Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 Compared
I wanted to see how sharp the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 was compared to other midrange zooms and popular prime lenses. The easiest way to do such a comparison is to go by focal length, starting at 35mm. The comparison below only includes Nikon lenses for now, but Sony lenses will be added at a later date.
35mm
At 35mm, all of the lenses tested are quite solid, and the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 is one of the most consistent of the bunch. In particular, its corners are some of the best wide-open (even though wide open is f/2!) and its midframes are sharper than most. That said, all of the other lenses reach higher central sharpness numbers than the Tamron in the range from f/2.8 to f/5.6. The winner here, as expected, is the Nikon Z 35mm f/1.8 S prime lens – but among the zooms, if corner performance matters to you, either the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 or the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 is the winner.
50mm
50mm is the sharpest focal length of the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8, and it shows! Corner to corner, the two sharpest zooms here are the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 and the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S, which – at a given aperture – are roughly tied. Plus, the Tamron can still shoot at f/2.2 when zoomed into 50mm.
Of course, the winner overall is the Nikon Z 50mm f/1.8 S. I only included it here for context; it would have been a huge surprise if any of these zooms beat such a good prime.
70-75mm
This is an interesting focal length to consider, because we’ve reached the longest focal length of some midrange zooms, and the shortest focal length of some telephoto zooms! The easy winner here is the Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S, which is one of the sharpest zoom lenses ever made. Roughly tied for second are four lenses: the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8, Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8 S, Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S, and Nikon Z 70-180mm f/2.8. Of the four, the “winner” depends on which aperture and portion of the frame you’re prioritizing.
105mm
The top two lenses at 105mm are, as expected, the Nikon Z MC 105mm f/2.8 S and the Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S. The Tamron 35-150mm is starting to look a bit weaker than it was at the wider focal lengths. It still beats the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3, and the corner performance matches that of the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S, but it’s otherwise slightly outclassed by the remaining zooms here.
120mm
In the range from 120mm to 135mm, the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 is a bit weaker than most of the zoom lenses here, although still not bad. It continues to beat the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3 pretty easily, and the corners are a bit sharper than on the Nikon Z 24-120mm f/4 S (though the center is weaker).
As for the Nikon Z 135mm f/1.8 Plena, I only threw that one in here to show you what perfect optics look like :)
150-200mm
We don’t normally test lenses in the lab at 150mm, instead typically measuring at 105mm, 135mm, and 200mm where applicable. Still, this comparison will give you a rough sense of context for how a few of these lenses perform at their longest focal length.
150mm is arguably the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8’s weakest focal length – it’s still good, but it’s not as sharp as the Nikon Z 70-180mm f/2.8 in the lab, let alone the Nikon Z 70-200mm f/2.8 S. It continues to beat the Nikon Z 24-200mm f/4-6.3, however.
Summary
The Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 holds its own against some of the best midrange zoom lenses out there, including the Nikon Z 24-70mm f/2.8, so long as you’re using a focal length of 70mm or wider. At 105mm and beyond, it’s still a sharp lens, but it’s no longer best-in-class.
Overall, this is significantly better performance than I expected from such an unusual lens. The Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 beats most midrange zooms at their own game, while still being able to zoom into 150mm at f/2.8 with pretty good image quality. Sure, you can get better sharpness at 400% magnification by carrying a separate telephoto lens – but even then, not by as much as I would have expected.
The next page of this review sums up everything and explains the pros and cons of the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8. So, click the menu below to go to “Verdict”:
Table of Contents