I Have Seen Some Churches - III - The Churches of New England

First Congregational Church on the Common - Townsend, Vermont
Built in 1790 (today affiliated with United Church of Christ)
Copyright Andy Richards 2010 - All Rights Reserved

THE FIRST two posts in this series illustrated some of the very grandiose churches, Cathedrals, Mosques and Shrines I have had the privilege of seeing in person over the past few years. The majority of them have been in Europe. Some are thousands of years old. Some are fairly new. Some (particularly shrines and temples of Asia) are colorful. All are architecturally  striking.

Congregational Church - Middlebury, Vermont
Copyright Andy Richards 2006 - All Rights Reserved

I WANT to turn a corner for a minute and look at some very much simpler churches, but every bit as symbolic. The churches of New England. By comparison, the architecture of these churches are very simple. There are a number of reasons behind this, I think.

United Church of Westford, Vermont
Copyright Andy Richards 2006 - All Rights Reserved

THE RELIGIOUS philosopy in the early New England Colonies consisted of a very simple, straightforward set of core beliefs. "Grandiose" was not part of them. Many of the citizens who started and built these churches came from Europe to escape some of the grandiose and imperious approaches to religion prevalent in Europe. Freedom to worship as they see fit. Simplicity of beliefs translated into simplicity of design. In the early days of the colonies in the 17th century, the Puritans heavily influenced the design of "churches" (they called them "meeting houses" rather than churches), with a square, unadorned building being the central feature.

Sharon Congregational Church (UCC) - Sharon, Vermont
Copyright Andy Richards 2010 - All Rights Reserved

DURING THE 18th century, design slowly evolved, with towers (bell towers) and/or steeples becoming common. The primary style over the years has been Gothic, or has evolved from Gothic. The design of many of these later churches has been classified as "federal" or "colonial." Architectural touches were borrowed from Europe including the architecture of Londons' famed Christopher Wren, seen primarily in the and steeple/bell towers of many of the churches.

Stowe Community Church - Stowe, Vermont
Copyright Andy Richards 2005 - All Rights Reserved

A SECOND highly relevant factor was the availability of building materials, construction equipment, architects and builders. Trees - and therefore wood - were plentiful in the northeastern United States. Wood was comparatively easy to work with, and cheap, given its abundance.

West Hill United Methodist Church - Chelsea, Vermont
Copyright Andy Richards 2015 - All Rights Reserved

IN KEEPING with the early simplicity of the Puritan beliefs, churches were - if painted at all - painted in plain colors. The white that we so often see today in "postcard" images did not actually come into being until the 20th century! The pigments available before were more of an off-white (or perhaps whitewash).

The East Orange Union Church is a non-denominational Church built in 1819 - It is perhas the most uniquely painted church I have photographed in New England. New growth from the Ridge Road above has rendered it nearly impossible to photograph today.
Copyright Andy Richards 2006 - All Rights Reserved

THE DISCOVERY of Titanium Dioxide in the 1920's gave forth to the bright white paint that we see on so many of today's New England churches. This happened at about the same time as the so-called, "Colonial Revival" architectural movement. The Colonial Revival period idealized the colonial history of New England, creating  the iconic postcard image of the white church on the town common. However, as some of my images show, sometimes they are painted colors other than white.

Baptist Church - Sutton, Vermont
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

NOT ALL of these picturesque churches are still in use today as religious meeting houses. Many of them have been preserved as important local landmarks, like the West Hill Methodist Church above, which was closed in 2016, but is still operated by The Methodist Association as a historical site.

The Village of East Corinth, Vermont is often photographed from numerous perspectives, but you will seldom see a shot without the white, East Corinth Congregational Church and its Christopher Wren-inspired steeple anchoring it.
Copyright Andy Richards 2026 - All Rights Reserved

FOR LANDSCAPE photographers, the simple, often white, geographic structures of these churches make a wonderful element, anchor point, or even subject in these idyllic rural villages. The East Corinth shot above has a lot going on, but without the church, it just doesn't work. But in many instances, there is not only one centrally featured church but two, or even more. This makes for a number of good photographs from distance - from the perspective that my good friend and mentor, John Knox calls: "steeples in the hills."

