I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+

aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+This is hard, cause honestly you will need both. If I were to take two, it would be 20-70 plus the Tamron 70-180.If you take the 28-200, you loose a little image quality compared to the set I suggested, but more importantly, you lose the wide range from 20mm to 28mm which is almost essential for Hawaii.

I took my 28-200 to Maui last year for shots of the kids surfing. This was a waste as I really needed a 400-600 and a tripod.Most shots are going to benefit from something in the 20-70 range. With the beautiful sunsets you can get there, I would also want as fast a lens as I can bring. My golden hour shots are always the best images I bring home from Maui.For my upcoming trip I am bringing just my 40/2.5. Or maybe my 24/1.8.

I have both. There is a significant difference in feel (balance?) that makes the weight difference feel more substantial.  Picking between the two for a trip, I would take the 20-70 every time.   My 28-200 is going in a closet to be used as a telephoto zoom only, or maybe going to eBay

aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+I have both lenses and recommend the 28-200mm. It’s a better lens for travel IMO. I’d rather have the extra reach than the wide. You could also bring a something like Samyang 24/1.8 or Sony 20/1.8 for wide and indoors.I take two lenses. Sony 16-35/4 PZ G and Tamron 28-200mm.

aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+That’s tough. If you rarely shoot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+ then maybe the 28-200 plus a 20mm/1.8? The 20-70 is perfect for a person who shoots in that range but if the only part you really gel with is 50-70 there are better options.

DP13Photo wrote:aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+I have both lenses and recommend the 28-200mm. It’s a better lens for travel IMO. I’d rather have the extra reach than the wide. You could also bring a something like Samyang 24/1.8 or Sony 20/1.8 for wide and indoors.I take two lenses. Sony 16-35/4 PZ G and Tamron 28-200mm.Me too!

I bought my wife the A7C and the 28-200 lens for Alaska cruise and she was totally satisfied with the combo. I had the A1 and the 70-180 plus two others. I used that lens at 80% of the time.

aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+This is complicated because you appear unclear. You have typically not shot wider than 20, but how many of your pics end up being 20-28, and how happy would you be losing that FL? On the other side, how many of your shots are above 70; or let's say above 100, and how happy would you be giving that up? Its really a question of what you envision yourself shooting. Are you happier to compromise on the wide side or on the long side?Both seem like great lenses. I had the 28-200 for a while and loved it; will definitely buy another super zoom when one I like comes out.

Jason Crawford wrote:I took my 28-200 to Maui last year for shots of the kids surfing. This was a waste as I really needed a 400-600 and a tripod.Most shots are going to benefit from something in the 20-70 range. With the beautiful sunsets you can get there, I would also want as fast a lens as I can bring. My golden hour shots are always the best images I bring home from Maui.For my upcoming trip I am bringing just my 40/2.5. Or maybe my 24/1.8.thanks -  I have a 24 but want something a bit more versatile. Also have a 100-400 equivalent (but in different brand)- will definitely take this (but rarely use a tripod), just wanted something in normal range - and for my A7c - I like the reach of 200 but the close focus of 20-70. my all time most used. lens is probably the canon ef 100 macro - hence the dilemma.

someguy50 wrote:I have both. There is a significant difference in feel (balance?) that makes the weight difference feel more substantial. Picking between the two for a trip, I would take the 20-70 every time. My 28-200 is going in a closet to be used as a telephoto zoom only, or maybe going to eBayyeah - I have been looking to buy the 28-200 for ages but just never pulled the trigger - which is what makes me think the 20-70 might be better for me. I prefer the little lenses that are well balanced

DP13Photo wrote:aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+I have both lenses and recommend the 28-200mm. It’s a better lens for travel IMO. I’d rather have the extra reach than the wide. You could also bring a something like Samyang 24/1.8 or Sony 20/1.8 for wide and indoors.I take two lenses. Sony 16-35/4 PZ G and Tamron 28-200mm.thanks the 16-35 is definitely not for me - the only time I have used that focal length is for a crop sensor. I have a 24 - it will possibly come for low light although I struggle with that focal. length - I was actually thinking that if I liked the 20-70 I could get rid of the 24 and replace with a focal length (35, 50, 85) that I might find easier to useand a 100-400 equivlent just contemplating the middle range - and perhaps looking for an excuse for a new lens

