Видео

@@yellahbe for daytime sports I’d probably lean in favour of the 70-350. The range is a lot of fun and I think it’s a sharper lens. Backgrounds probably not as blurry at most focal lengths but I don’t think it’s worth changing. Both are good lenses each with a positive and negative compared to the other so it’s very close.

This is genuinely quite hard to answer because it’s quite subjective as to how happy each photographer is with higher ISO values. What I would say is that for anything beyond maybe 80mm, the shots weren’t getting lit by the flash due to my technique, so I upped the iso/exposure in post for those - they looked fine to my eye but personally I wouldn’t be a huge fan of this lens with flash as I wouldn’t be using the longer end of the range so would prefer a 24-70 to save some weight.

If it’s the 50mm I’ve shown in the video then I’d definitely favour the Tamron but I think it also depends on your usage. If it’s for a walkabout fun lens to use then the Sony 50mm is really lightweight and fun to play around with. The Tamron is more professional with a more robust build quality, faster autofocus and obviously a wider focal range. But in comparison to the Sony is much bigger and heavier. If you’re doing paid work I’d say the Tamron and get a flash if you need really low light stuff. If it’s just for fun, and a walkabout lens id maybe lean towards the 50. Bear in mind this comparison only showed centre sharpness, I wouldn’t say they perform equally. Overall the Tamron performs much better in several areas.

I never shot “night time” games that were floodlit, but I did do a couple of evening games around this time of year where daylight was on the minimal side and to be honest, on apsc especially, I don’t think either of these lenses would be fast enough in those conditions - your ISO would be somewhere around 8000 to be able to keep your shutter speed fast enough to freeze action, and on apsc 8000 iso would likely be too noisy for my taste. The f4 would maybe keep you around 6400 so that’s maybe closer to useable but it’s subjective. I’d almost ignore the f4.5 and see the super zoom as an f5.6-6.3 as it’s only f4.5 at the wide end, and most of the time you’d be zoomed in a bit. If you think you’d be doing a lot of night time games, I’d go for the Tamron 70-180 f2.8, either version. I’ve used and still got the first version and it was great for sports shots, gives you the extra light to keep the iso down, and was fast enough focus to get most shots in focus. I’d imagine the newer version is slightly better but you’d probably get the older version cheaper. It also gives you the benefit of if you ever went full frame, you’d not need to change the lens.

@@kingweddingmedia Hm... First, thank you for your response. I appreciate it. And I get it. The logical answer would be just the Tamron 70-180mm F2.8. It's the same price as the Sony 70-200mm F4. But unfortunately, for the moment as camera body, I only have a Sony A6000. Witch does have in body image stabilization. And the Tamron 70-180mm F2.8 also doesn't have stabilization. And to be at anything over 100-120mm without any image stabilization, it's just unusable and impossible... But thanks again for responding

@@danutbanut2476 you say that, but the photos would be absolutely fine at that shutter speed - it would just be the experience of what you’re seeing in preparation of taking the photo, which I appreciate can be difficult/less enjoyable without any stabilisation. In that case, I’d look at the G2 of the Tamron which does have vibration compensation. Might be a bit more cost but if you think you’d be doing a lot of evening games, the f2.8 will be well worth the extra cost.

Still one of my favourite lenses! I’ve got two copies as one stays on my gimbal camera all day but wanted one for photos too. If you like 24mm, get it! You won’t regret it, it’s a superb lens! Fast and really reliable autofocus, tiny, very lightweight and fun to use. Very, very sharp. I can’t fault it. There is a small review video on my channel somewhere with more sample images. I bought the 24 GM a couple of years ago but quite soon after sold it as I didn’t think it was as good as the Samyang in quite a few ways (I fancied the 1.4 aperture for extreme low light and a bit more subject separation) but to be honest, if it’s that dark, you’re better popping a flash on anyway! You’d get a bit more subject separation but at the cost of a much heavier lens, slower and in my experience less reliable autofocus on the GM, and also slightly less sharp from what I saw. The GM is not worth it in comparison IMO!

No I think you’ve misunderstood my thinking. If I’m doing just photography, I’d use a 50 on one camera and maybe a 24 on the other for example. However if I’m doing both photo and video at the same time, I’ve found that switching from photo mode to video mode, messing around with ND filters or cranking the shutter can be time consuming when on a wedding day you simply don’t have that time, so I was looking at the RV as being a way of having one camera solely as photography and the second camera set for video all day. The problem with doing that and a 50 as my main photo lens is sometimes a 50 just isn’t wide enough to cover everything, so I’d have to swap a lens out. Whereas using the RV and say a 35 would give me a wide enough lens to cover all the wider stuff, but punch in to apsc mode to still get a 50ish equivalent. Then that would free up the second camera to just do video.