The Village of Barton, Vermont - In this shot from up on Kinsey Road, you can count 3 steeples
Copyright Andy Richards 2010 - All Rights Reserved

Twin Steeples of these churches are actually across the road from each other in the Village of Chelsea, Vermont (credit to John Knox for showing me this scene)
Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

IF ANY readers here are classmates of mine from Hillsdale College back in the late '70s - early '80s - and if they were fortunate as I was to have Dr. John Willson as their Freshman American History (required course for all Hillsdale grads in those days) professor, they will (presumably fondly) remember the phrase: "family, church, and local community" drilled into them on an near-daily basis in his class. As you travel throughout our country - particularly in rural and first-settled parts, you will see two-thirds of that trilogy grandly illustrated. Every community has at least one church and it is always a central feature. Indeed in many cases, that church spire is visible from every angle. And in the case of the New England Churches, it is always the white steeple that shows up.

The Peacham Congregational Church's prominent and oft-photographed steeple can be seen prominently, both from afar, and from every angle around the village
Copyright Andy Richards - All Rights Reserved

NOT EVERY "New England" church is found in New England. Indeed, it seems that wherever settlors moved west and to some extent, south, they carried those building traditions with them. In my couple trips to Great Smoky Mountain National Park in Tennesee, the former community of Cade's Cove has 3 churches - all with the similar styling of the New England churches above. The Cade's Cove Methodist Church is perhaps the best known of them.

Cade's Cove United Methodist Church - Great Smoky Mountain National Park, Townsend, Tennessee
Copyright Andy Richards 2023 - All Rights Reserved

Sainte Anne's Church - Mackinac Island, Michigan
This splendid copy of the Gothic Revival style New England Church is a long way from New England
Copyright Andy Richards 2007 - All Rights Reserved

THE ARCHITECTURE of these churches fascinates me. As I briefly touched on above, the earliest churches were very simple, rectangular buildings called "meeting houses." At some point, cupolas, belfries and then steeples were added. My conjecture is that the main reason for these additions were as a bell tower, as churchbells were certainly an important part of the culture. The Cade's Cove church is - in my mind - as close to the early Puritan "meeting houses" as you can find today. It is very simple, both inside and out.

Churches on the Common; Newfane, Vermont
Copyright Andy Richards 2010 - All Rights Reserved

THE TWO side-by-side churches on the Newfane, Vermont Common are a perhaps "fun" illustration of two very popular "versions" of New England Church architecture. The church on the left, in the very traditional Gothic Revival style, was the town's first meeting house, built in 1832. Today it is known as "The Union Hall." Shortly afterward, in 1839, the Newfane Congregational Church was built directly next door. Whild also mostly Gothic Revival style, this one sports the then-increasingly popular tall steeple reaching - presumably - for "the heavens," inspired by England's famous 18th century architect: Christopher Wren.

Strafford Meeting House - Strafford, Vermont
Copyright Andy Richards 2010 - All Rights Reserved

HIGH ON a hill above the Strafford, Vermont Common, sits The Strafford Meeting House; perhaps the most photogenic of these churches that I have ever seen. It is also perhaps my best example of the evolution of some of these churches to the more grand "New England classic revival," or "federal" style. Note how much more detailed and palatine the steeple complex is.

Trinity Church - St. Anne's Square - Newport, Rhode Island
This late 17th century church is Rhode Island's oldest Episcopal Church
Copyright Andy Richards 2016 - All Rights Reserved

THIS BLOG post might lead you to believe that I am suggesting the only place there are great examples of classic, colonial New England style churches is Vermont. I have spent many years stomping around Vermont with my camera in hand. Unfortunately, I haven't spent much time in the neighboring New England states, so I don't have any personal examples of them. Something I would like to do someday. I know that, particularly in New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island and Connecticut, hundreds more examples of these churches exist in the many small bergs and villages. At this point, my only image that comes close is of the Trinity Church Steeple in Newport, Rhode Island. I hope to add to the collection in future years.

I Have Seen Some Churches - II

Torii Gate - Fushimi Inari Shrine - Kyoto, Japan
The Torii Gate is a traditional entrance to *usually) a Shinto Shrine
Copyright Andy Richards 2015 - All Rights Reserved

IN 2015, we had the great fortune to spend a little over a week in Japan. It was my first trip to Asia (save for the ever so brief touch in Istanbul on a cruise stop a couple years previously in 2013). In a way, that is surprising, as my dad spent some time in Korea and Okinawa during his stint in the service. My oldest sister was born in Okinawa, and my parents fondly remembered friends and cultural experiences there. Ironically enough, I have never (yet) been to Okinawa. We did visit Japan again, though, for a fairly long period in 2024, spending a week in Tokyo, and then a two-week cruise around the main island. A very memorable trip.

