APS-C zooms compared.

[JeromeLaignel]

I was just struggling between the two and this video made me state my mind 🤗 thanks a lot and I think I will go for the tamron ☺️ good job on your vids they are always super helpful in choosing the best gear

[igoryudnikov]

I was 2 weeks in Armenia and most of the shots were done with that tamron. It is very good lens. The only issue for me was dust, because I took single body, and switched too often

[Silverheartsmusic]

Like many, I'm a fan of (wildlife) video over stills. Always dealing with handheld shake, lighting changes, focusing in live video. It would make a good video(s) to compare lens/camera combinations in regard to the IS system, AF system, handling lighting & ISO changes, MF & zoom smoothness. All regarding the video experience as compared to sharpness and CA of stills - if you want to venture there.

[cyrilhamel]

Good test again (as always 😊).
Ideally you'd show us the difference in framing between Sony's 16mm and Tamron's 17mm.
Watch you soon

[balajinaidu]

Please do the review on sigma 18-50mm vs tamron 17-70m

[muhammadobaid]

I think you should have compared the sony with tamron both at 55mm,
Not at the tallest focal length of each.
Tamron's 55mm should be compared to sony's 55mm.
Any degradation in quality that Tamron exhibits at 70mm shouldn't count, cuz it offers it out of Sony's range after all!

[gordonyz]

Had Sony lens, sold only because upgraded to ff 24-70. The 55mm corners can look very soft for photo stitching (very notifiable at f/4) but fantastic lens otherwise

[Eikenhorst]

The completely black corners at 16mm for the Sony is just crazy. Basically at 16mm you are nowhere near using the full sensor, probably only 90% of it. The pincushion distortion on the Tamron at 70mm isn't that bad and fixing it doesn't throw out a serious chunk of your sensor surface. I would have like to see how the Tamron does at 55mm vs the Sony, the 56-70mm range is just a 'free' extra of the Tamron when you compare these two lenses. I personally would have loved it if it was a 16-70 or even 16-65mm, as I really do shoot at 16mm quite a lot and 4degree FOV is quite substantial :(