My Review of the Tamron 20-40 f2.8 Di III VXD and 28-200 f2.8 - f5.6 Di III VXD - for Sony FF

Recommended

Nassau, Bahamas - Holland America Ship from our cruise ship deck
Tamron 28-200 f2.8 - 5.6 ( 135mm @ f8) - Handles contrasty morning light well in my opinion
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

A COUPLE years back, following my first ever catastrophic injury to a piece of photographic gear (not a terrible track record, given my 50 years of "carry"), I decided to take a chance on one of the major third-party lens makers. Back in "the day" (for me, defined as the late 1970's to about 2020), there were the brand-name lenses, mainly from Nikon, Canon, Minolta, Olympus, all of which were of high quality design, manufacture and optical quality. There were - of course - also a couple of what most of us hobby shooters considered "boutique" lenses manufactured by Leica and Zeiss. I owned one Zeiss lens for my APS-C sony camera for a while. It was probably my all-time favorite for its image quality and look. But I have never owned an equivalent since switching to "full frame."

Nassau, Bahamas
Tamron 28 - 200 2.8 - 5.6 (200mm @ f 5.6 - "wide open"
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

WHEN I refer to "major" third pary manufactures, for years there were three: Sigma,Tamron, Tokina. There were others, but they really didn't match up in either build or optical quality.

Today, I consider them to manufacture - for the most part - lenses that are the image quality equal of any of the current "big three" Sony, Canon and Nikon

AT ONE time, Sigma, Tokina and Tamron all suffered from similar issues. Build quality was noticeably lower quality. Of greater importance, image quality was inconsistent and often just really not very good. I had a handful of third party lenses over the years; mostly consumer grade lenses, including Tamron and Tokina and even Tokina's "pro" AT-X models. But they didn't stand up well to the brand name (Nikon in my case) "consumer lenses for quality. All except for one. Late in my 35mm days, I had gotten into some birding, and purchased Tokina's pro (AT-X) copy of the venerable 300mm f2.8 AF fixed lens. It seemed to me to be essentially the equivalent of the Nikon copy. Same all metal build. Same heft. Exellent AF response. Very sharp image quality. And less than 1/2 the cost of the Nikkor (understanding that someday, it would also sell or trade for substantially less than the Nikkor). But great lens. Today, it can be had for around $400 on eBay.

This Nassau Restaurant (which we later had lunch at) was well over 2 blocks back from the already wide Cruise Port (I bought the T-shirt 😁)
Tamron 28 - 200 f5.6 - f5.6 (200mm @ f5.6) from the cruise ship top deck
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

MY ONLY other experience with third party lenses in those days was an eye-opener. I was shooting the Nikon APS-C SLR style cameras at the time ("full-frame" had not come out yet), and finding it difficult to adapt to the 1.4-5x "crop factor. I needed something wider. A pro I knew at the time suggested I look at the Sigma 14mm. I did. I was impressed. Very high build quality. Very good image quality and sharpness. Again, half the price. That one, too, went away when I moved to "full frame" bodies. But the eye-opener for me what just how far the three companies (Tamron, Tokina, and Sigma) had come from their mediocrity. Today, I consider them to manufacture - for the most part - lenses that are the image quality equal of any of the current "big three" Sony, Canon and Nikon. Mechanical build quality varies and is generally somewhat "lower" but certainly not unacceptable. There is a lot of plastic being used today. I think if I were a photo-journalist bouncing around the rough parts of the world, I would be concerned about that. But as a hobbyist, who generally takes good care of his gear, I am not in the least concerned. The polycarbonate resin plastic used in today's lens construvtion is much higher quality and more durable than yesterday's materials, and has the added advantage of being lighter to carry sometimes. It is also widely thought that these manufacturers often source certain components from each other (and that Sony actually owns a percentage of Tamron).

Nassau, Bahamas Cruise Port
This shot - again made from the cruise ship top deck - illustrates the detail, color, and contrast caught by the Tamron 28 - 200mm f2.8 - 5.6 (60mm @ f5.6)
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

BACK IN 2023, I visited the Great Smoky Mountain National Park with my buddy, Rich from Michigan. At that time I was shooting with a Sony A7rii body and carrying a Sony 24-104 f4 zoom as my primary carry and travel lens. We were on a trail that had been described as medium difficult. It was not. It was near-technical. We were both in our later 60's. We had hiked in to a beautiful waterfal that included some steep downhill portions. We had hiked back out. We were on the "homestretch." But exhausted. Neither my balance, nor stamina were what they once were and I didn't see the stone or root, as we walked downhill on the path. You can guess the rest. Several stitches just above my eyebrow (staples these days). No worries, I heal well and you cannot even see a trace of it today. The 24-105, on the other hand, didn't fare as well. There would be no stitches or staples from the repair shop. Fortunately, the camera wasn't damaged. Also fortunately, I had been paying inland marine insurance on the more expensive items for years. Once home, I looked up the current replacement cost and contacted the insurance company and a check was soon in the mail. 😂

For the $$ I received in settlement for one Sony lens, I was able to purchase two lenses