Seiryu-ji Temple - Aomori, Japan
The Buddhist influence is often incorporated into a Shinto Shrine - This is the largest bronze statute in Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

MY SON was married in Tokyo in August, 2015, and our daughter-in-law's parents (some truly wonderful people), took us to Kyoto, where we stayed for 2 nights and toured for most of 3 days - mostly with a private tour guide. It was a truly memorable time.

Seiryu-ji Temple - Aomori, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

RELIGION, SYMBOLISM and Shrines are an inherent part of the Japanese culture. There are two primary religions observed in Japan: Shinto and Buddhism. A large part of the population actually observes a mixture of the two. Less than 1% of the Japanese population observes the Christian religion which is so prevalent in the U.S. and Europe. There seems to be general agreement among observers that Shinto, which represents nature worship and spiritual purity, is the central influence, with many 100's of years of Buddhism also exerting its influence and often inter-mixing with Shinto symbolism and practice.

Fushimi Inari Shrine - Kyoto, Japan
A typical modern Shinto Shrine - Repeating patterns, bright colors and geometric shapes modified with (often upward) curves
Copyright Andy Richards 2015 - All Rights Reserved

GEOMETRIC SHAPES and often bold colors carry much religious and cultural symbolizm in Japan. Repetition is often seen in architectural design, which also carries with it a certain appealing simplicity. In keeping with the nature worship, many (if not all) shrines (even those in the center of large population hubs) are significantly affected by natural things like ponds, plants and flowers. For the photographer, these shrines and their surroundings make wonderful fodder.

Temple Rokuan-ji - Kyoto, Japan
Doing my research for our planned trip in 2015, I came across this image and immediately committed to visit and photograph this very beautiful temple - and yes, that is real gold!
Copyright Andy Richards 2015 - All Rights Reserved

IT IS not unusual to find shrines and temples set in natural settings, often right smack in the middle of high-population metropolitan areas. The Asian culture is very oriented toward nature, gardens, water, and ornate plants.

Torii Gate - Koishikawa Korakuen Garden - Tokyo, Japan
A more traditional example of an older Torii Gate, often painted white and of natural materials
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

AROUND THE 6th century, Buddhism, and along with it, architecture from mainland Asia came to Japan, bringing the bright colors to the temples and shrines so oftgen seen in Japan today. Though there are several important colors, perphaps the most important and symbolic is that wonderful red/orange color: vermillion. The vermillion pigment was derived from the mineral, cinnabar, which is a rather bright, red color. Cinnabar contains large percentages of mercury, and thus, is highly toxic. That probably wasn't very well-known centuries ago, and I would venture to guess that today's "vermillion" pigment is probably some type of synthetic which does not contain mercury. One of its positive qualities was that mercury was a natural preservative for wood. Vermillion was rather rare and expensive, and thus, reserved for things like temples and shrines for many years. The color has become more common today, but it probably explains why most of what you see on display in Japan and other parts of Asia are shrines.

Temple Todai-ji - A more traditional shrine with natural materials and looks - Nara, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2015 - All Rights Reserved

TRADITIONALLY, JAPANESE Shrines were (and often still are) built from natural, mainly wood materials, and are often left unfinished in their natural state. But the addition of vermillion in the 6th Century to many of these buildings was partly a consequence of the prominence of several "sacred" colors in the Shinto/Buddhist/Taoist religions (including green, black, and purple, which we also so a fair amount of in Japan).

THESE TEMPLES/shrines are often more than just a "church" or building. The Ikuta Shrine in Kobe, Japan is a wonderful example of how the grounds are a combination of landscape and multiple architectural examples of the Shinto tradition.

Main Entrance - Torii Gate - Ikuta Shrine - Kobe, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

Ikuta Shrine - Kobe, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

Ikuta Shrine -Kobe, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

Ikuta Shrine - Kyoto, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

BECAUSE THEIR approach to their religion is more holistic and communal with nature, their "places of worship" or often not confined to "churches" or gathering halls and examples can often be found in parks and gardens. In fact some of the shrines and temples themselves are part of a larger complex of garden and parklands.

Kiyomizo Temple - Kyoto, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2015 - All Rights Reserved

REPETITION IS often a tenet of Asian art and architectural design. In the context  Asian temples and shrines, the repetition is not only within the elements of design but also often seen as a motif in the overall landscape. The tiny Kiyomizo "mini-temple" above is a very small, but very similar copy of the much larger Fushimi Inari Shrine and grounds at the bottom of the mountain (this shot is the only time during that year's Japan visit that I felt a bit under-equipped - I would have liked to have had a telephoto lens for this shot - but it does, nonethelss, show the landcape in context).

