View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
PhantomLord
Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 476 Location: Szczecin, Poland
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 2:47 pm Post subject: Tamron's test 27A (SP 28-80), 01A (SP 35-80), 17A (35-70) |
|
|
PhantomLord wrote:
Hi,
Some time ago I bought Tamron 17A 35-70mm/3.5 and I loved it. Found out that SP model 01A 35-80/2.8-3.8 should be even better and I bought it as well. Accidentally I bought Tamron SP 27A 28-80/3.5-4.2 as well (20£ for 17A, 16£ for 01A and 17£ for 27A incl. shipping). So when after all of them arrived I decided to try to compare them.
It's not a fancy test, but show lens sharpness and softness in normal conditions. All photos were made using Canon EOS 600d, JPGs out of box with Landscape picture style set and WB to Cloudy. Every photo was focused on the central part of the image. I was not using tripod, so there are some shifts between photos. Because there are different shortest and longest focal lengths different part of the image will be showed in Corners section. Because it was cloudy day I decided to go for auto ISO, and shutter not slower than 1/250th, so wide-open are usually on ISO 100, f/5.6 on ISO 200 and f/8 usually ISO 400-800 depending from set.
Every set will be as follows from the left: Tamron SP 27A, Tamron SP 01A, Tamron 17A (if not stated otherwised)
1st Part:
Here's the whole photo, and followed by the 100% crops of the central part of the image:
Every lens at it's shortest focal range:
Wide-open (different order: 27A at f/3.5, 01A at f/2.8, 01A at f/3.5, 17A at f/3.5):
Closed to f/4:
Closed to f/5.6:
Every lens at it's longest focal length:
Wide-open:
Stopped one click from wide-open (f/4.5 for 27A, and f/4 for 01A and 17A):
Closed to f/5.6:
2nd Part:
It's close focus test, not the closest possible, but about 40-50cm
Whole image:
Every lens set to ~35mm. Those are 100% from the centre part of the image:
At f/4:
Whole image:
Every lens set to longest focal length. Those are 100% from the centre part of the image:
At f/4.5
3rd Part:
This is more or less straight wall and I was about 10-15m from it, shooting perpendicular to it.
Whole image:
Every lens at its' shortest focal. Those are 100% from the center part of the image:
Wide-open (different order - 27A at f/3.5, 01A at f/2.8, 01A at f/3.5, 17A at f/3.5):
Closed to f/5.6:
Closed to f/8:
Every lens at its' shortest focal. Those are 100% from the right upper corner of the image:
Wide-open (different order - 27A at f/3.5, 01A at f/2.8, 01A at f/3.5, 17A at f/3.5):
Closed to f/5.6:
Closed to f/8:
Every lens at ~50mm. Those are 100% from the center part of the image:
Wide-open (different order - 27A at f/3.5, 01A at f/2.8, 01A at f/3.5, 17A at f/3.5):
Closed to f/5.6:
Closed to f/8:
Every lens at ~50mm. Those are 100% from the right upper corner of the image:
Wide-open (different order - 27A at f/3.5, 01A at f/2.8, 01A at f/3.5, 17A at f/3.5):
Closed to f/5.6:
Closed to f/8:
Every lens at its' longest focal. Those are 100% from the center part of the image:
Wide-open:
Closed to f/5.6:
Closed to f/8:
Every lens at its' longest focal. Those are 100% from the right upper corner of the image:
Wide-open:
Closed to f/5.6:
Closed to f/8:
_________________ Mateusz
No good story ever starts with drinking tea.
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mateuszmolik/sets/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PhantomLord
Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 476 Location: Szczecin, Poland
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PhantomLord wrote:
My conclusions are simple:
- Tamron SP 01A 35-80/2.8-3.8 is the best, however f/2.8 is quite hazy
- Tamron 17A 35-70/3.5 is not that much away from 01A, it's sharp from wide-open, little stopped it's sharp across whole APS-C frame, need to be stopped more at its' longest focal length.
- Tamron SP 27A 28-80/3.5-4.2 is pretty good in the centre at 28-40mm, but pretty lousy everywhere else. 50+mm is terrible in the center until heavily stopped, corners are bad across the whole focal length.
If I have to choose between Tamron SP 01A and Tamron 17A I would choose SP, however it's just a little bit better than 17A and 17A is smaller, joyful to use and generally cheaper (not in my case though). _________________ Mateusz
No good story ever starts with drinking tea.
