Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Which tamron adaptalls are good when i need...
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:00 pm    Post subject: Which tamron adaptalls are good when i need... Reply with quote
Which tamron adaptalls are good when i need lens what i connect with modern DSLR (currently Nikkor D300s),and i want big apertures nice bokeh (=smooth or odd and unique). and big aperture is even f4 when is really sharp!. and i prefer primes becouse they are lighter and often better. and budget is about max 100-200euros. less is better and i search all kind glass for special photos. any ideas.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Not sure Adaptall would be the best for primes, Tamron Adaptall 2 are mostly known for their zoom SP lens but I will give this a shot. I would certainly try to pickup 90mm F/2.5 SP, 24 mm F/2.5, and 28 mm F/2.5 for these 3 fits your specification. I would also consider 01A 35-80mm SP as it is clearly the most competent zoom. In many cases at 35, 80mm, this zoom are sharper than respective primes of the period. I would also look for a 24-48mm SP although it maybe harder to find.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Also the Tamron SP 3.5/17mm.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Seconding on 35-80!


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Agree on the mentioned lenses. I use http://adaptall-2.org as reference for Tamron adaptall lenses.

The 135mm f/2.5 Model 03B is also very nice. Simple design (4/4), not heavy (410g), and focus relatively close (1.2m).

I'd say it's pretty sharp, and have nice bokeh. A few samples with Panasonic G1:











PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
eno789 wrote:
Agree on the mentioned lenses. I use http://adaptall-2.org as reference for Tamron adaptall lenses.

The 135mm f/2.5 Model 03B is also very nice. Simple design (4/4), not heavy (410g), and focus relatively close (1.2m).

I'd say it's pretty sharp, and have nice bokeh. A few samples with Panasonic G1:











Fantastic pictures! I will need to look and pickup a 03B.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 5:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
You will never find any bad Tamron lenses , I think all lens in SP line are worth to have it good ones.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
They're all good, but the Tamrons tend to have issues with purple fringing on digital. Aut as far as primes are concerned, you will surely be better off with original Nikkors?


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
fantastic pictures


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 6:19 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
They're all good, but the Tamrons tend to have issues with purple fringing on digital. Aut as far as primes are concerned, you will surely be better off with original Nikkors?
+1
Look big five always if possible Zeiss, Leitz, Nikon, Olympus , Konica-Minolta.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
They're all good, but the Tamrons tend to have issues with purple fringing on digital. Aut as far as primes are concerned, you will surely be better off with original Nikkors?

I have the SP 80-200 F2.8 and SP 180mm F2.5 and both of them are superb on digital with no purple fringing.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
ManualFocus-G wrote:
They're all good, but the Tamrons tend to have issues with purple fringing on digital. Aut as far as primes are concerned, you will surely be better off with original Nikkors?


Wide open a few of my Tamron has issues with CA but overall it has been pretty decent. No more or less than other lens from the same era. For me, the worst offender seem to be 60-300mm SP. Although CA is relatively easy to correct in Lightroom (I shoot raw if that makes a difference). The SP lens I have that is pretty much immune to CA is 52A 70-210mm SP, it has a APO design (according to Adaptal-2.org) and is just as good as any of my modern lenses.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
They're all good, but the Tamrons tend to have issues with purple fringing on digital. Aut as far as primes are concerned, you will surely be better off with original Nikkors?
+1
Look big five always if possible Zeiss, Leitz, Nikon, Olympus , Konica-Minolta.


Offtopic totally but how common are cheap lens stuff form these brands which works with Nikon DSLRs? i dont think Olympus or Konica-Minolta for example made much lens stuff for these even if we count pricey.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Juha-P wrote:
Attila wrote:
ManualFocus-G wrote:
They're all good, but the Tamrons tend to have issues with purple fringing on digital. Aut as far as primes are concerned, you will surely be better off with original Nikkors?
+1
Look big five always if possible Zeiss, Leitz, Nikon, Olympus , Konica-Minolta.


Offtopic totally but how common are cheap lens stuff form these brands which works with Nikon DSLRs? i dont think Olympus or Konica-Minolta for example made much lens stuff for these even if we count pricey.


Here you go, source is http://www.similaar.com/foto/lensmount/lensmount.html , unfortunately, your option is somewhat limited for a Nikon. Adaptall-2 is certainly a fine choice.



The lens mounts included in this table are:
E Sony E
m43 Micro Four Thirds
NX Samsung NX
LM Leica-M
M39 Leica-M39
FD Canon FD (the old Canon mount)
EF Canon EF
A Minolta/Sony A (Sony Alpha)
PK Pentax K
M42 M42 screw mount
F Nikon F
LR Leica-R





Mount on camera
E m43 NX LM M39 FD EF A PK M42 F LR
Mount
on
lens E yes x x x x x x x x x x x
m43 * yes x x x x x x x x x x
NX y y yes x x x x x x x x x
LM yes yes y yes x x x x x x x x
M39 yes yes y - yes x x x x x x x
FD yes yes y - - yes x x x x x x
EF yes yes y - - - yes x x x x x
A yes yes y - - - x yes x x x x
PK yes yes y - - - yes x yes x x x
M42 yes yes y - - - yes yes yes yes x x
F yes yes y - - - yes x x - yes x
LR yes yes y - - - yes yes yes - yes yes


x: no
-: makes no sense to me, so I don't even know.
*: some lenses may work, but the general rule is that they won't (because they are designed for a smaller sensor, so they will show a hard vignette).
y: in theory, yes, but it may not be easy to find an adapter.