ABOUT THE TAMRON LENSES

• Di III. The GSMNP experience changed my thinking. Down at the waterfall, I found myself wishing for something wider than 24mm. Back home, I started researching on - line, and learned that there were many folks out there shooting - and extolling the virtues of - third party lenses. While I had always given Sigma a "leg up" as leader of the three, it seems that things have changed. Tamron and Tokina are pretty popular today. I think the three lens makers are on a pretty equal footing, today. As I noted before, I convinced myself that they were as good, optically, as the name brand. For the $$ I received in settlement for one Sony lens, I was able to purchase two lenses: both Tamron: the 28 - 75mm f2.8 (to replace the broken lens and approximate the focal range) and 17 - 28mm f2.8, giving me that slightly more wide angle I was looking for). Both are Tamron Di III RXD VXD lenses. Di III is Tamron's designation for a lens designed to fit a "full frame" mirrorless camera body. "VXD" (voice-coil extreme torque drive) is their newest, fastest AF drive. RXD (rapid eXra-silent stepping drive) is just slightly older and "less advanced." I have two of each and I cannot actually detect a difference. None of my 4 copies have vibration-reduction technology, which Tamron refers to as "Vibration Compensation" (VC). But since my Sony body has in-body stabilization (IBIS), I don't really consider that a factor. In fact, I generally have it switched off on my Sony lenses.
  
  

  

  Street Art - Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic
  I am mostly shooting dayllight "street" type images on this kind of travel, so many of these will be made with an f2.8 aperture
  Tamron 20 - 40mm f2.8 (40mm @ f.28)
  Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

  
  I STILL carry one Sony lens which I consider my "landscape long lens" (The Sony G 100 - 400 f4.5 - 5.6 GM OSS - perhaps a topic for a future review).
  
  

  

  The Plaza - Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic
  Tamron 20 - 40mm f2.8 (28mm @ f8)
  Copyright Andy Richards 2026

  
  
• Front Filter: One of the "X" factors that steered me toward Tamron (versus Tokina or Sigma, or one of the many other third-party lenses offered today - that just keep getting better), was something I see as genius from their engineers. While I rarely use filters, I do use them from time to time for certain specific uses. My primary use cases are a polarizer to reduce glare, and a handful of Neutral Density filters for shooting water (and occasionally other moving subjects). I hate fiddling with all the different filters, filter-holders, etc., that are necessitated by each different front element thread size on the lenses I carry. Fumbling in the field. Organizing them for efficient access. And, the added cost of purchasing good quality copies of all those different sizes. I have long worked for efficiency and light weight in the field. "Less is more." 😁 And this is where Tamron's "genius" comes in. I now own 4 different Tamron lenses for my Sony A7cr: The 17-28mm, the 28-75mm, and the newest 20-40mm (all f2.8); and a 28-200mm f2.8 - 5.6 variable. And all 4 of them have the exact same front thread size! That means one set of filters for all 4 of the lenses. I have a small filter pouch and I have just 5 total filters in it (my long lens has a larger front thread and I still have a PZ for it). Tamron has essentially "standardized" most of its lens front elements. At least for its most popular lenses. What a great idea! For my "serious" landscape and scenic photography, I have been very happy with the 17-28 / 28-75 combo, along with my long lens. In this post, I review my thoughts and experience with my current "travel" combination, the 28-200mm variable and the 20 - 40mm f2.8
  
  
• Versatility: I have been using the variable 28-200 almost exclusively for non-dedicated travel since 2023. It is a very versatile lens and I do like it. It is still a little large for my preferences, and on a number of ocassions, I have found myself wishing for a wider angle. Looking at a lot of my travel stuff (especially when cruising), I find most of my needs for walking around on shore are satisfied with shorter focal length lenses. So I began searching the Tamron lineup for a compatible, shorter lens. I arrived in the end on the 20-40 f2.8, and in 2026, I have begun to carry that lens as my primary travel lens. I like the constant 2.8 aperture. I really like that has the same front element as all 3 other Tamron lenses. I have found the 20 enough wider than the 28 that I have been happy with it. And with its 60 megapixels, I have found that I can crop pretty deeply if I need a closer field of view in my final result. It has become the primary "carry" lens (though I still keep the 28-200 close by, as I often use it to shoot from the ship on to land based subjects).
  
  

  

  Puerto Plata's "Pink Street" entrance holds some challenges for the photographer, including lots of "busy" elements in the immediate foreground and throngs of tourists. The 20 - 40mm lens allowed me to step very close to the entrance (almost underneath it) and still include the parts of the image I wanted to. The people were another thing altogether and I made use of the two new Photoshop Remove tool functions (Distractions and People) to "prune" the foreground.
  Tamron 20 - 40mm (20mm @ f8)
  Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

  
  
• Image Quality: I think image quality always has to be the starting point for any lens. In my view (I don't generally engage in so-called "pixel - peeping") the images I have been making during my 2024 - 2026 photography have been every bit the equivalent of any prior lens I have owned in terms of sharpness, color and contrast. Being slightly lighter and smaller than the Sony counterparts (or as close as possible), but comparatively equal, that is a high vote for the Tamron copies. If I were giving stars, they would get the proverbial 5-star rating.
  
  
• Build Quality: These might not earn such a high rating (maybe closer 4.5), but close. And that is, in my opinion, not really a "knock" on Tamron. As I noted earlier, Tamron has used a lot of plastic in its manufacture. The particular type of plastic is known as polycarbonate (a carbon fiber resin). Lighter and cheaper to manufacture than high-end metals (like magnesium alloys used in the brand name lenses), there is some suggestion on-line that the high-end metal design and contruction is manufactured to tighter tolerances. Whether polycarbonate wears more or less than metal remains to be seen. Durability is one of the things that separates a high-qualilty manufactured item from cheaper copies. It will ultimately be measured in terms of longevity, but also in terms of how well it stands up to thousands of repetitive movement. It might be argued that build quality is every bit the equivalent of its brand-name bretheren. What I can say is that my copies are tight, smooth, and well-damped in terms of their zoom and focus mechanisms.
  
