The Perfect Focal Range for Documentary Work? We Review the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD for Fujifilm X Mount

The discussion of what kind of glass is better for documentary photography has been around since the beginning of the genre itself over a century ago. Some swear by using primes only, while many prefer the versatility of a zoom. What are the benefits? What are the downsides? Let’s look at both!

The Case For Primes

They have been around for considerably longer and at the end of the day, they are simpler to make. This can mean their costs are lower for the end user, but that is not the reason fixed focal lengths are so popular among documentary, wedding, and/or street photographers. When you do not need to worry about multiple focal lengths during the design process of the lens, you can concentrate on making the one focal length as good as possible. This frequently leaves primes sharper. It's less so in modern times, when the optical design of lenses has been nearly perfected by most of the manufacturers, but some can still tell the difference when the final images go through enlargement or a large format printer. 

The single largest benefit of prime lenses is the ability to take in much more light. An f/2 fixed lens would be already considered a small aperture for most photographers as these lenses can often go up to f/1.4, f/1.2, and in the case of Fujifilm’s X Mount, even up to f/1.0. This allows for considerably more light to hit the sensor, giving you better shutter speed options or lower ISO demand. The depth of field is reduced to a thin sliver separating your subject from the foreground and the background easily while keeping the bokeh soft and creamy. It’s not all sunshine and rainbows, though.

The Case Against Primes

Are you in a crowded and tightly packed space when suddenly an interesting moment happens right in front of you, but your camera has a telephoto lens mounted? Tough luck. Or are you walking around with an 18mm wide-angle and the perfect split-second scene is happening across the street? Better luck next time. There is a clear reason prime photographers often go so-called “double-barreled.” This means having two separate bodies ready to shoot, one with a wider angle and the other one with a tighter telephoto. You gain the benefits of better low-light performance at the cost of having to carry two cameras, deal with the extra weight, worry about two batteries, and having to carry them readily by your side without smashing them against whatever comes your way or each other. A zoom lens alleviates a decent amount of these disadvantages.

Is a Zoom Lens a Better Fit For You?

Let’s have a look at what you gain by using a zoom lens. It’s quite simple, really: The ability to change your focal length at will without needing to resort to either using a separate body or changing the lens altogether. Swapping lenses is not always an easy option. You could be on the move, you could be working in a dusty or rainy environment, or you could simply not have the time to do so before the moment you intend on capturing is over never to occur again. But zoom lenses come with a caveat. To keep manageable image quality and dimensions, they lose a bit of light transmissive capabilities. Many zoom lenses even do so more as you zoom to the longer end of the focal range. Having your aperture drop as you push in is far from ideal. 

One such lens is the famous and well-received Fujifilm XF 18-55mm f/2.8-4 R LM IS, which does start at a decent aperture of f/2.8 at 18mm but drops down to a limiting f/4 when you use it at 55 millimeters. Well, this is where the recently released Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD for Fujifilm X-Mount comes in. The full frame equivalent of 25.5-105 millimeters and a constant aperture of f/2.8 regardless of your focal length does open up a solid amount of possibilities. All you need is a single body and a smaller bag. Less to worry about. The 17mm length is a wide enough starting point to cover most of your needs when in a tight spot or a crowded space. Barrel distortion is non-existent, so your images come out with straight lines and no unwanted curves. But if something happens a little farther away or if you want to isolate your subject, all you need is to rotate the zoom ring in less than a second, and you’ve got a wholly different scene in your viewfinder.

The lens is not as small as a prime would be, but it is not too large either. I’ve been carrying it on my X-T5 for over a week now, and it fits the camera very well, ergonomically speaking. It does not feel heavy when mounted and fits in even a smaller camera bag. The outer shell is plastic, which did make me worry about scratches, as it’s a loaned unit, but luckily it made it through my testing with no marks or any other kind of damage. The design is simple with no unnecessary switches. Everything is already available on the camera, so why double it? The zoom ring is fairly smooth, and its travel is pleasingly short. Only a quarter-turn clockwise gets you from the short end to the long end. This saves time, improves grip, and negates having to reposition your hand when zooming. I would prefer having the manual focus ring on the front end of the barrel, but it is a tiny issue I could get used to within a day.

Including image stabilization is a welcome move. Yes, apart from the X-T30 II, all of the currently available Fujifilm bodies offer IBIS, but it is a feature that does not hurt to have, especially when used with older bodies like the brilliant X-T3. Last but not least would be the RXD AF motor included. True, the newer VXD ultrasonic drive is considered faster and better than the RXD stepping motor, but the smaller aperture means a lighter focusing group, so the autofocus is still decently capable. Tracking subjects in motion was not a large issue. I was able to rely on it during my testing with minimal out-of-focus leftovers.

Integrated image stabilization, or as Tamron calls it Vibration Compensation is a welcome addition for longer exposures whilst shooting handheld. Where it exceeds, however, is video. You see, it's not a simple IS system because it utilizes AI to predict motion and smooth out motion before and after tilting and/or panning for considerably more stable footage. When held correctly I'd argue it negates the need for a gimbal for a plethora of uses. 

Last but definitely not least is the weather-sealing. When combined with an adequate camera body you can rely on the lens to keep moisture and dust out. This gives you many more opportunities to work with. Once you get used to being able to photograph in the rain your life becomes easier and your images better. Especially for a wedding/street/documentary/landscape photographer, where you do not have any control over your environment.

What About Yourself?

I know this all sounds incredibly obvious and, for many, possibly as completely redundant information, but you’d be surprised at how often I’m having these conversations with fellow photographers during my work in a camera shop. Deciding between a zoom lens or a set of primes is an incredibly important step that should not be taken lightly. I personally use primes for my work and have been ever since I took photography seriously. But walking around with a zoom lens of this versatile range and a constant f/2.8 aperture has been pretty comfortable framing-wise. Did I miss my f/1.2 low-light beast at night? Yes, but not as much during the day. The benefit of being able to shoot whatever focal length I just so happened to need was freeing. It even made me consider getting a zoom such as this Tamron for my more fast-paced documentary work. What about you, though? Do you use primes? Do you use zooms? Why do you prefer one over the other? Tell us in the comments, and let’s have a discussion as old as documentary photography itself.

Samples

Here is a selection of a few images taken using the lens for a few days. Granted, fixed focal lengths tend to deliver sharper results when you magnify the file beyond 100%, but the versatility of the zoom does appeal to a fast-paced photographer.