A few months ago, Tamron released its first E-mount APS-C lens in nine years: the 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD. Its constant fast aperture makes it rather special, but how does it perform on the job? This short video seeks to find out.
Shipping for this lens is due on January 15, and while it’s not exactly a budget option at $799, it packs a lot of features that make it a desirable option for Sony APS-C shooters. The lens offers a 35mm equivalent of 25.5-105mm, making it very versatile, especially given that it maintains its fast aperture of f/2.8 throughout its focal range.
If that weren’t enough, Tamron has also included Vibration Compensation, which uses AI to give your shots greater stability — though only when shooting video.
The immediate comparison is Sony’s own 16-55mm f/2.8 G, a much more expensive option at $1,298 (currently discounted by $100). As Manny Ortiz notes in this video, the Sony lens squeezes out a little extra in terms of quality, but that’s to be expected given the significant difference in terms of price.
Tamron seems to be continuing its tradition of delivering high-quality glass at affordable prices. Will you be buying this lens when it hits the shelves in a few weeks? Let us know in the comments below.
I own the Sony 18-135mm zoom. The quality is superb. And the lens is stabilized. The quality of the results led me to quit using quality fixed focal length lenses in most cases.
It is not f 2.8; it is variable aperture - and it is light and offers terrific quality, especially stopped down 1 - 2 stops. It is also less expensive.
I have the 18-135 as well, and it's my favorite lens, but I will sell it to help fund the purchase of the Tamron 17-70. The difference in aperture is very noticeable if you shoot indoors or in dimly lit scenarios. I took some pictures at a friend's wedding last year and the "mood lighting" meant I really had to crank up the ISO, so all I got was a bunch of grainy pics. I won't make that mistake for my cousin's wedding this year.
Also, you're missing out if you don't use any primes like the Sigma 16/30/56mm trio or the Sony 35mm.
I have the 18 to 105 F4 video zoom lens and I enjoy it but having that constant 2.8 in apsc is, in my opinion, essential (if you intend to use it to take anything resembling a portrait).
I sold the 18 to 135 immediately after getting the F4 zoom. I might sell the F4 if I pick up this!
How much did you sell the 18-135 for? I am going to do the same to pick up the Tamron 17-70 in a month or two.
I'm pretty excited for this lens. Kudos to Tamron for bringing it to market. It offers something different.
The obvious comparison is the exceptional Sony 16-55 2.8. I have that lens and i can't say enough superlatives. Everyone knocks this lens for its price. I would point out that in Canada the Sony lens (made in China) is a lot less expensive, perhaps because we don't pay the Trump taxes. Politics seem to effect gear. Sad.