Im looking for a wide-angle for my a7iii and honestly its getting overwhelming. I keep seeing people swear by the Sony 16-35mm GM but thats like 2 grand and honestly I just cant swing that right now since I have a trip to Iceland in three weeks. Then I checked out the Tamron 17-28mm which is way more in my budget and everyone says its sharp but Im worried about missing that extra reach on the wide end. Is the 1mm difference actually noticeable in landscape shots? Im stuck trying to decide if the quality loss is worth saving a months rent or if I should just hold off and save more cash for the Sony...
> Is the 1mm difference actually noticeable in landscape shots? Honestly, you wont really notice the 1mm. Go for the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD instead, its plenty sharp for Iceland.
Late to the party but honestly save your cash for the trip. I have used the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Di III RXD for years and never felt limited. If you need more room, just shoot a quick panorama. Check out the lens comparisons on DXOMARK to see how it holds up against the big Sony glass. You will be perfectly satisfied with the results, and having extra funds for experiences in Iceland is way better.
^ This. Also, honestly, the Sigma 16-28mm f/2.8 DG DN Contemporary is worth checking out too. I had issues with focus breathing on my copy of the Tamron, so the Sigma felt a bit more consistent for video. It isnt perfect, but it sure beats draining your savings account. Anyway, have you looked into getting a decent polarizer for those waterfalls? Iceland glare is brutal. But yeah, bring extra socks.