Kansas Ron wrote:I bought my wife the A7C and the 28-200 lens for Alaska cruise and she was totally satisfied with the combo. I had the A1 and the 70-180 plus two others. I used that lens at 80% of the time.yes the 70-180 really really appeals to me as does the 70-200. I would probably use it more too but I have a few lenses in that range just not 2.8 unless they are primes- I use them a lot.. I think my kids would prefer the 28-200 to use themselves but the would prefer me to take out a smaller lens (its less embarrassing!)I suppose I could get a 70-180 and take it with the 24 I have.

travelinbri_74 wrote:aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+This is complicated because you appear unclear. You have typically not shot wider than 20, but how many of your pics end up being 20-28, and how happy would you be losing that FL? On the other side, how many of your shots are above 70; or let's say above 100, and how happy would you be giving that up? Its really a question of what you envision yourself shooting. Are you happier to compromise on the wide side or on the long side?Both seem like great lenses. I had the 28-200 for a while and loved it; will definitely buy another super zoom when one I like comes out.yep unclear I am - which is why I decided to post - usually I am really clear in what I need and just buy. I don't think it is the 20-28 I really like about the 20-70 it is the small size and close focus and constant f4.the 50mm f1.4 is my most used lens (20,000+ photos), 100mm macro second most used and the EF16-35 2.8 on crop camera third most used (but I think most of this was on holiday and it was my first zoom) followed by EF 24-70 2.8 (but this is too big and heavy for a holiday walk around I took it to NY and never used it which is why I bought the 7ac) And then the 100-400.the appeal of the 28-200 is the range but the f5.6 puts me off - I have a few lenses but no superzoom.not sure what I plan to shoot - never been to Hawaii but in Fiji I used 24mm (on crop sensor) mostly, followed by 100 (macro) then 70mm and in Darwin 800mm followed by 100-400 - that said the Darwin trip did not include my children Hawaii will and I like to take photos. of them when they let me.

aagirlz wrote:travelinbri_74 wrote:aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+This is complicated because you appear unclear. You have typically not shot wider than 20, but how many of your pics end up being 20-28, and how happy would you be losing that FL? On the other side, how many of your shots are above 70; or let's say above 100, and how happy would you be giving that up? Its really a question of what you envision yourself shooting. Are you happier to compromise on the wide side or on the long side?Both seem like great lenses. I had the 28-200 for a while and loved it; will definitely buy another super zoom when one I like comes out.yep unclear I am - which is why I decided to ' post - usually I am really clear in what I need and just buy. I don't think it is the 20-28 I really like about the 20-70 it is the small size and close focus and constant f4.the 50mm f1.4 is my most used lens (20,000+ photos), 100mm macro second most used and the EF16-35 2.8 on crop camera third most used (but I think most of this was on holiday and it was my first zoom) followed by EF 24-70 2.8 (but this is too big and heavy for a holiday walk around I took it to NY and never used it which is why I bought the 7ac) And then the 100-400.the appeal of the 28-200 is the range but the f5.6 puts me off - I have a few lenses but no superzoom.not sure what I plan to shoot - never been to Hawaii but in Fiji I used 24mm (on crop sensor) mostly, followed by 100 (macro) then 70mm and in Darwin 800mm followed by 100-400 - that said the Darwin trip did not include my children Hawaii will and I like to take photos. of them when they let me.Also consider dust and moisture sealing. Windblown sand and sea spray are very common. Especially on a snorkel or sunset cruise.

aagirlz wrote:someguy50 wrote:I have both. There is a significant difference in feel (balance?) that makes the weight difference feel more substantial. Picking between the two for a trip, I would take the 20-70 every time. My 28-200 is going in a closet to be used as a telephoto zoom only, or maybe going to eBayyeah - I have been looking to buy the 28-200 for ages but just never pulled the trigger - which is what makes me think the 20-70 might be better for me. I prefer the little lenses that are well balancedIf that 70-200 isn't crucial for you, then it would be an easy choice for the 20-70. 28-200 is too much for me to carry around all the time on my a7c, but the 20-70 is nice and I love the extra bit on the end. Huge difference between 20 and 28

