Best all-around zoom lens for Sony a6700 and a6400?

Question

Hey everyone! I’ve been a long-time user of the Sony a6400, and I recently decided to pull the trigger and add the a6700 to my kit. I love the Sony APS-C ecosystem, but I’ve hit a bit of a wall when it comes to finding that perfect "one-lens-to-rule-them-all" for my daily carry.

Right now, I find myself constantly swapping between a few primes like the 24mm and 50mm. While the image quality is fantastic, I’m honestly getting tired of missing shots because I’m fumbling in my bag to change glass. I’m looking for a versatile, high-quality zoom lens that performs well on both the a6700 (with its great IBIS) and the older a6400, which obviously lacks in-body stabilization.

I’ve been doing some deep dives into reviews, and three main contenders keep popping up. First, there’s the Sony 16-55mm f/2.8 G. The clinical sharpness and native autofocus speed look amazing, but the price tag is a bit steep and it lacks built-in OSS, which makes me a little nervous about using it on the a6400 for handheld low-light shots.

On the other hand, the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 seems like a beast in terms of value and includes its own stabilization (VC), which would be a huge plus for my a6400. However, it’s quite a bit bulkier, and I’m worried it might feel unbalanced on these smaller rangefinder-style bodies. Then there’s the tiny Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8, which is incredibly tempting for its weight and size, but I’m worried about losing that extra reach on both ends of the focal range.

I mostly shoot a mix of travel, street photography, and family gatherings. I really want something sharp that can stay on the camera 90% of the time. For those of you who own either of these cameras, what has been your go-to general-purpose zoom? Is the extra reach and stabilization of the Tamron worth the extra weight, or is the premium Sony G glass the way to go despite the lack of OSS?

viagra-moscow.ru · Accepted Answer

yo, had a moment to think about this more and honestly i feel u on the lens swapping struggle. i mean it's literally the worst when youre trying to catch a candid moment and youre stuck fiddling with rear caps in the middle of a crowd. since ur looking for the best value and u mentioned being budget-conscious, the Sony E 16-55mm f/2.8 G is probably a pass for now. it's like $1,300 new and even used it's pricey... and honestly, the lack of OSS on the Sony a6400 is a huge dealbreaker for handheld shots in low light imo. here's the breakdown of the other two:
1. the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD is amazing because it has that VC (stabilization). it usually goes for about $700. it's the most versatile for sure, but it is CHUNKY. it definitely makes the rangefinder-style bodies feel front-heavy and kinda wierd to hold for long periods.
2. the Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DC DN Contemporary is the king of budget at around $500-550. it's tiny! like, actually pocketable almost. if i were u, i'd go with the sigma. yeah, it lacks stabilization, but since u have the Sony a6700 with IBIS, that'll be ur main low-light rig anyway. the a6400 can just be ur daylight street setup where u have high shutter speeds so stabilization doesnt matter as much. plus, with the $800 u save vs the sony G lens, u could basically buy a high-end gimbal or just keep ur primes for when u need that extra reach. tbh the extra reach on the tamron is nice but ur already used to swapping primes, so just cropping in a bit with the 26MP sensor on the a6700 basically makes up for the loss. the sigma is just SO much more practical for a daily carry. gl! 👍

GreasySpoonDiner · Answer

Had a moment to think about this from a market research angle, and honestly, Sony is really leaning on their native ecosystem tax for that 16-55mm. If you look at the MTF charts on the Sony Alpha Blog or the lens comparison tools on RTINGS, you will see the technical gap between the Sony E 16-55mm f/2.8 G and the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD is way narrower than the price gap suggests. Youre basically paying for the G branding and slightly better corner sharpness that you might not even notice in daily travel shots. Since you mentioned being worried about balance on the a6400, i would suggest checking these resources to compare the physical footprints before you buy:

Sony Alpha Blog (best for MTF and real-world sharpness tests)

RTINGS lens comparison tool

Camera Decision (great for checking size and weight balance side-by-side) The Tamron is definitely a bit of a chungus on those small rangefinder-style bodies and its gonna feel front-heavy. If you really need that OSS for the a6400 but want to stay in the Sony family without the 16-55mm price tag, the Sony E 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 OSS is a total sleeper hit. It is not f/2.8, but it is super sharp and way more balanced for street photography. Quick tip: Check the firmware support pages for any third-party lens you pick. Tamron has been releasing updates to optimize their AF motors for the newer AI autofocus chip in the Sony a6700, so make sure youre running the latest version to get that native-like performance.

Sidneyraith · Answer

Saw this earlier but just now responding! tbh I’m a bit of a specs nerd and have been looking at the data sheets for these too, even though I'm still relatively new to the E-mount world. Quick question for you—how often do you actually plan on using the a6400 as your primary for the day? If it's mostly a backup, maybe the stabilization isn't as critical for your daily carry? From a reliability standpoint, I always worry about camera shake ruining a perfect moment, especially on the a6400 since it has no IBIS. To me, the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD feels like the most 'reliable' choice because it has built-in VC. It’s like insurance for your photos—you know they’ll be sharp even if your hands are a bit shaky or you're in a rush. The Sigma 18-50mm f/2.8 DC DN Contemporary is sooo tempting because it’s tiny and won't strain the camera mount as much, but the lack of stabilization makes me nervous for those handheld low-light street shots you mentioned. iirc the Tamron is around $700-800, which is way more affordable than the Sony E 16-55mm f/2.8 G anyway. I’d personally go for the Tamron just for the peace of mind, even if it is a bit beefier!