Very nice images! The Tamron 28-200 lens is, IMHO, one of the best lenses in the Sony system. It is very tough to beat for the image quality/price/size.I have been testing the Tamron FE 28-200mm f 2.8-5.6 Di III RXD a couple of days ago and flowers grabbed my attention because it was raining and made the colors really pop:
View attachment 907213
I was quite presently surprised at how close I can get.
View attachment 907214
While it doesn't get as close as Olympus 12-100mm f 2.8 Pro but the DoF is so much less for a very beautiful blurry background.
View attachment 907215
Very beautiful sharpness for a non-Pro (well as in being advertised) super zoom lens, even wide open.
View attachment 907216
The bokeh balls can look distinct and nervous but it hasn't bothered me at all, to be honest, it's not like shooting at f 2.8 or f 1.8.
View attachment 907217
Where, in the past, I have found many cameras and lenses struggle so hard with shades of red, this combo seems to do very well and they reproduce all the different shadings in the petals, brilliant contrast.
View attachment 907219
This one is not close to minimum focus distance but I do love the rendition of the colors and the background. I've seen and heard a lot of people complain about Sony's disgusting rendition of green (and I would agree that those greens look awful in the samples they showed) but I haven't seen those kinds of shades in my style of post-processing, so it makes me think it's either people being lazy in JPEGs and not liking the SooC or they are not White Balancing very well to their scene (outdoors I generally prefer the Lightoom's Daylight WB and change the temperature to 6.000 as I love warmer tint to images).
View attachment 907223
Another example of greens being very present to my eyes (though I admit that these greens are quite "fresh" as it was still English raining at that time, aka getting wet in places that the sun doesn't shine). Also for f 5.6 that house is quite a background blurred, being at ~75 meters away from the subject.
I have to say that is very very very close to Olympus 12-100mm f 4 Pro (but from memory and experience and not a direct comparison as I don't have Olympus gear anymore), the minimum focus distance the f 4 past 75mm (of the Sony) and Sync IS is where the Olympus has the advantage, but Tamron has the f 2.8 advantage (at 28mm to 31mm, f 3.2 at 32mm to 44mm, f 3.5 from 45 to 58mm, roughly). They are roughly the same size, shape, weight, the Tamron may feel a bit less in build quality because of the use of industrial plastic and rubber rings but that doesn't mean much for me personally. The filter thread is different though, 72mm on Olympus and 67mm on Tamron. In terms of image quality, I can't give too much information as I am still getting used to the lens, BUT there is one huge difference I have noticed right off the bat: Tamron has significantly less Chromatic Aberration compared to Olympus, both in normal usage and in high contrast and backlight usage. On Tamron, there is some that are literally 3-4 pixel width and it's easily removable, on most of the Olympus and Panasonic lenses it was beyond 10-pixel width and quite often correction would be at notable image quality drop because desaturating that many pixels it would give a very noticeable gray halo of missing information or in some situations with some Olympus lenses the purple fringing was so deep in intensity that the Lightroom dropper could not recognize it and fixing it would have to be done my -100 Saturation or +100 Green Tint with a brush on it.Very nice images! The Tamron 28-200 lens is, IMHO, one of the best lenses in the Sony system. It is very tough to beat for the image quality/price/size.
I have not had any CA on my 12-100 either.I can’t say I’ve ever noticed even the slightest amount of chromatic aberration on my 12-100 Olympus. Everything you’ve described @L0n3Gr3yW0lf sounds pretty extreme...you must’ve surely had a bad copy? I’ve never even heard a single reviewer fault this lens for anything, much less what you’ve described. Interesting. Anyway, lovely images with the Tamron!
I can look up some examples, I don't want to give any false information or bad reputation. It could be that I may judge it too severely.I can’t say I’ve ever noticed even the slightest amount of chromatic aberration on my 12-100 Olympus. Everything you’ve described @L0n3Gr3yW0lf sounds pretty extreme...you must’ve surely had a bad copy? I’ve never even heard a single reviewer fault this lens for anything, much less what you’ve described. Interesting. Anyway, lovely images with the Tamron!
I suppose I believe that lens is capable of standing up to a severe judging, so I’d love to see some of your examples.I can look up some examples, I don't want to give any false information or bad reputation. It could be that I may judge it too severely.
I had a look through a few images and it is less than I originally said or believed (I could blame it on a bad experience with a bad copy of Olympus 14-150mm Mark II and Panasonic primes like 15mm f 1.7, 20mm f 1.7, 42.5mm f 1.7) though I was reminded of another issue I had this one is a bit more complicated: moire.I suppose I believe that lens is capable of standing up to a severe judging, so I’d love to see some of your examples.
Nice to see you posting some pictures btw!