  

  

  Puerto Plata's "Umbrella Street - Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic
  These streets have sprung up all over the world in the past few years (as I just recently blogged about here).
  Tamron 20 - 40mm (39mm @ f8)
  Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

  
  
• Weather Sealing: Online references suggest that Sony pro lenses have a more robust internal sealing; some even saying it is designed to "resist downpours." I am not going to test this theory (purposely) on any lens. Tamron's own literature characterizes their build as "moisture-resistant." This has always been a bit of a thought-provoking topic for me. There are time, I know, when rain can enhance photography. Not very often, though, and I have - over the years - mostly avoided it. Other than an underwater housing, I don't think any camera/lens combination is designed to used "in the rain." That is, if it is actively raining. Particularly if it has any kind on intensity. As such, I will do what I can to keep my gear as dry as possible. I have a rain hood for the big lens (and have used it just once over the several years I have owned it). I also wear a completely waterproof raincoat when needed, and there is room under it to keep the camera as dry as possible. So waterproofing is not a huge factor in my own decision. Dust proofing is a little more important. Today, almost all better quality lenses have a fair amount of gasket type "proofing" around any potential openings, including the mount. These - especially the "pro" models do have decent weather proofing. Just not the perhaps more robust design of the main brands.
  
  
• Auto Focus: This is almost always going to be an important consideration, especially for those of us who are even slightly vision-impaired. I have owned lenses over the years that focus slowly, noisily, and often engage in frustrating "hunting." I have experience none of that in each of the 4 different lenses I own. The "VXD" designation on Tamron lenses designates the AF motor ("voice coil extreme drive"), and they advertize "blazing speed." "RXD" (supposedly slighly less advanced) stands for "Rapid extra-Silent Stepping Drive." My two "shorter" focal lengths have the VXD and the others have RXD. In use, I cannot tell the difference. They all focus quickly, accurately and quietly.  Indeed, I would judge them easily the equivalent of the focusing performance of my former Sony G 28-105, and my current Sony GSM 100 - 400 (though it is fair to note that they are not completely "apples to apples" comparison, as both Sonys have smaller max apertures). The way the front element behaves is also an important consideration. On some "lower end" lenses, the front element rotates during zoom/AF operation. These do not. I am happy with the AF performance of these lenses.
  
  
• Zoom Mechanism. One of the things that sets "consumer" and perceived "lower-end" zoom lenses (even some brand name models) apart is how the zoom works. In high-end lenses it is not at all uncommon for the zoom to be basically all internal. The "consumer" zooms essentially all have an outward moving lens barrel that exends and retracts as you zoom. There are some obvious design issues here, as the moving front zoom barrel is exposed to the elements each time you zoom it out. It is less expensive to design and manufacture, and generally lighter weight. It is a tradeoff I have lived with for years, and given the price differential, a compromise I will easily live with. All of my Tamron lenses feature the extending type zoom. The other area of importance is the issue of "zoom creep." At least in past years, third-party lenses (and particularly the now ancient "push-pull" style) were often loose, and the zoom would "creep" out, when being carried around. Annoying. These Tamron lenses are all well damped and do not suffer from "zoom creep" at all.
  
  
• Physical Characteristics. Pound for pound, and inch for inch, the Tamron lenses are lighter and smaller. Given the similar performance, I see that as a win.
  
  
• Cost To Own: For all but a very small percentage of purchasers, this one of the (if not the) most important considerations. Third party lenses from Tamron, Tokina and Sigma are typically around 50% (sometimes even more) less expensive than "brand name" lenses. The reasons are mostly as set out above. Purchasing one of them is a tradeoff. In my case, it is a tradeoff I am readily willing to accept. As we often read on line: "YMMV." Depending on use, frequency of use, your photographic environment, and your personal attitude toward care and handling of your gear, the tradeoff may not be worth it. It is a judgement call.

One of the "X" factors that steered me toward [the] Tamron [lenses] . . .  was something I see as genius from their engineers . . .  all 4 of them have the exact same front thread size! That means one set of filters for all 4 of the lenses

MY VERDICT on these two Tamron lenses is that they get my highest rating - i.e., "recommended." I would readily purchase them again and recommend them to friends and fellow shooters. The combination of price, image quality, versatility and convenience makes this an easy recommendation. As far as image quality is concerned, for my purposes, they go head-to-head with "equivalent" Sony lenses.

Recommended

Gateway Arch National Park - What Do I Know?

Gateway Arch - Gateway Arch National Park - St. Louis, Missouri
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

LAST YEAR, I posted a series of blogs on National Parks. The ones I have visited. There are 63 officially designated "National Parks in the U.S." They range in size from over 13 million acres, to just under 100 acres. So lots of variability.