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mateuszmolik/sets/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
norland
Joined: 10 Aug 2013 Posts: 165
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
norland wrote:
Interesting test -- had wondered how the 17A (which I have) compared to the others.
It seems close enough to the best to justify staying with the 17A. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
ManualFocus-G
Joined: 29 Dec 2008 Posts: 6624 Location: United Kingdom
Expire: 2014-11-24
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 5:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ManualFocus-G wrote:
Super test, thank you! This fits with my previous results i.e. the cheap 35-70/3.5 is incredible value for money
The 28-80mm SP is soft at large aperture but has lovely colours whilst the 35-80mm SP is in a league of its own. _________________ Graham - Moderator
Shooter of choice: Fujifilm X-T20 with M42, PB and C/Y lenses
See my Flickr photos at http://www.flickr.com/photos/manualfocus-g |
|
Back to top |
|
|
bernhardas
Joined: 01 Jan 2013 Posts: 1437
Expire: 2017-05-23
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 6:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
bernhardas wrote:
Edited
Last edited by bernhardas on Tue May 03, 2016 10:23 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PhantomLord
Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 476 Location: Szczecin, Poland
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 7:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PhantomLord wrote:
Thank you guys for kind words.
I get a lot of knowledge and saw a lot of wonderful photos on this forum, so this is my small way to give something from myself.
Norland and Graham: I couldn't agree with you more. 17A is great value for money and I was having real fun shooting with it. Every single meeting with friends or quick journey made with this lens results with a couple of very nice photos. Now it will find new home with my friend as I am gathering money for my first AF lens (Tamron SP 17-50/2. (I hope I will not be excluded from forum )
Graham: I must use 28-80 a little more as I am intrigued by what you said about colours . What's more, my 27A is in excellent condition, with smooth zoom and focus ring which gives wonderful feel (+ I have the original case)
bernhardas:
Quote: |
I have to admit however, that for the last couple of concrete wall pictures I nearly lost the will to live |
Mission accomplished then . You made my day Bern .
Cheers
Mateusz _________________ Mateusz
No good story ever starts with drinking tea.
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mateuszmolik/sets/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
drjs
Joined: 25 Feb 2013 Posts: 485 Location: USA
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 7:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
drjs wrote:
Great review!
Although I don't own a 17A. My own testing bearing out the same results as you have described here between 01A and 27A. 35-80 is a splendid lens and with a 01F 2X T/C, an extremely competent macro lens as well.
Kudos to Tamron on designing such an versatile lens. _________________ Follow me on 500px |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PhantomLord
Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 476 Location: Szczecin, Poland
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
PhantomLord wrote:
Ahh... Few weeks ago I missed auction with 01F in exc. condition that was sold for 20zł (about 4£) and I was quite angry at myself . _________________ Mateusz
No good story ever starts with drinking tea.
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mateuszmolik/sets/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7776 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
I like my 17A, it's a good lens. But I don't use it as much as the Minolta Rokkor 35-70 / 3.5 Macro - which I believe to be the king of 35-70's. I also have a Vivitar 35-70 / 3.5 manual focus and Pentax and Minolta AF lenses. And I've said before that I think this was a very popular second purchase lens for people who bought SLR's back in the day, and it was a very competitive sector of the lens market, so the manufacturers made sure they were damn good lenses. That way the customer came back and bought the 70-210.
Tamron made a very good lens with the 17A, but the competition was fierce.
I used mine a few days ago, I enjoyed it and got some good results from it. _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Nesster
Joined: 24 Apr 2008 Posts: 5883 Location: NJ, USA
Expire: 2014-02-20
|
Posted: Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Nesster wrote:
Lloydy wrote: |
I like my 17A, it's a good lens. But I don't use it as much as the Minolta Rokkor 35-70 / 3.5 Macro - which I believe to be the king of 35-70's. I also have a Vivitar 35-70 / 3.5 manual focus and Pentax and Minolta AF lenses. And I've said before that I think this was a very popular second purchase lens for people who bought SLR's back in the day, and it was a very competitive sector of the lens market, so the manufacturers made sure they were damn good lenses. That way the customer came back and bought the 70-210.
Tamron made a very good lens with the 17A, but the competition was fierce.
I used mine a few days ago, I enjoyed it and got some good results from it. |
And you told my tale. I bought an OM2s with the 50mm lens, felt some ennui, and my wife, God bless her, told me to go back and get the lens I really wanted. I wanted the 01A. It served as my main/only lens for ever; I did eventually buy an 85/2 to take pics of our daughter's performances. But that was much much later.