@@kingweddingmedia this is what I do for everything on a7iv. its perfect

@@thefrenchexpedition yeah I have a7iv’s and love them. 14 MP in apsc mode is fine for some of the shots you’d typically get on a wedding day but I wouldn’t want to deliver half/most of my shots at that level of resolution. Funnily enough I’ve recently bought the Viltrox 27mm f1.2 (apsc lens) and predominantly bought it for video but I’ve been so impressed with it that it’s actually become my main photo lens now! Obviously gives approximately a 40mm FOV and that seems to sit really nicely for where I tend to work from. The images have something special to them, something I never that got that sort of feeling from with the 35mm GM. So my current set up is that Viltrox on my main body, then the new sigma 28-45mm f1.8 on the other body which covers all the video handheld stuff but also allows me to switch to photos when I don’t need video clips. I also keep a longer lens nearby for the ceremony/speeches where I need more reach - seems to be a really good mix and has worked well for me recently!

@@kingweddingmedia do you think the rolling shutter is worse on the a7r V than the a7 IV?

@@thefrenchexpedition it apparently is - I haven’t noticed any at all in either camera although I don’t do many panning type shots where you’d maybe see it. Most of my handheld shots are as static as I can hold it or if it’s a gimbal shot it’ll be walking with the couple, or a parallax type shot. A lot of wedding stuff is quite slow paced though, you need to move quite quickly to see any rolling shutter so it’s never been a concern for me.

It’s great value for sure! The Sony has faster autofocus and is sharper across the frame at f1.4 but if a 50 isn’t going to be your main lens then I’d say the Samyang is definitely worth going for.

I honestly now see this as a real 50/50 or pros and cons each way. In terms of missing shots from changing lenses - I would say yes but not from changing lens, more missed a potential shot or two because I didn’t have a long enough lens on at the time, when I use primes I tend to stick to what’s on for that part of the day, then switch if it’s a transition point of the wedding. Start of this wedding season I’ve actually started off with the Tamron 28-75 as my main lens, and the Sony 50mm GM on my second body and that’s really worked well. If you were to just use one zoom lens, the issue here would be low light where you maybe don’t want to use flash (church ceremony or hotel speeches for example). An f1.4 lens does make a big difference here and you can always crop a bit if necessary. What I think I’ve liked about doing one zoom and one prime so far this season is the 50 can pretty much do anything and everything, but the zoom gives me that flexibility and quick variety. It’s a tough call for sure, and I honestly think the best thing to do is go with the type of lens combo you’re most comfortable with!

Yeah I don’t think it would be any use for night games even with floodlights. I just had a manfrotto monopod with a ball head attached, pretty simple setup but works well.

Sony A7iv which is 33MP.

Yeah I much prefer the 28-75. Lighter, more fun to handle/use and I think sometimes 35 isn’t quite wide enough. Tempted to get the 70-180 G2, have the first version just now and it’s good!

I haven’t used this one in lower light, but did once use the 200-600 which is a similar aperture range in an evening game (so not floodlights but lower light). I ended up not using it for the rest of the match and sticking to the tamron for its 2.8 aperture at that game. Since you need a fast shutter you really need a 2.8 aperture of wider for lower light sports I’d say!

Yeah I’ve shot a few events and couple portrait sessions with the RV now and I’m very happy with it. I haven’t noticed any difference in the dynamic range between it and the A7iv which I’m used to so that’s a big win. I’ve yet to really challenge it for low light/high ISO performance but from what I have seen so far the differences are minimal. For me, the worst thing about it compared to the A7iv is the sound/feel of the shutter, it feels quite weak (hard to explain). But if that’s my only “gripe” then that’s hugely positive over what my initial concerns were with buying it. Yeah the tamron 35-150 wasn’t for me. I’ve actually gone back to the 28-75 G2 and have been loving using it. I am more of a wider shooter though so it makes more sense. I really like the 70-180, also been tempted to get the G2 of that but can’t justify it yet!

yeah from what I've done so far I think that will be the case. I actually wasn't interested in the 61MP images this can do, I use medium RAW, but it's the fact it also gives 26MP in apsc mode, effectively making it two cameras in one that really interested me. I still need to do some more testing, particularly in low light as potential noise was another concern, but again early indications are really promising here too! Really pleased with it so far!