Kaminarimon Gate - To Buddhist Shrine Senso-ji - Tokyo, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

ONCE THE largest city in the world by population (now third behind Jakarta, Indonesia and Dhaka, Bangladesh), but squeezed into a relatively small land mass for its 330 million inhabitants, it is amazing to me just how much "parkland" Tokyo has preserved. And much of it is associated with the various shrines and temples around the massive city. But not always. There is one example where one of the most significant and famous temples is compressed right into one of most populous, and crowded urban areas. I shot the images composited above in 2024 in front of the very crowded Kaminarimon ("Thunder") Gate, which is the entrance to the Buddhist Senso-ji Temple in the Akasuta Prefecture of Tokyo. As you can see from the image below, rather than tranquil, "commune with nature" surroundings, the walkway leading up to the temple is lined with very commercial shops! This is the only place I saw anything like this near a shrine or temple.

Behind the Kaminarimon Gate, approaching Senso-ji - Tokyo, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

JUST AS often, it seems, there is a mix of all the elements discussed above, some bright color, some natural materials and the traditional shapes blended into the natural landscape, like the small shrine that is one of many elements of the Seiriyu-ji Shrine in Aomori Japan, below.

Seiryu-ji Temple Complex - Aomori, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

I NOTED above that there are a few "sacred" colors in the Shinto-Buddhist belief system. Red (or vermillion), we said, may be the most common. It is thought to ward off evil and is a signal of strength. It has become a symbol of wealth in Japan, also, in great part because during its earliest introduction it was too expensive for all but the weathiest (which often translated to emperors and other high up leaders). Perhaps the second most common color I have seen is green (midori). Green symbolizes nature, harmony, and peace. It not only compliments the rich color of vermillion artistically, but is thought by architects to be a blend of the strength and power with nature and harmony. Perhaps my favorite example of this was the small temple at the entrance of the Seiryu-ji Temple complex in Aomori. I absolutely love the Vermillion and green mix here, with the geographic elements.

Seiryu-ji Temple - Aomori, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

AS MUCH as I love the bright colors, there is certainly a peaceful "vibe" about the use of the more traditional, natural colors of natural wood and white. In the Shinto belief system, white symbolizes spiritual and physical purity. What impressed me about the Seiryuden Temple below, however, was its elegant simplicity. There were only the colors you see here - inside and out - and the interior was very "spartan," in its furnishings. The glass block benches gave the temple a very modern, yet still elegant look and feel. Like the more traditional European Churches in the first blog in this series, I know I will be back in Japan at some point. I also have my eyes on a more extend visit to South Korea some day soon. So there will be more pictures.

Seiryuden Temple - Kyoto, Japan
Copyright Andy Richards 2015 - All Rights Reserved

I Have Seen some Churches!

Prominent Steeples in Zurich, Switzerland
Copyright Andy Richards 2024 - All Rights Reserved

MAYBE TOO many. 😊 It is not hard to see why churches figure so fully into sightseeing around the world. They tend to be the foremost specimina of the historical development of art and architecture, being possibly rivaled only by some of the impressive palaces around the world. I have seen some pretty cool churches, from simple to ornate, and have only sometimes felt that my photography of them did them justice. The shots in this blog are by no means all of my images. I have shot 100's of churches over the world. And I will continue to add to that collection as time goes on. These are just a few of them That "curated" just for this post. This is the first in a series of posts where I showcase some of the very different "churches" I have had the pleasure of visiting all over the world.

St. Colman's Cathedral - Cobh, Ireland
Copyright Andy Richards 2019 - All Rights Reserved

ONE OF my favorites around the world, and perhaps the most imposing steeple I have observed, is St. Colman's Cathedral in Cobh, Ireland. The tall, gothic steeple reaches around 300 feet into the sky. It is the tallest church in the Republic of Ireland.

St. Patrick's Cathedral - Dublin, Ireland
Copyright Andy Richards 2019 - All Rights Reserved

THAT IS - to my way of thinking - the major positive of seeing all these churches around the world. They tend to make wonderful photographic subjects, if you can find an interesting viewpoint. They stay put, and so with few exceptions, you can try to time your shooting to the rigth conditions. Lighting (both natural and artificial) often lends drama and depth to them.