I did a quick compare with the Rokkor mentioned, and the Rokkor seemed to be the better lens. However, as far as distortion at 35mm etc the two were like peas in a pod.
Thank you for such a well done compare, these things get quickly out of control and have all sorts of intrusions. And that is some interesting concrete you found _________________ -Jussi
Camera photos
Print Photographica
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
gLOW-x
Joined: 21 Jan 2016 Posts: 39
|
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2016 11:27 pm Post subject: Very nice comparison ! |
|
|
gLOW-x wrote:
Thanks for this comparison ! Very helpful.
On my side, i tested the older QZ35M Adaptall 1 today. Loved it...but VERY glowy until f4. It ruins the f2.8.
I will sell it, and buy a 01A. I prefer it to 27A, mainly due to macro.
I like those "walk" lenses on M43 : i get 70-160mm equ. (enough for portrait, far away landscape...) With a real 2.8/3.5 AND macro down to 1:2.5 on 01A, it is really a do it all lens outdoor.
And my Pana native 20/1.7 for low light. And Pana 12-32 for large landscape...and Oly 40-150 for AF/animals...and... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LifesShort
Joined: 01 Feb 2016 Posts: 71 Location: Forsyth, GA, USA
|
Posted: Mon Feb 15, 2016 11:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LifesShort wrote:
Thanks for the comparison. The only one of these that I have or have ever had is the 01A. I was recently gifted a mint copy of this lens along with the 01F 2X T/C. I haven't even used it yet, but I definitely will now! |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Lloydy
Joined: 02 Sep 2009 Posts: 7776 Location: Ironbridge. UK.
Expire: 2022-01-01
|
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 1:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lloydy wrote:
I had my 35-70 17A in my pocket today, but I didn't use it. Not because I don't like it, I was just enjoying a Zeiss Planar on my Sony, and if I have only got one lens in a particular mount, like the Planar in QBM mount, I use the little Tamron with the matching Adaptall mount. _________________ LENSES & CAMERAS FOR SALE.....
I have loads of stuff that I have to get rid of, if you see me commenting about something I have got and you want one, ask me.
My Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/mudplugga/
My ipernity -
http://www.ipernity.com/home/294337 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
WNG555
Joined: 18 Dec 2014 Posts: 784 Location: Arrid-Zone-A, USA
|
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
WNG555 wrote:
Thanks for a great comparo!
The only lens of the trio I have is the 01A, tried one after recommendation from a forum member.
My eyes told me it's good, but nice to see how well it stacks up. _________________ "The eyes are useless when the mind is blind."
Sony ILCE-6000, SELP1650, SEL1855, SEL55210, SEL5018. Sigma 19/30/60mm f2.8 EX DN Art.
Rokinon 8mm f3.5 Fish-Eye, 14mm f2.8 IF ED UMC. Samyang 12mm f2.8 ED AS NCS Fish-Eye.
And a bunch of Manual-Focus Lenses
My Flickr |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Excalibur
Joined: 19 Jul 2009 Posts: 5019 Location: UK
Expire: 2014-04-21
|
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Excalibur wrote:
Any opinions on the 09a 35-70mm f3.5 f4.5 ? _________________ Canon A1, AV1, T70 & T90, EOS 300 and EOS300v, Chinon CE and CP-7M. Contax 139, Fuji STX-2, Konica Autoreflex TC, FS-1, FT-1, Minolta X-700, X-300, XD-11, SRT101b, Nikon EM, FM, F4, F90X, Olympus OM2, Pentax S3, Spotmatic, Pentax ME super, Praktica TL 5B, & BC1, , Ricoh KR10super, Yashica T5D, Bronica Etrs, Mamiya RB67 pro AND drum roll:- a Sony Nex 3
.........past gear Tele Rolleiflex and Rollei SL66.
Many lenses from good to excellent. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
marcusBMG
Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1301 Location: Conwy N Wales
|
Posted: Tue Feb 16, 2016 2:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
marcusBMG wrote:
Excalibur wrote: |
Any opinions on the 09a 35-70mm f3.5 f4.5 ? |
My impressions of the 09A are that it is very similar to the 17A in character and IQ. I don't think tamron changed it particularly optically when they made it constant f.