Market Street - St. Louis, Missouri
As we approached the arch area, I saw this traffic light. I hoped for - and was rewarded with - a red light, stopping long enough for me to get the light centered in the arch with the Old Courthouse in the background - image below
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

GATEWAY ARCH National Park is the smallest National Park in the U.S., at just over 92 acres. Its grounds are on the west side of the Mississipi River near where St. Louis, Missouri's oldest buildings once stood; and very near the start of the Louis and Clark Expedition. Originally built as a monument to the Lewis and Clark Expedition, the Gateway Arch (namesake to the Park) is the tallest structure in the western hemisphere.

Gateway Arch and Old Courthouse - St. Louis, Missouri
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

THE PARK is one of the newest (4th newest at this writing) of the parks, officially "promoted" as a National Park from its former "national monument" status only in 2018. The new designation was not without controversy, as all other officially designated parks preserve and protect some natural area, resource or phenomena. Construction of the arch, considered the "gateway to the American West" began in 1963 and was completed roughly 2 years later; designated as a national monument.

Market Street - St. Louis, Missouri
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

LIKE MANY monuments around the world, the arch can be seen from all around St. Louis. In my shot from Market Street with the famous Old Courthouse framed in the arch, I wanted to show the context of the city street, leading down to the Missiippi. The sheer size of the arch creates the illusion of spanning the city street and driving through the arch. In reality, it does not span the street.

Another view of The Arch and The Old Courthouse from Market Street - St. Louis, Missouri
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

WHEN RESEARCHING the monument, I learned a couple things that hadn't ever entered my mind. It is illegal to fly an airplane through the arch. The FAA warned pilots shortly after completion in 1965 that such fly-throughs would result in not only a heavy fine, but immediate revocation of their license. At least 10 pilots done so over the years. It is said that the U.S. Secret Service forbids a sitting POTUS from going up in the arch because it is such a limited access space.

Gateway Arch - from the St. Louis Cathedral parking lot - St. Louis, Missouri
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

PHOTOGRAPHICALLY, THIS one is interesting - and potentially a challenge. This is a subject where either living in or near St. Louis would be advantageous. The arch itself is not a particularly photogenic subject, making it important to be able to provide some context or a unique perspective. I have seen some pretty cool images from a distance, and hope someday to be able to find and shoot from those spots. There, the photographer is able to add elements of foreground interest and, if fortunate enough to find a spot across the river, possibly nighttime shots with reflection opportunities. Up closer is going to call for a wide angle perspective and wide angle lens. I recenlty picked up a "travel" lens - a 20 - 40mm f2.8 lens (using a "full frame" camera/sensor). I will be traveling a fair amount this year in old European cities and among some landscape gardens, among other things, and I was hoping the 20 - 40 would give me the versatility I would like to get some of those close perspectives. So I was delighted to learn on this trip that for images like the arch from a close up vantage point, the lens performed very well and its field of view fit my eye and the subject.

Gateway Arch - St. Louis Cathedral entrance to Gateway National Park - St. Louis, Missouri
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

DODGING BETWEEN rain showers, I only really had one outside-of-the-vehicle opportunity. I approached the park (and the arch) from the old St. Louis Cathedral parking lot. There is an entrance there, and the red flagstone surface gave me an interesting lead-in to the image. This may have been a case where the cloudy skies worked to my advantage, as my (perhaps) favorite of the precious few images I did make looks as if the arch disappeared into the clouds. There was some green foliage in the foregound as well. Any one of those elements alone would probably not been enough. But put together, they gave me a (surprising) opportunity to make a reasonably nice image. When I get back I will try a number of different viewpoints and perspectives. For now - this is the one I had, other than the cell-phone snapshots from the "shotgun" seat in the car.

St. Louis Cathedral stands as a sentinel to one of the entrances to Gateway Arch National Park - St. Louis, Missouri
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

THERE WAS sun back there somewhere. Somewhere behind the clouds. I just know there was. 😏I have made it known here from time to time that I am not afraid to use Photoshop to achieve my "vision." This one is not AI though. Just good, old-fashioned "manipulation" using the sky replacement tools in photoshop to create an image that "could have been." One of my "Rich" buddies rolls his eyes whenever I bring up sky replacement. This one is for you Rich (and you know who you are). 😎

Gateway Arch (what "might have been") - Gateway Arch National Park - St. Louis, Missouri
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

THE GATEWAY Arch has been on my "bucket list" for a number of years. We have family living in suburban St. Louis, and other than a day-long business trip some nearly 40 years ago, we had never visited the area. That really has been inexcusable from the family standpoint. We are planning to remedy that situation, and along with that will undoubtedly come some additional opportunities for photography in a city that has no shortage of photo ops. We were there for only a couple days this trip and unfortunately, the single day we had allocated to a visit to the city and the arch was one in which Mother Nature determined would be a near rainout. Every image here was made between raindrops, or behind a car windshield. But I saw enough. I will be back! 😀

Umbrella Streets - They are a "Thing"

Douglas Street Umbrellas - Dunedin, Florida
Copyright Andy Richards 2024

A LITTLE quick "Google" research informed me that the first known Umbrella Street was (probably) in Portugal (Águeda, specifically for the Ágitagueda Art Festival). Whether truly the first or not, the idea has caught on around the world.

Pink Street; Lison, Portugal
Copyright Andy Richards 2022 - All Rights Reserved

THE UMBRELLA Sky Project, was first conceived as part of an art fair in 2011. Part of the Ágitagueda Art Festival, the project is - as is so much art throughout history - a practical architechtural application evidenced by a striking and colorful visual display. In addition to the artful and photo-friendly presentation, the design is to shade for pedestrians during the hot summer months. The concept has been adopted now world - wide and has grown into a popular tourist attraction in many cities.

