Jump to content

Tamron 28-75 vs Sony 24-105 G

Recommended Posts

Hi All,

I just picked up the Sony A73 but haven't picked up a lens yet. As my first lens, I'm torn between the Tamron 28-75 and the Sony 24-105.

The thing is, I can get the Sony 24-105 f4 for the same price as the Tamron 28-75 due to a close friend working at Sony ("employee discount").

Any reason NOT to get this lens (24-105)? I realize it's f4 vs f2.8 (ISO can make up for it) but what about the bokeh? Are they similar? I've read that with the Sony you've got to increase your focal length to achieve similar bokeh results, which concerns me if I want to use the 24-105 for some portraiture photography (50mm/85mm).

I can likely only afford one lens for the next 12-18 months, although I could maybe swing the Sony FE 50mm f1.8 which is about 300$.

Thoughts? I've got to make a decision soon.

Thanks and looking forward to getting into this system, it sounds great!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was torn between the two when I was buying until I decided to buy the Tamron due to it being cheaper. If you can get the 24-105mm for the same price as the 28-75mm, I'd get the 24-105mm. It also depends on what type of photography you want to pursue and will you be doing video too. This is my opinion on both...


I've noticed the 4mm between the two lenses on the wide end makes a huge difference. If you plan on getting wide shots in general (Travel, City, Landscapes, Establishing shots for video etc..), the 24-105mm wins. Distortion is also noticeably better on the Sony.

The 28-75mm seems to be a little sharper and if you plan on achieving shallow depth with a shorter range of focal lengths (Mainly Portraits and Medium Close-Ups), the Tamron wins. I'm pleased with the portraits I've taken with the Tamron, but if you're seriously into portraits or plan on doing professional work (Weddings, Graduations, etc...), I wouldn't settle on the Tamron.

This video linked below by Max Yuryev helped me in make the decision in choosing the Tamron over the Sony (with a $400 price difference at the time)


I'd get 2 prime lenses; a wide portrait lens (24mm or 35mm; f1.4 or f1.8) and a medium telephoto (85mm f1.8) for focal length diversity, maximum sharpness, and better overall picture quality. You don't have to buy both off the bat. You can start with one of them and work your way up until you can afford another lens. I'm starting to get into Wedding Photography and I realized how tough it is shooting in low light or even slightly dimmed lighting.  

Check 2nd video linked below for more details


I haven't personally used the Sony but after traveling to California, Chicago, Mexico, New York and Dallas with the Tamron, I noticed it was tough getting a variety of shots on the go. I'll link some photos below

Hope this helps! 


1st-2nd and 4th-8th photo sets in the link below were taken with the tamron


All photos were taken with Tamron in the second link




Videos that helped me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-MoxfXAbsc by Max Yuryev

(Skip to 2:11)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQookYtenLo&t=5s by Chris Turner


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m sure the OP has long made his/her choice but I’ll add my 2 cents for those who may still be on the fence. And truth be told there’s a lot between these two lens to be on the fence about. I rented both lens’s before I bought. 

Here is my rationale for choosing the 24-105: I love to be wide and the difference between 24 and 28 is (at least for me, substantial). The longer reach of the 105 over the 75 of the Tamron not as much but since the 24-105 seems wonderfully sharp all the way out to 105, why not. I won’t use it as often but like I said....why not? The Sony auto focus is faster although not substantially so but (and this’ll be an intangible) somehow feels better/works better.  I can’t give a pragmatic explanation but it was there when I had both lens’s for comparison. By no means a deal breaker but “a thing” none the less.  The OSS on the Sony lens is uncannily good. For run and gun and hand-held low light situations I’m surprise (at times shocked) at what I can get away with. This most likely was the moment and reason I couldn’t go back to the Tamron.

Not to dismiss the Tamron in any way. It’s really spectacular. It’s tack, tack sharp. It has a great color profile. I believe it was a tad lighter. It’s cheaper and it’ll open up to 2.8 (although i’m not sure for my own personal purposes the OSS doesn’t outweigh the extra stop of light). I guess an argument could be made the the a Tamron might be better at shallower DOF but that would be dependent on shooting style and needs.

In the end I think either of these lens’s are as good or better than I am and it’d think it impossible to go wrong with either. For me however the Sony was a better choice.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Create New...