Great test Mateusz I concur with all your conclusions. 01A is the best at the longer focal lengths and also for closest (macro) focus, where I have seen results that compete well with eg 52B; 17A is good all round and runs 01A close, often indistinguishably close - it's "01A-lite; 27A is good, even very good, at the wide end but disappoints as the focal length increases, however it does have good and natural colours - 01A and 17A are "warm". _________________ pentax ME super (retired)
Pentax K3-ii; pentax K-S2; Samsung NX 20; Lumix G1 + adapters;
Adaptall collection (proliferating!) inc 200-500mm 31A, 300mm f2.8, 400mm f4.
Primes: takumar 55mm; smc 28mm, 50mm; kino/komine 28mm f2's, helios 58mm, Tamron Nestar 400mm, novoflex 400mm, Vivitar 135mm close focus, 105mm macro; Jupiter 11A; CZJ 135mm.
A classic zoom or two: VS1 (komine), Kiron Zoomlock... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
PhantomLord
Joined: 08 Apr 2013 Posts: 476 Location: Szczecin, Poland
|
Posted: Wed Feb 17, 2016 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
PhantomLord wrote:
You've concluded it very well Marcus, I could only add that my 01A is simply fantastic to use. Every time I take it out, I'm always happy with the results, no matter digital or film. I liked 17A very much and I like your description as 01A-light , it's spot on. 17A had something that I miss in 01A a bit - simply incredible colour rendition, it's hard to describe and impossible to measure, but it really was fantastic in that area. Don't get me wrong, 01A renders colours great as well, but 17A was a bit better .
As for 27A I didn't like it very much and it was pretty disappointing despite that I loved the focal length range. May be that I had a worse example of the 27A, but since I bought Vivitar Series 1 28-90/2.8-3.5 to cover that range I didn't consider trying other example of 27A.
It's nice to see someone reading and commenting on my post, especially as it was one of the firsts I committed on this forum . I really do hope, it was useful for someone. _________________ Mateusz
No good story ever starts with drinking tea.
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mateuszmolik/sets/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 821
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2019 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
I have bought a bunch of Tamron zooms and I am still learning them.
It appears to me that 27A suffers from spherical aberration wide open which you could use for portrait.
However my copy stopped down one stop and a half is tack sharp on all the range. And I like the lack of distortion. _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
benadamx
Joined: 25 Feb 2019 Posts: 329
|
Posted: Thu Nov 21, 2019 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
benadamx wrote:
awhile back i sort of accidentally bought the 01A (was included in a bundle with the SP 54B 300mm i bought on purpose) and hadn't given it much thought as I don't usually shoot with manual zooms due to IBIS issues on the A7ii, but in light of this am definitely going to take it out on a trip this weekend... thanks for bumping this thread. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
cooltouch
Joined: 15 Jan 2009 Posts: 9097 Location: Houston, Texas
|
Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 1:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
cooltouch wrote:
A few years ago, I bought an 01A because of all the rave reviews it got here at the forum, but honestly I haven't used it much. About the same time I bought a 27A, hoping it might be the Tamron equivalent to my Vivitar S1 28-90. I haven't used it much, either. I've owned the Vivitar S1 off and on for over 35 years and I still find that its performance is unequaled for its focal range. I do believe that the 35-80 will give it a good run for the money within its focal range, however -- and these photos and others I've seen taken with the 35-80 would seem to bear this out.
The 27A in these tests is disappointing. But I can't help but wonder if it might not be a good copy of this lens. Reason I say this is because of the Modern Photography test shown at Adaptall-2.com:
http://adaptall-2.com/lenses/27A.html
As you can plainly see, its performance is well above average. I guess I need to dust mine off and put it through some tests of my own, see how it fairs up against the 01A and the Vivitar. _________________ Michael
My Gear List: http://michaelmcbroom.com/photo/gear.html
My Gallery: http://michaelmcbroom.com/gallery3/index.php/
My Flickr Page: https://www.flickr.com/photos/11308754@N08/albums
My Music: https://soundcloud.com/michaelmcbroom/albums
My Blog: http://michaelmcbroom.com/blogistan/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uddhava
Joined: 22 Aug 2012 Posts: 3071 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-06-21
|
Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uddhava wrote:
Here are some from my 27A
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
Minolfan
Joined: 30 Dec 2008 Posts: 3436 Location: Netherlands
|
Posted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Minolfan wrote:
uddhava wrote: |
Here are some from my 27A |
Nice samples!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
lumens pixel
Joined: 27 Feb 2019 Posts: 821
Expire: 2021-06-25
|
Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2019 10:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
lumens pixel wrote:
Very nice Uddhava. Have you noted glow wide open and at what settings the lens becomes sharp? I think I have a good copy but need to close 1 stop and a half for perfect sharpness.