I’d agree the vast majority of clients aren’t going to care or notice - and that’s a completely valid point in favour of using this or any other zoom. It’s me that notices/is bothered by it and that’s one of the reasons that leads me to prefer primes. I find I actually get more variety from using primes - when I use zooms I tend to find myself zooming to a similar framing most of the time, whereas with a prime I’ll get variation through being “forced” into the framing that prime has at that moment. I think during a ceremony I could see a good argument to favour a zoom as you could be restricted on where you can move to, but for most of the day I’ll have dual harness with one wider prime and one more telephoto prime. It makes my shooting more deliberate of reaching for the camera for the type of look I want at that point. Just my personal preference on how to shoot events like weddings.

Both shots have the exact same editing done to them - I’m a wedding photographer and have presets I use for certain scenarios. These images were taken at the same venue with the same lighting so the same preset was used - both images therefore having been treated identically in editing. There may be some minor variation in the final white balance and exposure but that’ll be the only differences. This isn’t a clinical lab test of each lens, this is literally just some real world images with me using them as I would for my job. To call it misleading is completely unfair as I’ve simply shown what I got from the lens on each occasion, in the way that I typically would shoot that scenario. I didn’t set out to compare these two lenses, the first wedding was with the Tamron, the second was with the samyang after I’d been left disappointed with the results the Tamron got. After the second wedding I compared more closely and saw significantly better results with the samyang, and felt that was worth showing in case anyone else was considering each of these lenses. It was only one wedding for each lens though, so not a huge sample size, but I don’t want to risk future wedding shots by using a lens I know didn’t work very well for that purpose at a previous wedding. I’ll use what I feel gives me the most confidence and reliability.

Obviously different focal lengths but the 50mm f1.4 mk ii is a much better lens than the 75. The 75 is good, but I found it’s focus was a bit too slow for subjects moving at any decent pace

Correct, I’m just here to take part, not take over!

@@kingweddingmedia I never said you have to take over just try to improve your skill like buy a better setup tweak your settings and practice

@@Phantom12099 yeah I just play for fun - I don’t have the time to put in the time I’d need to improve significantly. If I can get the odd win here or there that’s good enough for me.

Sony’s eye autofocus on their mirrorless bodies is pretty spectacular - it’s not impossible to miss and sometimes it will pick up something else in the scene if it can’t make out an eye, but if you have a decent level of light it’s pretty much perfect. Trust me, the autofocus issues here are definitely not a fault of the camera system. Having used both DSLRs and mirrorless, in my opinion the autofocus options and capabilities of a good mirrorless system is miles ahead of any optical viewfinder.

Why does anyone buy anything? I bought it to see if it could fit my way of working better than what I was doing up to that point - my intrigue was finding out if this could replace my need for a dual harness two camera set up as I sometimes feel like carrying two cameras (with flashes on top) can be a bit of a nuisance as I’m wary of bumping one off a table/person etc, so if one lens could do it all I could revert to a one camera set up. I feel it doesn’t tick all the boxes it needs to for me, so I’ve sold it. I find I mainly shoot between 24-85mm range with occasional 135 usage. I’ve found 35 isn’t wide enough in some situations, so I’d either need to swap lenses or carry a second camera. I’ve found the f2 isn’t actually letting in as much light as other lenses set at f2, so that benefit is already limited, I don’t tend to use the longer end that much.

@@kingweddingmedia Thank you. I asked because I'm exactly like you. Prefer primes, use 2 bodies with 35 and 65 etc. And I just sat there and thought about this 35-150 lol.

@@dergelenkspreizer5272 it might be worth renting and seeing how you like it? It does have plenty of positives - I tend to use a 50 the most, then either a 24 or 35 on my other body, then swap the 50 for an 85 if I’m outdoors or in a big room. So it can be a bit of a pain swapping lenses if you’re in and out all day, hence why I was tempted by it - but there’s just something about the look of a 1.4 that can’t be matched imo! I went back to the Tamron 28-75 G2 as my “all in one” option as that covers my most used focal lengths but to be honest, it usually stays on a video tripod camera and rarely gets used for photos.

