How does /p/ compare lenses that aren't quite like-for-like competitors?
Thinking of getting a Sony 70-300g as an upgrade to my existing Sony 70-300. Started noticing chromatic aberration and loss of sharpness as I've become a bit more critical of my photos - (been shooting a year from total beginner). I'm finding I'm mostly interested in birds.
So this review talked me into aiming for Sony 70-300g (
http://kurtmunger.com/sony_70_300mm_f_4_5_5_6_gid224.html). If I went for it would get the g2 now. But review also suggested looking into a Tamron (
http://kurtmunger.com/tamron_70_300mm_f_4_5_6id290.html). I don't have that Tamron, but I have one seems similar (
https://www.camerastuffreview.com/en/tamron-lens-review/tamron-18-270-mm-review) gifted same time as the Sony A77 I've just been upgraded to (previously A37 also a gift).
Obviously max zoom is different, but at a comparable zoom e. g. 200 mm, how do I know that the Sony 70300g is likely to be a worthwhile upgrade on the Tamron (
https://www.camerastuffreview.com/en/tamron-lens-review/tamron-18-270-mm-review) I have without buying it and shooting some repeatable objects around my house?
I feel retarded even asking this question. Help =_=
Pic not related to the lenses. It just made me smile.
