Tamron 20-40mm F2.8 Hands on with this BUDGET ZOOM lens.

It's become my favorite lens of all time which I was not expecting!

Very informative Chris. Thank you for this review

Something I learned with sadness - Sony active stabilization works ONLY with Sony lenses 😡

Sorry, F4 vs F2.8 is a huge difference. I own the 20-40mm, I think it's heavier than I thought. But still a great walk-around lens.

I have the a7iv and stuck between choosing the Tamron 17-28 or this 20-40, is there any way in your follow-up video you could be able to do some sort of compare and contrast?

Great first look video. Look forward to your full review after your Yosemite trip. Here are some future questions: 1) After your use in Yosemite, do you find you miss the 40-70mm range in real world experience while shooting the fire fall? 2) Usual, sharpness, chromatic aberration, distortion, vignette, flare/ghosting, sun stars analysis if you feel up to it; 3) Is this a good value compare to the Sony FE 20-70mm F/4, or 2 primes (Sony 20mm F1.8 + 40mm G f2.8); 4) If you have a Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8, is this close enough in terms of overlapping range to replace it? 5) Would you rather have this or the Sony FE 16-35mm f/4 PZ?

The 2.8 vs 4.0 debate is interesting because... it has no answer. You're right, people have camped out on those two apertures. At the end of the day, it's 100% situational per person. Seems like every time I mention I'm in the comments and the 16-35/4 or 24-105/4 are discussed... There's a 2.8 fanboy. Even your 20-70/4 video has them all going basically "why no 16-200/2.8 OSS for 1lb??"

Need 2.8? Buy one. Don't? Buy a 4.0. Super complicated?

Seems a great lens with the A7R5 - you can get 60mm at 30mp. It pretty much covers all my uses. I shoot my establishing and interior/exterior shots at 20mm because I don't like the distorted look of 16/18 - and Im at 50mm for product/detail/portrait.
... Im usually working at around F3.5 - so its bright enough for me.

I'd be interested in seeing some evening / twilight shots. For me, that's the big difference between this and the (also compact) f/4 zooms. I know, I know . . . high ISO performance today blows away high ISO from 15 years ago. But double the light is still double the light. I'm thinking this might make sense for me as a travel lens: small, relatively inexpensive, a bit of zoom for composition, and it's not something you have to put away when the sun goes down.

Traveling with 1 lens: the Sony 20-70 seems slightly more useful, but it's close.

Traveling with 2 lenses: Here, the Tammy 20-40 seems to pull ahead. I can bring a compact-ish telephoto and basically I'm set. With the Sony 20-70, I'd still be tempted to bring a faster wide angle prime and something with a bit more reach. To me, the Sony 20-70 seems like a nice "middle" lens in a 3-lens kit.

It’s good for crash zooms!

Please walk with the Active Stabilisation and see how good is the stabilisation.

I have the 35-150 so I bought this lens specifically to pair with the longer one. It is a great combination for me, as I use the longer lens 80% of the time anyway, but never know when I will need wider. The 20-40 is perfectly fine for my non-professional projects, both video and still.

Great job on the video Chris! Thanks for making it.

Imo this lens can become the first f/2.8 zoom for many full frame users.

From your earlier video, I started out with the Tamron 11-20mm on my a7IV and have noticed I keep it closer to the 20 end. So I bought the 20-40mm– thanks for catching up to me with this video! 🤣🤣 Now I have just received my semi-used-open-box special discounted Tamron 70-180mm F/2.8 so I have my triple-kit. Yes, the kit has a mid-range hole and your comment in this video about that being an important range for you was heard loud and clear. Funny thing, though, I shoot around that range with no regrets, so I think I'm okay with it. Loved you in this video getting out for us and showing the town and traffic lights in the rain. Thank you!

It's my main lens for the A7iv. Light, small, and wide enough for gimbal and hand held work. You need at least 20 for A7iv if you want to shoot 4k 60 because the crop turns it into 30-60mm. It's also a nice range for interviews and interior work where wide zooms are more useful. 2.8 with an extra stop of light is useful for event or doc work where you can't bring lights. It's funny you're concerned about the sharpness and the proceed to stack a satin and promist filter. 😅

"budget lens" lol it's damn near $800

Try the 200-600 zoom ring :) you can rotate it with one finger.

In Germany, the 20-70 f4 is 800€ (!) more expensive than the Tamron. It is ridiculous. Never ever I would go with the Sony.

Do you really want to trust a budget lens like that for a once in a lifetime photo opportunity like the fire falls?

I recently used a 16-35 f1.4 lens and I found out I was at 20mm really often...I was looking at the tamron 17-28mm to pair up with my tamron 28-75 but I have mix feelings at the moment.. 20mm is all I need. soooo. dont know

Been waiting for this video from you lol.... Haven't watched it but already excited lol

Pre-ordered the 20-70 and im not sure whether or not to be excited or nervous about getting this lens. Pleaseeee compare this 20-40 f2.8 vs 20-70 f4, especially when it comes to bokeh while vlogging :) totally missed national pizza day! Great video!

I doubt I have a use for it I have all the lens I need right now really. I have the 16-35GM, 35-150 Tamron, any my 'Safari' lens 150-500 Tamron, as well as the Tamron 28-75, and the 1.4 35GM. I keep thinking about the 50GM but the Tamron at 50 has done all I needed. I don't have a Gimbal for my main camera just a small one I put on the ZV-1or ZV-E10, and the Osmo for the iPhone.

It’s a great lens. But! Like all non Sony lenses, it seriously underperforms with Active Stabilization in video. Compare it to a Sony 20mm 1.8 in video with Active Stabilization in video, and it’s not even close. As much as I love having 3rd party options with the E mount system, I have no illusions that for video stabilization, there is a huge difference with how native lenses perform

Chris,you obviously are not excited to try out this lens ( much as was your opinion about other Tamron's ). I own this lens :I picked it up to use on my A7C as a moderately wide street lens. I bought to "replace" the Tamron 17-28 which I found frustrating to use as it was never long enough. Too much lens switching needed... A "budget lens"? - tell that to my bank account as the 20-40 is just over $1K with tax, in Ontario, Canada- yes, but the 20-70 F4 is even ( a lot!) more at half again ( $1,694.98 CAD with tax for an F4 lens!) i! I think the build quality on the 29-40 is much nicer than the older Tamron lenses - compare it to the 17-28 and you will soon see how Tamron's design aesthetic is evolving. It offers everything you need and nothing more and definitely the Tamron is weather sealed. Ha,ha, I did not take my camera out with me yesterday ( Pizza Day) as we were definitely enjoying UK weather but I did buy a new laptop and carried that around in the rain. Happy to report that the packaging on that was definitely weather sealed! Looking forward to seeing what more you can do with this lens but it probably is not one for you . I bought mine to go with my Tamron 28-200 for a compact travel kit.

thats my main lens for gimbal, amazing lens

So double stacking filters eh getting that unique look

Super interesting focal range… it’s an intriguing lens. Difference between black pro mist and satin? And why double stack?

Try weather sealing test