Umbrellas lit at night on The Pink Street - Lisbon, Portugal
Copyright Andy Richards 2022 - All Rights Reserved

MY OWN introduction to the concept was in Lisbon, Portugal a few years back. Now a center of nightlife in Lisbon, the Pink Street was once a "red light" district, due to its proximity to the harbor. As part of an urban renewal project, the short, pedestrian street was painted pink - and colorful umbrellas hung, sometime in the early 2000's. Today the street is lined with bars and trendy restaurants.

The Pink Street - Open for Business - Lisbon, Portugal
Copyright Andy Richards 2022

AS A photographer, the Lisbon Pink Street provides two very different photo-ops. The first (and perhaps my preferred) is the early morning visit before things open up. As is my custom, I am often up and out on the streets at dawn, exploring and shooting. One of my planned activities was to find the Pink Street, and that I did, early one morning. It was just a few blocks from our hotel and thankfully in the valley in Lisbon, so I was able to avoid the steep, hilly walks a few of the other days had served up.

Douglas Avenue Umbrellas - Dunedin, Florida
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

THE SECOND opportunity, though, which "street photographers" will certainly appreciate, is at night, after things have ramped up. I was fortunate to do both.

Douglas Avenue Umbrellas - Dunedin, Florida
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

WHEN WE left Portugal, I thought of the umbrellas as a decorative addition to the main attraction, the Pink Street. Kind of a one-off in my mind. Some time later, I discovered a "mini" version of the hanging umbrellas motif on Douglas Street in Dunedin, Florida, kind of by coincidence. I knew I had to return early one morning to photograph them. I was still thinking of this motif as a unique event. But it wasn't.

Thomas Angel's Gate - Trondheim, Norway
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

LAST FALL, on our Norway cruise, our final port stop was in Trondheim, Norway. It was probably my favorite city that we have visited in Norway (though in reality, we haven't visited very many of them). There, once again we encountered the Umbrella Street phenomena, on a popular retail shopping street: Thomas Angel's Gate. It was probably the first time it really ocurred to me that this motif was not at all a one-off, but had become a widespread ocurrence.

Thomas Angel's Gate - Trondheim, Norway
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

AGAIN, MORE recently, we visited yet another Umbrella Street; this time during our first ever visit to Dominican Republic, on a Celebrity Apex Caribbean cruise.

Umbrella Street - Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

I HAVE since learned that there are various versions of this motif in many other places around the world. Some I have visited and apparently missed - Like Camden Market in London, Dublin and San Juan - you can be sure I will seek them out next time. Others are in places I haven't been to, and some of those are already on the travel itinerary, like Istanbul, Thessalononiki, and Paris. I will be looking for them.

Umbrellas - Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

I HAVE found this subject interesting enough to me that it has become a "project" to photograph as many of them as I can, and I even have a new gallery, dedicated to Umbrella Streets now on my website. With only 4 locations so far, you can see I have my work cut out for me. I don't know when, but there will be more of this. :-)

Remove Reflections in Photoshop - A Year Later - Has It Improved?

JUST OVER a year ago, I wrote about this Photoshop tool, and concluded that for the most part, it was "not ready for prime time yet." In fairness, I also concluded that it was a pretty good tool in many cases to create a starting point, with the additional need to "work" the image afterward. Many of Photoshop's AI and content - aware tools share this issue. There is usually going to be some additional "cleanup" necessary after applying the tool.

IN 2025, a new feature was added to the "Remove" tool in Photoshop's Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) module, to remove reflections. In a blog post in May, 2025, I reviewed that feature. The recently released Photoshop ver. 27.6.0 now includes that "tool" in the main Photoshop program under the Edit Menu labeled "Reflection Removal." The reflection removal in ACR has also been maintained. In ACR, you will be working with raw images and thus generally higher resolution files, making your renders potentially higher quality. The Remove Reflections tool in Photoshop, however, can only be used on 8-bit images. If you don't convert the image to 8-bit, "Remove Reflections" will be greyed out.

USING THE tool in Photoshop (instead of ACR) gives slightly more flexibility and perhaps creativity, but at the expense of image quality. In Photoshop, the tool provides for the use of layers, allowing a layer of just the reflection, which can be adjusted for opacity and also used for creative purposes. When you activate Remove Reflections, it will give you a separate dialog box asking if you want to create a new (reflection) layer. I would do so, just to give yourself that additional flexibility in processing.

HAS THIS utility changed? Most certainly. But has it improved? Lets take a look. The first image below is the original, unretouched image made through the plexiglass up in London's "Shard" skyscraper.

The Thames from "The Shard" - London, England
Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

THE SECOND shot below is the identical image, but with the "Reflections" utility under ACR's Remove Distractions applied using the highest quality. A comparison with the same image using the same adjustments in the prior blog post show that there have not been any improvements made to this tool from the 2025 version. They are virtuallly identical. While some of the high level reflections have been removed, the streaks across the river are still visible.

The Thames from "The Shard" - London, England
Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

THE NEXT image below is the unretouched image brought into Photoshop and after conversion to 8-bits, the new "Remove Reflections" tool under the Edit menu applied. It seems like for this example there is an ever-so-slight improvement, but the tradeoff will be that on larger file applications, it is perhaps made is less effective by requiring that the image be converted to 8-Bit).

