Camera Lens Review: Tamron SP 15-30mm, Canon EF 16-35mm & EF 17-40mm and Sigma 24mm

Great review video of some wide angle lens. Watch and see which one might be best for you.

Comments

shaolin95 says:

What about the Tamron 15-30mm IQ across the frame vs the FE 16-35mm F4 on my A7ii?

Helge Larsen says:

I love my SP Tamron 15-30mm. Why? Because this lense is superb. Give me pictures with extra quality. If you will act as a pro you must buy SP Tamron 15-30mm. I recomend to visite my facebook site. Helge Larsen (the one  with the red rose). Have a look on my picture album then you understand why I recomend SP Tamron 15-30mm. Landscape and night pictures. Forget the weight. You can buy yourself a carry bag. And then no problem with the weight. I use 3 lenses today. This lense and a Sigma Fullformat lence, and Tamron SP 150-600mm zoom lense mostly, and are satisfied. I own a Nikon D610. Fullformat.

Samuel Hung says:

i went for the Tamron 15-30 after watching all the review, because i do a lot of milky way shooting, and sometimes i feel that my Tamron 28-75 is not wide enough. All i all, I absolutely LOOOOVEE the image quality, but yes, it is one heavy lens.

Darryn Wayne says:

This is your reason for not choosing the Tamron???? Because of it's weight???? HahahahahahahahahahHHHahahahahHHahahaha

aokaddaoc says:

Using a Ultrawide in APS-C is ….. hilarious

Harpreet Singh Saggu says:

Hey Toby, really appreciate all the effort you put in making these videos and I have been really following your advice. I have a 70d wanted to know if there is a wide angle lens you can suggest

L BP says:

i always enjoy your videos. Do you still recommend the 16-35f4 today for landscapes. Or has it changed in ur line up. Also what lens today would be good for nite sky. i want to take just 2 lens on a trip. one is perhaps the 16-35 f4 and another one like a 1.4 perhaps wide. any recommendations

Dominique Flack says:

Hi, I am a novice. I will be going to photograph the Northern Lights in Iceland with my new Canon 70D. I believe that I will need a 16-35mm. I have a 16-300mm Tamron, will this do the job or do I need to buy a 16-35mm? Or what do you recommend? Thanks.

ted tedsen says:

i had the rokinon/samyang 14 and now i have the tamron 15-30mm on my d810 acording to dxomarck the rokinon/samyang is the sharpest wide angel on the marked it resolves more megapixels on my 36.3 sensor than zaiss 15MMzaiss 14mm canon and the tamron also

Otniel Santiago says:

This is a wonderfully informative video, great job and thank you.

John Hnatek says:

Again why did you leave out from the comparison the "elephant in the room" the Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 14-24mm f/2.8G ED Lens? You must know someone with a Nikon Body or rent one.

Serhiy 123 says:

I'm not often comment something, but this is a very Useful video. I love position of storyteller and highlighted points. It's rare when you watch BLA-BLA video with interest.
BUT!! having all these in front of you and not providing us MTF 50realworld(better) sharpness test with different focusing distance field curvate test +CA test + some IS efficency test is …hmm… BAD.
Why not neccessary most important points it is quite essential for choosing UW lens.

Nicolaas Strik says:

I absolutely love my Tamron 15-30mm on my D800! I now have the Tamron Trinity (w/24-70 + 70-200). It is all I need for my landscape photography.

Erik Nyberg says:

Kind of an odd choice of Sigma prime when the 12-24 II is both full frame, wider than the rest (except the 11-24) and less than a third of the price of the new Canon.

floex831 says:

Love the show Toby but to put a lens down because it's auto focus. That's not a photographer-like thing to do! Now it may not be practical for some applications and hence some photographers may not want it but the lack of AF does not make it a bad lens. 

DML Channel says:

Canon…cAnon…caNon… CANON… CAnon…canoN… I was busy typing this when PhotoRec Toby said his favorite lens would be… oddly enough, take a guess, maybe, a Canon.