All that quest results from my experiences with Minolta Md 28 85. I was desperatly looking for a lens sharp to the corners in that range and the Minolta is fine two stops closed if you take into account field curvature that is huge. I am fine with that if the lens is homogeneous but my two copies needed to focus at different distances in the corners which I didn't like.
So my move towards Tamron having red the adaptall 2 site. I have been lucky since my copy of the 27A reacts the same way on all corners which is a sign for me of a copy conforming the specs. However there is glow wide open which is why I wonder if I could find the perfect copy without glow.
Sorry for the long explanation. _________________ Lumens Pixel
-------------
Minolta SR mount: 16 2,8; Sigma SuperWide 24 2,8; 28 2,5; 28 2,8; 28 3,5; 35 2,8; 45 2,0; 50 1,4; 50 1,7; 50 2,0; 58 1,4; 85 2,0; 100 2,5; 100 4 Macro; 135 3,5; 135 2,8; 200 4; RF 250 5,6; 24-35 3,5; 35-70 3,5; 75-150 4; 70-210 4
Canon FD mount: Tokina RMC 17 3,5; 28 2,8; 35 2,8; 50 1,8; 50 3,5 Macro; 55 1,2; 135 3,5; 135 2,5; 200 4,0; 300 5,6; 28-55 3,5 4,5; Tokina SZ-X SD 270; 70-150 4,5; 70-210 f4; 80-200 4L; Tokina SZ-X 845
Tamron Adaptall: 28-80 3,5-4,2 (27A); 70-210 3,8-4 (46A); 60-300 (23A); 90 2,5 (52B); 35-135 3,5-4,5 (40A)
Tamron SP: 20-40 2,7-3,5 (266D) |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SkedAddled
Joined: 19 Oct 2008 Posts: 1424 Location: Michigan, USA
Expire: 2021-08-12
|
Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2019 5:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SkedAddled wrote:
cooltouch wrote: |
The 27A in these tests is disappointing. But I can't help but wonder if it might not be a good copy of this lens. Reason I say this is because of the Modern Photography test shown at Adaptall-2.com:
http://adaptall-2.com/lenses/27A.html
As you can plainly see, its performance is well above average. |
I actually own 2 copies of the 27A,
with both providing excellent results.
I like the color rendition and sharpness, though I don't use them wide open. _________________ Craig
Of course I'm all right! Why? What have you heard!?
Canon Digital EOS 5D Mk IV, EOS 50D, Powershot S3 iS
Vivitar 28 f/2.8 OM - Zuiko 50 f/1.8 OM - Tamron SP 28-80 f/3.5 AD2[Favorite!] - Hanimar 135 f/3.5 M42 - Soligor 135 f/2.8 T4 - Tamron SP 60-300 f/3.8 AD2 - Soligor 75-260 f/4.5 M42 - Soligor 400 f/6.3 T4 - Soligor 500 f/8 T2 Cat + Matched 2X TC - Addiction Growing!
This is us -- We drive these -- We're named these |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uddhava
Joined: 22 Aug 2012 Posts: 3071 Location: Hungary
Expire: 2021-06-21
|
Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2019 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
uddhava wrote:
lumens pixel wrote: |
Very nice Uddhava. Have you noted glow wide open and at what settings the lens becomes sharp? I think I have a good copy but need to close 1 stop and a half for perfect sharpness.
All that quest results from my experiences with Minolta Md 28 85. I was desperatly looking for a lens sharp to the corners in that range and the Minolta is fine two stops closed if you take into account field curvature that is huge. I am fine with that if the lens is homogeneous but my two copies needed to focus at different distances in the corners which I didn't like.
So my move towards Tamron having red the adaptall 2 site. I have been lucky since my copy of the 27A reacts the same way on all corners which is a sign for me of a copy conforming the specs. However there is glow wide open which is why I wonder if I could find the perfect copy without glow.
Sorry for the long explanation. |
I remember that my lens is soft wide open, I will have to look at some photos to see if there is a glow.
I do like my lens though and use it especially when traveling. I also have the Minolta MD 28-85mm and have taken
it traveling also. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|