The Thames from "The Shard" - London, England
Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

IN THE last image, I applied the ACR reflection removal, and then in Photoshop, converted to 8-bit and applied the new Reflection Removal under the Edit Menu on top of the prior removal process. If anything, in this instance, it looks worse to me, suggesting that they two algorithyms will likely work against each other.

The Thames from "The Shard" - London, England

Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

I NEXT tried just the new Edit Menu "Reflections Removal" tool on another image from the prior blog, showing my own reflection in the window. Similar to the prior result, it did nothing. Doesn't appear to recognize my image as a reflection. That is probably a factor of high contrast that might be better treated if there was a bright, specular reflection.

Window Reflection of Photographer - London, England

Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

CONCLUSION? THEY have added some "bells and whistles," making it usable in PS itself, with layers, but only on 8-bit files. I cannot see any improvement in its effectiveness. For me, it will remain a relatively little used tool (in reality, try not to create such reflections unless I am doing them on purpose), but one that may have some limited utility as part of a more thorough processing session.

Photoshop Has Dropped A New "Major" Update - (2026 ver. 27.6.0)

JUST A few days ago, Adobe dropped major new releases for both Lightroom and Photoshop. I don't really use Lightroom, so I don't cover it here. The newest version of Photoshop, though, was released on April 27 and contains just a few new features - but they are features with a pretty big impact on post-processing in PS.

LIKE JUST about all computer-science related phenomena, new features and processes are being released more and more quickly. When I first acquired Photoshop, it was stand-alone software that you loaded onto your computer and used locally. Updates were offered bi-annually (sometimes annually). Today, it seems like major version changes continue to be offered annually, but incremental updates both in the beta version and the full version of the cloud-based software are offered incrementally, without any particular timeline, but recently several times a year.

A Short History of Photoshop Updates

A lot has happened in the computing world during that roughly 20-year span, including significant updating of desktop computer technology and specifications, laptop and then tablet style computers and the cell-phone revolution's perhaps most significant addition to all of this: the so-called "smart phone." At the same time, perhaps the most momentous computer technology of a couple generations became available to the public in 1993: the internet ("world wide web"). Like desktop computers, the interface with the internet at that time was quite rudimentary by todays graphical user interface standards. But it was nonetheless revolutionary for the way it changed how we communicate. This included the ability to "share" digital photo files freely. While at first, we communicated digitally by hard wire connections, we quickly had wifi and bluethooth and cell phone networks.

Photoshop (ver. 1) was first released as a program for the Apple McIntosh personal desktop computer in 1991 (I jumped on a few years later with version 3, I believe, and by that time it was running on the PC as well). It seems to me that updates to the program happened every couple years or so, through version 7.0. Many of us hobbyists developed a pattern of only upgrading every other version. While each update brought useful (and often amazing) "improvements," we still felt that we could get along without them until there were enough cumulative additions to feel like we could justify the cost of upgrading. With version 8.0, Adobe changed the naming/numbering scheme, so 8.0 was Photoshop CS (which stood for "Creative Suite" - and about that time, Adobe started offering/bundling some of their other software that seemed related to the processes Photoshop users found useful). Photoshop CS continued the every couple years pattern, through CS6 (ver. 13) in 2012.

In 2007, Adobe introduced Lightroom, a newer, more streamlined processing software aimed at the more limited audience of photographers only. Photoshop was - and remains - one of the premier graphics editing and creating softwares for graphic artists of all times. Nonetheless, serious photographers immediately embraced it, in spite of the "light" photo-editing versions available (primarily Adobe Photoshop Elements). The consumer software just didn't provide sophisticated enough tools for heavy photo-editing. But they worked fine for lest robust editing, were simpler to learn, and much less expensive to acquire. Eventually, Elements gave way to Lightroom, which continued to be less expensive and at the outset was also less complex. Lightroom created a brand new interface that was much more intuitive for photographers (and has basically been copied by many of the quite capable competitor programs out there today). Aimed squarely at photographers, Lightroom incorporated a relational database for cataloging, keywording, and otherwise organizing photographic digital files, making it more of an all-in-one program. Although it has come light years forward since first released, it still doesn't have several of the processing tools that I have come to find indispensible to my own workings, and for that reason, I have never fully embraced it. There may come a day - but not yet.

Adobe, of course, had to adapt Photoshop to the emerging technologies (world wide web, cloud, etc.) mentioned above. By 2012, "the cloud" had become a ubiquitous way for computer users and networks to store and save files, and even to run executable programs from a cloud server. The software models of releasing a hard update that had to be loaded on computers (more or less) individually have, for the most part, become a thing of the past as providers now distribute their programs as licensed use cloud-based software. Like much change, there are pros and cons. In most cases, a user can no longer own their own current version, stand-alone copy of a software program. They are now essentially "renting" them. Some find that to be a significant negative. At the same time, it has made the process of pushing out new features, upgrades and fixes much more efficient. Adobe, like most other providers, got on the bandwagon in 2013, discontinuing the standalone software for PS at CS6. The next iteration was solely cloud - based (Now Photoshop "Creative Cloud"). At first there was a fair amount of push back from seasoned and long-time users. But over a relatively short couple years, I think most of us have embraced the CC versions, finding that improvements, new features and the like are nearly immediately available and cost nothing other than your annual subscription cost. It means we don't have to wait until we think the time to upgrade is right, to have a cool new feature.

