The processing of the lens is relatively high, there are as Tamron usual 5-year warranty and it can be virtually free to send in for adjustment.
1. Autofocus
The quietest AF has the Tamron 70-300 USD, the loudest Sony SAL18250.
The Tamron 16-300 is true focus fastest precisely, the Tamron 70-300 USD is also fast, to the focus on approaches but then must correct what particularly bothers the movies again. The Sony is a total of the slowest, but meets quite well.
2. Distortion and chromatic aberration (CA)
The Tamron 70-300 USD has the lowest distortion and virtually no CAs. The Tamron 16-300, however, recorded visible (approximately similar to SAL18250), but which are CAs really clearly visible on the screen, which makes even the Sony clearly better.
3. Focus
Ranging from 16mm to about 60mm (of course without TAMRON 70-300 USD): the SAL18250 is here before the TAMRON 16-300, Fade brings the Tamron 16-300 but get closer. Overall, the focus is still good, just the pixels look the difference is clear. Even with A4 prints you will barely make a difference.
From the 60mm SAL18250 then builds significantly from, Fade Out does help but the Tamron 16-300 attracts increasingly passing on.
The Tamron 70-300 USD is open from 70mm already really good, diaphragm 8 makes it very sharp and brings it before the Tamron 16-300, which you have to stop down more with increasing focal length in order to remain focused properly.
BUT: purely in the center is the Tamron 16-300 very sharp and can keep up with the TAMRON 70-300 USD to about 200mm or even beat it partially!
However, the Focus takes the TAMRON 16-300 toward the edge already clear from because the Tamron 70-300 is USD better.
Conclusion:
Sony SAL18250 against TAMRON 16-300: the Tamron 16-300 wins. Up to 60mm Although the Sony is better, but with stopping down is good and the Tamron 16-300. From 60mm up the Tamron 16-300 is then forward that CAs are relatively well corrected automatically. The AF of the TAMRON 16-300 is still superior to the SAL18250 and additonally little more WW and telephoto. If I want to 50mm really sharp pictures, then I take anyway to Sony SAL1650.
TAMRON 16-300 vs TAMRON 70-300 USD (ranging from 70mm): already severe. In telephoto the Tamron 70-300 is USD - apart from the image center - sharper. AF are both quite well who has the TAMRON 16-300 I liked better because it hits faster and not again "follow up" must. The Tamron 70-300 USD has significant advantages in the border area, as well at the CAs and from 200mm increasingly in the center. For this it is somewhat brighter. BUT: as always top it's too long by 70mm, so when traveling I would have to carry around the SAL1650. Are both ordinary Klopper and then I would be the Tamron 16-300 would prefer. In addition, the center is really very hot!
I do not think that everyone wants to buy the Tamron 16-300 in order to save other lenses and just to live with it - who buys it wants to drag for a trip to not more lenses.
But those who really want a lens to be so happy, I think if the CAs can be corrected in the image editing and you put especially emphasis on a sharp image center.
Most me disturb the rapid sharpening waste in the border area and the area to about 50mm, because it gives me something to focus compared to SAL18250. At the telephoto end, it is much better, the center also fits and the AF is faster / quieter. For this purpose the larger focal range my Sony Travel Zoom will be replaced! Only the high price is one more thing to think that Sony is also not much cheaper.
########## Update 02/08/2015 ###########
In the comments on the request came to assess the lens when shooting, particularly with respect. Of audibility of the autofocus.
Borweg for SAL 18250: this is absolutely unsuitable for Use films - the AF is basically quite loud when filming he is restricted in terms of speed (perhaps to make it quieter?). However, this will only lead to the fact that the AF is much too slow when filming and then quasi permanently audible. A properly crunching, grinding sound. Better bearable it would have been to let the speed identical to the photo mode, the AF would only minimally louder but much faster ...
So, back to the Tamron: the AF is quite fast and accurately even when filming. However, you can hear this as clearly - with smaller focus Because it's more of a clatter, the less noticeable if there are ambient noise, with major changes but also a focus during continuous vernehmendes noise. Probably not be used without an external microphone as a video combination - at least if you want to use the AF much.
If you have questions like comment!
If the review was helpful, please click the button! If not please give me feedback and comment by the opportunity to improve - thanks!