1/250th is a fast enough shutter speed for a bride/bridesmaid walking down an aisle at a wedding - the 50+ weddings I’ve done where other lenses have been used with 1/250th and had the majority of shots razor sharp in these scenarios would confirm that. It’s 100% not motion blur causing lack of sharpness in these images - spray and pray is a wild suggestion, I use the medium burst mode which isn’t even challenging the camera (and shouldn’t for most lenses). This, coupled with the fact that I had some (minimal) that were razor sharp but the majority slightly out of focus shows it’s not motion blur, it’s that the lens isn’t keeping up perfectly with a fairly slow moving subject. That Samyang 135 isn’t the fastest in this scenario either but bear in mind it opens up to f1.8 so the depth of field is going to be much shallower there and really make it difficult to keep razor sharp. I wouldn’t use the samyang for these types of shots - in future if I want a long lens for these moments I’d use the Tamron 70-180 as it tracks moving subjects much better. Your A7iii is a 24MP sensor, the A7iv is 33MP which will be ever so slightly more demanding - but still invalidates any comparison you’re trying to make with your experience with the lens. I’m not saying this lens is terrible, but for what it’s build as (an all in one lens to do it all) I simply found it wasn’t good in these areas - and to me that means it’s not worth keeping as other tools I have do the job better. As for the screen recording - yes for the viewer on RUclips that’s not ideal as you’re seeing a compressed version and not the actual file but I can guarantee you those shots were not 100% sharp, and also guarantee you it’s not down to motion blur (the cheerleading shots yes, but not the wedding ones). It really does beggar belief when so many people get so emotional over someone else’s findings with a lens then try to argue that they’re wrong - this is what I’ve found with this copy of the lens. That can’t be argued. It could be a bad copy, it could be you’ve got a great copy, it could be the perfect lens for many - but for me, it didn’t do a good enough job in what I wanted/needed it to do in order for me to deem it worth keeping. I prefer using two primes on two bodies over this Tamron on one body. That’s my opinion so there’s literally no point in debating that. If you love the lens and it works wonderfully for you then fantastic!

​ @kingweddingmedia There aren't many people here commenting, ...but If I see or hear things I can't agree with, I will leave a comment. I don't care what you use or prefer for the job. Everyone has their own preferences. If you can see lines/streaks, that is motion blur, end of story. It amazes me you can't recognize it. OOF images would be uniformly soft. It gets very difficult to judge the plane of focus once you have motion blur in the mix. Your experience with past lenses, situations don't count - the images tell the story - motion blur - either caused by the moving subject, your shaking hands or an error with the IBIS in combination with that lens. Pic 1 has diagonal motion blur. Pic 2 has slight vertical motion blur. Pic 3 is OOF + diagonal motion blur. Pic 4 is OOF. Plane of focus is on the body - ears, not the face. Pic 5 looks okay. Pic 6 has diagonal motion blur. Pic 7 is OOF + slight motion blur. Pic 8 has diagonal motion blur. "​ Your A7iii is a 24MP sensor, the A7iv is 33MP which will be ever so slightly more demanding - but still invalidates any comparison you’re trying to make with your experience with the lens." I don't agree with that one either.

@@sulev111 ok bud.

@@kingweddingmedia Ok what? Do you atleast admit there is motion blur in your images? Just out of curiosity. No need to get emotional or defensive.

@@GolfWhisky As they say, If you can't beat fear, just do it scared. I shot my first full day wedding in 2019 with a Pentax K3 and rented K1 combo. Needless to say AF was my biggest issue. But it turned out okay in the end. Take the worst focusing lens for Sony and chances are high it focus better than the best lens for Pentax :D Now I've done about 25 full day + 30 smaller ones in addition to all the other stuff (portrait, familisessions, studiosessions, concerts, parties etc).

Don’t think so, I have an issue with my eye and the drops I have are blurring my vision.

Ha ha ha I wouldn’t say that but thanks!

Not sure I could get to champion! 😂

How about diamond

@@Kiwicosie I think I’m already through diamond, I’m in Elite but finding a lot of sweats now!

No wins today!

Not tonight, tomorrow likely either before or after the Liverpool game.

Chicken on top!! Let’s go!! 🎷

No helmet. I’ve mounted a Sony fdr x-3000 onto the hot shoe of the camera body.

Thanks … do you prefer it over the go pro or action 4. I’ve not heard as much about the Sony action cam. I love the form factor

@@teachingrounds for me yes but the comparable models all do much the same job as each other. You’ll struggle to find an fdr x3000 anywhere as I don’t think Sony sell them anymore. Not sure why as they’re fantastic little cameras

I use certain spot (medium), continuous autofocus and the tracking as well so I effectively “focus and recompose” but since it’s in continuous AF it’s fine if it’s a moving subject.

that's what i like about games like this, it's not always the better player that wins, sometimes it's the one who has a better strategy or makes better decisions in the moment.