At first it seemed like updates and new features were rolled out roughly semi-annually, maybe quarterly. But in the last couple years (particularly with the proliferation of "AI", it seems like those new features come more and more frequently, sometimes as frequently as monthly. PS also has a freely downloable beta version which can be run concurrently with with your official copy which gets them even sooner and lets beta users be the testing ground. For the most part I have viewed this as a great feature! lately, my little "udate available" icon on my PC seems to be lit up in red every week, in some instance more than once a week. Actual version and sub-version changes are less frequent, with full version releases happening roughly annually.

THE RECENT rollout of Photoshop is ver. 27.6.0. In 2023, Adobe stopped labeling it as "CC," and now just refers to it as PS again. Here I touch on the new features in this release that I find most impressive, and more importantly, useful. Some of them are more or less full new features, while others are improvements and additions to features that have already existed in one form or another. Note the heavy emphasis these days on "AI" - powered features. There is a caveat here, in my view. At the time of this writing, you have to pay extra to access many of the AI features. The industry has developed a system for charging, which they call "credits" (Adobe refers to them as "generative credits"). My PS Creative Cloud account gives me 250 credits per month. They are not cumulative! Once I use them up, I must wait until it resets the next month (adding an additional 250), but any unused credits for the month go away when the reset occurs. Alternatively, I can purchase additional credits - in bundles (not individually) by purchasing another subscription to Adobe's AI component: Firefly. The cheapest and smallest number is an additional 2,000 credits for $9.99 per month. Hmnn. Seems like a pretty clever way to lull us into using generative AI to the point we have gotten so used to it that we think we cannot do without. Then before we know it, we are paying another $100 plus per year for our software. Be aware! The other "negative" we are not hearing much about is the environmental resource side of AI. We are seeing huge data centers cropping up all over the world these days. They are controversial, as they are often build adjacent to residential areas and they are noisy. The also consume a huge amount of energy. In addition, they produce heat, which must be disappated - usually in the form of fresh water; already a scarce resource. Some food for thought. But now on to the update.

NEW FEATURES

• Rotate Object:  In my view, this is the biggest truly "new" addition. This "AI" driven feature allows you to rotate a 2-D object selected within an image. The AI component attempts to add in elements of the image/object that might have been there if you had photographed from a different perspective. I have seen it demonstrated with relatively simple object where there is not a huge amount of detail or color variations (e.g., a car). Like all of the AI being generated these days (by Firefly in PS), I am amazed at what it can do. But I am also sometimes disappointed in how it renders these AI - generated image elements. Like I have with other features, I have now played with it just a bit, using, among other things, front views of faces and have been duly impressed with how well the AI does. I have also seen it used with cars, motorcycles, etc. I have not tried it yet with a more detailed subject, like "busy" architecture. What we do know is that like all the AI I have worked with, it will get better with time. Be aware that this feature uses a substantial amount of your generative credits (20 per application), so you can see that it would be really easy to blast through your alloted (free) credits with this one..
  
  
• Remove Reflections: Perhaps the second "biggest" new feature, Remove Reflections has been out for a while, available in PS "technology previews," as a part of Adobe Camera Raw (ACR). It was subsequently added to Light Room. Version 27.6.0 now adds this now as a standard feature Photoshop itself (not just ACR). However, be aware that it only works on 8-b it images! So probably best practice is to continue using this in ACR if you have a raw image. In ACR, this application will be found under "Distraction Removal" / Reflections. I did a dedicated blog post a year ago on this application when it first became available as a part of PS technology previews. At that time my opinion was that it basically wasn't "ready for prime time." Since I did a dedicated post, I won't cover it here, other than to say it is available. Instead, I will do a follow-up dedicated post in the very near future (so watch for it i the next week or so). This feature does not use generative credits.
  
  
• Remove Distractions: The next biggest change - but perhaps the one you will find most useful - is a major update to the existing "Remove Tool." Back in 2023, ver. 24.5 added the first "AI" "cloning-type tool." For years we have had the clone, healing brush, and spot healing brush tool as our primary "retouching" tool. Then Adobe added "context-aware" technology. More recently, the addition of the "Remove Tool" to the Tool Bar added the option of AI to context aware technology. The tool provides the option of no AI, AI, or let PS decide if/when AI is appropriate. As of this writing this tool does not consume generative credits. I have taken to using the Remove Tool probably 90 - 95 percent of the time instead of cloning.
  
  In October, 2025, a feature was added to the Remove Tool, called "Find Distractions." It is found up on the Menu Bar and appears when the remove tool is selected on the Tool Bar. Originally, "Find Distractions included only "wires and cables" as a dropdown option in PS, but was also (still is) available in ACR and included both wires and cables, and people (I covered this in a separate blog on AI back in May, 2025). Then, in February, 2025, a second dropdown added a "people" feature to PS. When clicked on, these tools auto-find the subjects. It is a 2-step process with the first click on "find" finding and highlighting (selecting) the objects. A click on the checkmark on the Menu bar completes the action (second step). There is also an option to check create new layer (recommended) on the Menu bar.

