Tamron17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD for Sony Mirrorless Full Frame/APS-C E Mount, Black (AFA046S700)

This lens and the Tamron 50-400 are the only two lenses I bring on my landscape photography trips. They share the same filter size. I got a magnetic CPL filter and swapping it between the two lenses only takes a few seconds.I have used it on a bunch photo projects and the images are fantastic from f2.8 onward. I shoot most of my landscapes between f8 and f11. However, I had a specific project that called for all the images to have very shallow depth of filed. I used this lens at f2.8 and never questioned the quality. The lens delivered with flying colors.I do not do weddings anymore but was asked to do one a few months ago. I brought this lens and my Tamron 28-75 G2 and my 70-180 G1. The lenses performed flawlessly and I got fantastic images out of all three.

I got tired of carting around a case of primes, thought I would try a couple zooms instead. This lens covers the wide angle range nicely. Coupled with a Sigma 24 - 70 f/2.8, and I am set for most shoots. Pretty sharp for "budget" lenses, they work well with the FX6 face-tracking auto focus. Am I lazy or just getting old?

Love this lens! It was perfect for what I needed it for!

I wanted a wide zoom for my a7c. The decision between the Tamron, sigma, and sony lens really didn't come to price for me. I wanted something as compact as possible. Frankly I was a bit worried if I'd not like the Tamron b/c I don't like cheap feeling lightweight gears. But I took the plunge and have no regrets. I use this lens for video, and I always use autofocus so the lack of the M/AF switch on the lens is not a factor for me. The lens is light, but does not feel cheap, unless you have it right next to the new Sony 12-24. I was really torn b/c I like the sony so much! But I ended up with the Tamron b/c it's 1/2 the weight and for my video purposes, I can't tell a difference in the picture quality. Perhaps to very picky photographers you can tell the difference. But I bought the a7c for the small size and not matter how much I like the sony lens, it's too heavy for my set up. I do wish the Tamron was a bit wider. The 12mm wide end of the sony would allow shooting in much tighter spaces. But, can't have everything. The Tamron is sharp. Great in low light. The focus is nearly silent...I can't hear it at all in my videos. And is less than 1/3 the price of the sony.

For the price you cannot beat this lens. Yes, you're sacrificing 1mm on the wide end and 7mm on the long end compared to something like Sony's 16-35 f/2.8 GM, but at $899 there is nothing close that matches this Tamron 17-28 f/2.8. I'm not a technical photographer, and while I care about vignetting and distortion, it's not something I look at closely because it's easily correctable in Lightroom. With that being said, I really don't notice any extreme faults. Focus is incredibly fast, and at f/8 and beyond you're gonna get a sharp image across the frame. Bokeh at f/2.8, while not necessarily a popular necessity for a wide zoom, is very nice looking (see the first image I've included). Unless you absolutely need OIS or those extra mm on either end, this is the lens for you. At $1300 cheaper than the GM, just buy it - you won't regret it.

I agree with the some of the other reviews that say this lens a bit overrated. I say that because, while it gets the wide angle job done quite well, its a bit handicapped by its short zoom range and somewhat odd image quality. I will say the image quality is not bad at all but it is also not great. The images this lens are a bit uninspired in my opinion. It can be a pretty sharp lens when used correctly but it suffers from extreme vignetting at most apertures and somewhat oddly shaped distortion.Both of these deficiencies can be corrected in software but the amount of vignette and distortion correction required was a bit too much for my standards.At the end of the day this is another modern zoom that is seemingly more of an engineering exercise than an attempt to make a tool that can provide unique rendered leading to magical images. The images it renders are a bit flat, and bit wonky, and a bit boring. Sharp? Yes, even from edge to edge except at 17mm where corners are a bit soft even stopped down. Contrasty? Yes. Exciting? No.I ended up returning this lens and got the Sony 20mm f/1.8 G. Many considering this Tamron should look at that new Sony 20mm because it fits in the middle of the zoom range of this Tamron but has less distortion (almost no distortion) and less vignetting to correct in post and it’s the same price as the Tamron.I guess in the end I am more used to prime lenses as that is what I normally shoot. I feel like this lens has too short of a zoom range and many would be better served by a wide angle prime such as the Sony 20mm G or 24mm GM. If you must have a zoom then I hear many good things about the wider range Sony 16-35 f/4 or the Sony 12-24 f/4G if you can save up a little more.Another observation was that I was surprised to see autofocus hunt a bit on my A7III in a room that was decently lit by a 60 watt overhead light. This surprised me because this is a relatively fast (bright) lens. I will say of the times it did find focus it was accurate though. It should be noted that if you watch or read reviews of this lens you’ll find that it does render darker images at f/2.8 than other comparable Sony zooms at the same aperture. I feel Tamron is fudging a bit on the f/2.8. I’d even go as far as to say it behaves more like an f/3.5 or so lens. When I look at the size of the front element and the overall design of the lens it makes me think that’s a good assumption.I recommend this lens if absolutely need the 17mm focal length. It is a well built lens that has good image quality that lacks a bit of life and feels maybe about $100 overpriced as such.

This makes my second Tamron lens for my Sony A7II. I bought the 70-300 first and loved it so much I bought the 17-28 next to get wider. It's a fantastic fast lens that I've been having a blast to use. I did a fair share of research into wide angle zoom lenses and was on the fence about this only going up to 28mm but honestly I'm ok with it now that I've started using it. I was playing around with this lens yesterday trying to snap photos of my dog running around the park and I can tell you that the autofocus is fast, the images are clear and going to f2. 8 makes this a great lens for me