torn between the Tamron 17-70mm f2.8 and that new 35-150mm for my X-T5... my logic was the 17-70 is easier on my $1200 budget but that 35-150 looks killer for the outdoor wedding Im shooting next month. is the extra weight and cost worth it for portraits or should I just stick to the 17-70?
Just saw this and had to jump in. Quick question tho, are you shooting handheld all day? Honestly, that Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 Di III VXD is a beast but it's massive for the X-T5 body. Over the years I've found balance is everything. Quick tip: for a more balanced wedding setup, the Fujifilm XF 50-140mm f/2.8 R LM OIS WR is a great alternative that wont strain the mount as much.
honestly, if youre shooting a wedding next month, you really want the Tamron 35-150mm f/2-2.8 Di III VXD. ive tried many setups over the years and having that f/2 at the wide end is a total game changer for portraits. the Tamron 17-70mm f/2.8 Di III-A VC RXD is a super solid lens and definitely easier on the wallet, but for an outdoor wedding, that extra reach and the faster aperture will make your subjects pop way more. weight is a factor, sure, but in my experience the results are just on another level. maybe rent it for the gig if the price tag is too steep? but seriously, the 35-150 covers all those golden portrait lengths like 50mm, 85mm, and 135mm in one go... basically several prime lenses in one body. it is definitely worth the extra bulk for the kind of quality you get. let me know if you need any other tips for the wedding!