St. Paul's Cathedral - London, England
Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

CHURCHES AND similar religious architecture, as is true of religion in general, have always been front and center in every civilization. No matter the religious leaning, it is nearly impossible to visit any primary city (as well as most smaller towns) without a steeple or spire (or more) being prominently seen from nearly everywhere in the vicinity, reaching - as it were - to the heavens.

Westminster Abbey - Westminster; London, England
Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

CHURCHES REPRESENT every developing phase of architecture, beginning with the ancient pyramids and continuing through the Middle Ages (with such Medieval "period" architecture as Gothic, Byzantine, and Romanesque), the Renaissance ("neo-Gothic," Baroque), the Neo-Classic and modern periods. At the same time, particularly during the Medieval and Renaissance periods, there were also many examples of Moorish architecture, largely brought by the Muslims from Africa, Asia and the Middle East, and in the eastern Asian part of the worlds, influence from Asian architecture (particular Japan, China and Korea).

Chandeliers and stained glass windows lend color to the otherwise very gothic appearing La Segrada Familia in Barcelona, Spain
Copyright Andy Richards 2015 - All Rights Reserved

WITH THE notable exception of Asian (Japan, Korea, China) shrines, bright colors are not a primary feature of most churches. It does, however, serve its ornamental purpose in the form of paintings, tapestries, and stained glass windows.

Understated but nonetheless colorful chandelier and stained glass windows highllight the monotone organ pipes and organic interior of Trondheim, Norway's Nidaros Cathedral
Copyright Andy Richards 2025 - All Rights Reserved

IN MY own travel experience, architecture seems to inform history, and the architecture of Northern and Central Europe, Eastern Europe, Asia, Africa , North America and South America are all quite different. And churches generally are the first buildings erected in any historical civilization. Thus "European" churches tend to come more from gothic traditions and origins, as modified by subsequent periods, like neo classic.

One of the oldest churches in the world; The Chruch of the Holy Apostles sits in the center of the Roman Agora in Athens, Greece
Copyright Andy Richards - 2015 - All Rights Reserved

OFTEN MUTED organic materials are used inside and out. Earthy colors are common. While very old churches were often constructed with wooden timbers, newer churches into the middle ages and the renaissance replaced them with more durable materials such as stone. Stone masonry was - of course - very important part of the building trades. And these materials were inherently more resistant to nature disaster like wind and fire.

The Front side of Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris, France - photographed in 2019 shortly after the fire. The back side was all scaffolding and charred timber remnants. Hopefully my upcoming trip to Paris in 2026 will afford the opportunity to photograph the newly completed building.
Copyright Andy Richards 2019 - All Rights Reserved

TWO OF Europe's keystone churches, St. Paul's Cathedral in London and Notre Dame in Paris were substantially destroyed by fire: the older, much smaller, original St. Paul's by the 17th century great fire of London, and Notre Dame (which sustained major damage to its wood framed upper story and roof) in the more recent, 2019 fire.

The distinctly gothic "St. Vitus Cathedral" in Prague, Czech Republic, built in the 14th Century
Copyright Andy Richards 

EUROPEAN CHURCHES  seem to me to be more grandiose. Large and imposing, they almost always reflect the trends of art and architecture of the times, often designed by some of the great, European artists. I believe symbolism is a huge part of the design of all churches. Grandiose shows, in my view, the power of the god for which the church was built. Many of the European churches are also packed with small instances of what might be called "micro" symbolism.

St. Mark's Cathedral - Venice, Italy
Copyright Andy Richards 2019 - All Rights Reserved

IN OTHER parts of the world, churches symbolize a much simpler approach and view of the religion, though perhaps also highly influenced by practicality (like the availability of building materials). Thus, we see a huge proliferation of simple, white-steepled ("New England" styled) churches in the small communities around the United States, and in some parts of Northern Europe. Photographically, I am often drawn to these simpler structures by their straightforward lines and shapes. As they are often white, I look for context that will frame and give the photo some variety and interest.

What remains of the original St. Paul's Church, London, England
Copyright Andy Richards 2021 - All Rights Reserved

NOWHERE HAVE I ever experienced symbolism more starkly, however than in Asia (in my case, primarily Japan, but I know Korea, China, and I am certain other countries in that part of the world showcase similar architecture).shrines' most salient characteristics are the characteristic shapes, and bright colors (particularly red, vermillion, green and golds).  And they are next.

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