The newest version (27.6.0) now adds a new dropdown choice with an even more robust removal algorithym: "General Distractions." General Distractions, auto-finds and categorizes items PS thinks may be a distraction and selects them for removal (I am not sure why, but rather than gather all these under "General Distractions," PS has left the "People", and "Wires and Cables" applications separate). The tool continues to offer the choice of AI off or AI on (or let PS decide). Up to 26 different "Distractions" can be identified in "General Distractions," like poles, urban elements, vehicles, vegetation, "visual clutter," and others. I won't try to describe them all here. Play with it. It is a very powerful tool. While the interface seems sophisticated, it really is just a selection tool. For General Distractions, each differently identified category highlights the selection in a different (customizable) color. But they are all still nothing more than selections. When the tool is active it acts as a highlighting brush and you can highlight anything you want and when you click the checkbox that will be removed along with the automatically selected items. Likewise, if you hold down your alt (option in Mac) key, the brush will be an erasor and remove highlighted areas. This creates a lot of flexibility with this tool.

At the top of the General Distractions dropdown, there is an option to "select all," which is checked by default. you can uncheck/check items to "un-hi-light" them (meaning they won't be removed if left unchecked). You can also use that option to see what each category is recognizing (or not) in the image. I find the image very cluttered when the "select all" option is checked. I prefer to uncheck the select all box and then check each category separately. I think it makes things much easier to visualize. YMMV. 

Like so much of AI, this new tool certainly isn't perfect. Most of the time it does a pretty good job. Depending on your setting, you have the chance to deselect indivual object. The selections are color coded (assigned by PS, but you can customize and even brighten them). It also gives you the choice whether to save the result on a new layer. On medium to simple compositions I have been pretty amazed at how "smart" it is. On more busy images, it doesn't always do so well. On one image it did such a poor job that I ultimately reverted it and did my removal indivivually. Most of time, though, it is going to give you good results and at the very least a good start to your retouching. This is another one that might sneak up on you as far as your use of generative credits. Originally, the wires and cables only used one. But using all these above removals could very well stack and quickly exhaust your credits. I like to leave AI off on this tool and have been pretty happy with the results.

• Dynamic Text: I only use the Text tools in PS on very rare occasion, the new text features don't get me to excited. If you use text frequently, your experience (and excitement) may vary significantly. Rather than trying to comment usefully on something I don't use, here is what Google AI says: "Photoshop 27.6.0 introduces significant text engine improvements, including Dynamic Text, which allows text to flow inside custom shapes like circles, arches, and bows, moving beyond traditional rectangular bounding boxes. It also enhances Generative AI capabilities for text prompts."
  
  
• Layer Cleanup. Similarly, although I use layers frequently, most of the time they serve a temporary purpose for me and the end product doesn't usually retain them in my final images and don't use lots of them in a file, so labeling them is something I generally forego. But the new "Layer Cleanup" feature is certainly intriguing. If applied, it does two things. First, it "contextually" labels your layers. PS decides what to name them. It is, of course, customizable, so you can change the label names. "Cleanup" seems like a wonky name for that tool. But here is where that "cleanup" name probably comes from. The second thing the tool does is removes any empty layers in your file. I will probably play with those features a bit.
  
  
• Harmonize: In 2025, Adobe added this feature to PS beta. It is (yet another) AI application that is designed to use AI to automatically blend an object placed on a separate layer into an image, by adjusting light, tone, color and shadows. It is pretty powerful, and is now incorporated into the main PS program. But keep in mind that it is going to use a minimum of 5 generative credits for each "generation."
  
  
• Generative AI Models: PS has used Adobe's AI model, Firefly, for its native AI generated work. But more recently they have partnered with a couple other AI generation softwares, including Gemini, and Flux. These models now appear in a dropdown in the lower left of the dialog box and can be selected in lieu of Adobe's Firefly model, presumably giving you more choices in results, and more choice and flexibility in your prompts for generation, including the ability to add "Reference Images" (see below). Beware, however. Using these partner models will come at a significant cost of generative credits (20 for Flux and 40 for Gemini!).
  
  
• Add Reference Image: Here is one that I could see myself finding useful. I only use the PS AI tools on a very limited basis. But one that I have used a little more frequently is "Generative Expand," which is kind of a subset of the Generative Fill and Generate Image, AI features now found under the Edit dropdown in Photoshop. It is also found as an option when using the crop tool. For about 10 years now, the content aware crop option has been there, and I have found it a great tool for around the edges cropping issues. Then, in 2023, they added another option to the crop tool: Generative Expand. I have found it useful in a small handful of images where my on site composition wasn't as good as it could have been. Again, it consumes generative credits. What 27.6.0 adds now is the ability to upload reference images. Note that this only works, though, if you choose one of Adobe's "partners." The default is Adobe's "Firefly," but you have the option to use one of a couple other "partner" softwares (there is a small dropdown on the bottom left of the dialog) and upoad from 3 - 8 images of your own that the software will use as a reference to build its AI addition. There is quite a bit of customization available. I am not certain how many generative credits use of the partners will consume, but it is likely to be more than the default (which has been 1 per generation typically, for generative expand).
  
  
• Actions Panel: One final significant new addition is the expanded and improved Actions Panel. The new panel is reorganized, and offers many new "actions" that you routinely have had to do "by hand" like sharpen, resize, save as and others. It also separates Adobe Actions from your own personal actions, which remain in new separate panel. It is worth taking a look and doing some browsing.

THIS ONE was kind of a big "drop" in one update, so I thought it was worth trying to summarize. Of course all the real gurus out there will have their blogs and YouTube videos and I recommend doing some "surfing" and finding them as well as watching the videos. Lots of interesting stuff there!