aagirlz wrote:travelinbri_74 wrote:aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+This is complicated because you appear unclear. You have typically not shot wider than 20, but how many of your pics end up being 20-28, and how happy would you be losing that FL? On the other side, how many of your shots are above 70; or let's say above 100, and how happy would you be giving that up? Its really a question of what you envision yourself shooting. Are you happier to compromise on the wide side or on the long side?Both seem like great lenses. I had the 28-200 for a while and loved it; will definitely buy another super zoom when one I like comes out.yep unclear I am - which is why I decided to post - usually I am really clear in what I need and just buy. I don't think it is the 20-28 I really like about the 20-70 it is the small size and close focus and constant f4.Why not look at the Sigma 28-70/2.8? It’s slightly lighter and you get f2.8 which is yet another stop faster and it’s close focusing is good. Not quite as good at close distances as the 20-70 however it is quite respectable. The Tamron 28-75 G2 has almost the same close focusing but it is a bit heavier than the 20-70. I personally wouldn’t think a 20-70 makes as much sense to someone who isn’t likely to use the wide end very much.

aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+I have not been to Hawaii, but if I were to go these are my thoughts.If you rarely shoot wider than 20 mm and want one lens, then sure a super zoom makes sense like you said the 28-200 idea.If you like the shooting wide to telephoto idea And you say Yes to a 28-200 mm, then I think do need 200 mm. Could the 24-105 do what I want?Then I have to ask myself will I do any Macro, say for flowers for example if that even matters. Do I need to address that. Here I think about the lenses close focus distance if not an actual macro lens.*Do I need to think about the potential for rainy days and how to protect gear. If weather is bad will I even take my camera gear from the hotel outside?*Here I suggest the Olympus TG-6 waterproof p&s for beach and pool and or rainy days if you are out on a hike if actually shooting matters. Just an idea.*IF you have any concern of changing lenses and condensation/ humidity on sensor. You want to travel easy, you Prefer 50 mm plus AND sensor size does not matter:Idea, maybe the Sony RX-10 IV*********This is one reason I really like the Sony 70-200 GM II and Sony 100-400, I think really easy to travel with for what they are if we are talking 50 mm plusIF 20 mm is rare I think the 24-105 with the sony 1000-400 is an idea.

From someone who just did a trip to the islands, a 200mm reach is going to be more useful than a 20mm wide.   I took my 28-200, 28-75,14/2.8, and 35/1.8.   Used the 28-200 the vast majority of the time.  I also recommend a dashcam or window mount for your phone for the Road to Hana should you do that.

LenRivers wrote:aagirlz wrote:I am considering a new lens for my A7C - tossing up between the sony 20-70 and tamron 28-200. i want it as a general walk around but also specifically for travel - the first trip will likely be to Hawaii which I have booked for later in the year. lightweight is fairly important to me as is range. Any advice particularly from those who may have both. I typically have rarely shot wider than 20mm and prefer 50+I have not been to Hawaii, but if I were to go these are my thoughts.If you rarely shoot wider than 20 mm and want one lens, then sure a super zoom makes sense like you said the 28-200 idea.If you like the shooting wide to telephoto idea And you say Yes to a 28-200 mm, then I think do need 200 mm. Could the 24-105 do what I want?it could be.Then I have to ask myself will I do any Macro, say for flowers for example if that even matters. Do I need to address that. Here I think about the lenses close focus distance if not an actual macro lens.yes this is likely I also have 50 macro and older canon ef but am unlikely to take the latter and I am usually happy with a zoom with a good reproduction ratio. this is what appeals about the 20-70Do I need to think about the potential for rainy days and how to protect gear. If weather is bad will I even take my camera gear from the hotel outside?having lived in tropical place - yes always think about it - we have a 10 +year old point and shoot that is good enough for underwater. I am not sure how good the weather sealing on a7c is thoughHere I suggest the Olympus TG-6 waterproof p&s for beach and pool and or rainy days if you are out on a hike if actually shooting matters. Just an ideacan buy a new lens - but not new camera (long story)- first bought camera gear living I n high humidity - not concerned about this.IF you have any concern of changing lenses and condensation/ humidity on sensor. You want to travel easy, you Prefer 50 mm plus AND sensor size does not matter:Idea, maybe the Sony RX-10 IV*********This is one reason I really like the Sony 70-200 GM II and Sony 100-400, I think really easy to travel with for what they are if we are talking 50 mm plusIF 20 mm is rare I think the 24-105 with the sony 1000-400 is an idea.yes it is an option both the 28-200 and 24-105 are significantly cheaper than the 20-70.