PhotoRec Toby… there is this company called NIKON. This company (NIKON) makes a 14-24mm f/2.8 lens which seems to be the benchmark ALL ultra wide angle lenses are measured against.

This company…Nikon… also makes a two other ultra wide angle lenses, one lens is an f2.8 and the other is an f4. Both accept Nikon or aftermarket 77mm filters.

However, they are not Canon lenses.

Kandlelight Chaos says:

This is an amazing review, probably the best UVA one I've watched.Thanks for the effort!

Kryn Sporry says:

Honestly, I mostly see a spec comparison with basic pro's and con's for generic wide angle lenses, and all lenses seem "excellent", with vignetting being mentioned casually for some lenses. If I were to have to choose based on this review, I would not be able to.

Fahad B. Sakhawat says:

Thank you man…………………., I will go for 16-35 f4 , canon.

DoomedRace999 says:

+PhotoRec Toby:

Hi,
I am a huge fan of your reviews and videos. 

Now I am really looking forward to buy a Ultra Wide Angle Lens.
Currently there is a new player in the market.

tamron 15-30mm f2.8 

Its been a while it came in the market, but surprisingly nobody has reviewed it for its picture quality.
Because I am in a dilemma, that whether I should buy this tamron or should I go for the Nikon 16-35mm f4. Because both of them belong to the same price range.

I will be really thankful to you. I need you to advise me as soon as possible.
Because right now I am in California. and will be here for the next 30 days. 

If I find your review helpful then I shall buy this lens for my landscape. before I go back to New Zealand.
Weight of the lens is not an issue for me. What matters to me is the image quality.

So Please Please Please tell me which one should I go for.

Thank you.

DoomedRace999 says:

Hi,
I am a huge fan of your reviews and videos. 

Now I am really looking forward to buy a Ultra Wide Angle Lens.
Currently there is a new player in the market.

tamron 15-30mm f2.8 

Its been a while it came in the market, but surprisingly nobody has reviewed it for its picture quality.
Because I am in a dilemma, that whether I should buy this tamron or should I go for the Nikon 16-35mm f4. Because both of them belong to the same price range.

I will be really thankful to you. I need you to advise me as soon as possible.
Because right now I am in California. and will be here for the next 30 days. 

If I find your review helpful then I shall buy this lens for my landscape. before I go back to New Zealand.
Weight of the lens is not an issue for me. What matters to me is the image quality.

So Please Please Please tell me which one should I go for.

Thank you.

tean tan says:

I agree with MNaviator,
You could have include in this review the crop lens Sigma 18-35mm f1.8. It is an outstanding lens at about $900 and light compared to the FF lenses here.

ronnie tjikoeri says:

If i got a f2.8 lens set at f4 and a f4 lens set at f4 will there be difference in exposure ? 

Korey Rowe says:

Great review and really appreciate the good info concerning video. 

Nikolay London Professional photographer says:

I found this photography lens review very competent!!!

goldrace10 says:

Very interesting, great review !

@shaftinaction says:

Thanks for review Toby. 

Charles Talhelm says:

Something I've noticed with a few f/2.8 lenses for stars: They get bad coma in the corners, tamron's 24-70 was unacceptable at 2.8 the stars became seagulls and ufos, I've heard this is also a problem with canon's 16-24 f/2.8 and it doesn't clean up until you hit f/4…may as well go with the f/4 then!  I liked the tokina except for all the flare I'd get from nearly any direct light source, it wasn't good for the city at night.  I use the rokinon 14mm and really want to try the 20mm because it is even a wider aperture yet but has slightly less distortion.

Dennis Sigona says:

Great review and well done!!

nagol5178 says:

I never buy a lens that won't allow a filter. I like the option to do video as well as to get smooth water in long exposures. Although, I must say, my Zeiss 16-35 FE has a hard time getting the Tiffen ND variable filter on it. Because the filter is really thin. However, it goes with some effort. I've never been a fan of glass that protrudes out. The Zeiss has that kind of design on the inside of it. However, the final glass piece is flat. I don't care about built in lens hoods.

Write a comment

*