Last edited by drjs on Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:02 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nikon is worst camera to mount other system lenses, certainly from big five only Nikon works hassle free and not all even from Nikon.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 7:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
drjs wrote:
Here you go, source is http://www.similaar.com/foto/lensmount/lensmount.html , unfortunately, your option is somewhat limited for a Nikon. Adaptall-2 is certainly a fine choice.


Your link might not work for some as it included the comma at the end - I have tried amending it.
Nice table - though a few missing like Practica B, Olympus, etc

Adaptall nearly does what it says on the tin. The original adapters can be a bit awkward to fit to the lens - I would suggest getting one per lens rather than constantly taking them on and off.

Tamron AD models without the magic letters "SP" are probably better skipped. They were cheaper consumer versions, fairly slow average zooms, which probably won't be any more useful than the kit lens on a modern mirrorless camera. I picked up a one touch SP 35 - 105mm f2.8 for £55 six months ago, and I am only getting round to trying it out. It looks pretty promising, but I think it might be difficult to find as it might not have been in production long before demands for autofocus led to the death of the Adaptall concept - there was no way AF was going to work with interchangeable mounts. I am planning to post some samples soon - it is nice range to have at f2.8 on a crop frame camera.

For its type (long focal length mirror lenses) the AD2 SP 500mm f8 reflex is pretty good if you know the limitations of mirror lenses. It is pretty light and reasonably sharp, has a massive focus throw for precision. It's limitations, as with all such lenses, are busy bokeh and donut OOF highlights, fixed aperture and slow speed (probably more like an f11 because of the front mirror and light loss at reflective surfaces). If you want a pocketable birding lens, it may be one of your best options!


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Basilisk wrote:
drjs wrote:
Here you go, source is http://www.similaar.com/foto/lensmount/lensmount.html , unfortunately, your option is somewhat limited for a Nikon. Adaptall-2 is certainly a fine choice.


Your link might not work for some as it included the comma at the end - I have tried amending it.
Nice table - though a few missing like Practica B, Olympus, etc



Thanks! Corrected!


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Tamron 103a is probably the best bang for buck tele zoom out there, it's 80-210mm and has a maximum aperture of f/3.8-4. It's image quality is always excellent although purple fringing should be expected. Agree about the SP 70-210/3.5-4 52A...very little fringing but resolution isn't stellar. The SP 60-300mm is amazing stopped down to f/7.1 (where purple fringing goes away) and the SP 300/5.6 is also handy and light (still has fringing issues though).

The SP 17/3.5 is very nice and sharper than the Tokina lens with similar specs. The 500/8 and 350/5.6 are both very decent mirrors and the SP 35-210mm produces lovely images but it big and heavy.

If you're after fast primes though, pick up a Nikkor 105/2.5, 50/1.4 or 28/2.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
When talking about manual lenses on nikon, the russians are often overlooked at.
There are at least two excellent lenses I know that can be had in nikon mount: Mir 24 2/35 and Kaleinar 5 2.8/100 (nikon version usually have the N (H in cyrillic) suffix, opposed to M for M42, but the mount was interchangeable so don't trust the letters).
I have them both in m42 mount (Funnily, a mir 24N and a Kaleinar 5N), and I love them.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 8:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
Nikon is worst camera to mount other system lenses, certainly from big five only Nikon works hassle free and not all even from Nikon.


+ of course Zeiss lenses intentionally made for Nikon (ZF) and such, but for adapting lenses Nikon is indeed the worst of the current systems.


PostPosted: Fri Apr 19, 2013 9:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Arkku wrote:
Attila wrote:
Nikon is worst camera to mount other system lenses, certainly from big five only Nikon works hassle free and not all even from Nikon.


+ of course Zeiss lenses intentionally made for Nikon (ZF) and such, but for adapting lenses Nikon is indeed the worst of the current systems.


But OTOH, with Nikon lenses, you can mount them on lot of other systems including Canon DSLR - one of the reasons Nikon MF lenses are usually more expensive. Mirror-less changes the situation a little bit.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2013 12:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Attila wrote:
Nikon is worst camera to mount other system lenses, certainly from big five only Nikon works hassle free and not all even from Nikon.


But has to my taste best colours in jfif (often users say jpeg format is jfif and developer is jpeg!) pics what i use often becouse i need sometimes quickly pic uses what are not so serious.


PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2013 1:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
eno789 wrote:

But OTOH, with Nikon lenses, you can mount them on lot of other systems including Canon DSLR


Yes, of course; both properties follow from the long register distance of the mount: what makes the camera system bad for adapting other lenses also makes the lenses good for adapting to other systems. And likewise mirrorless cameras are the best for adapting other lenses to, but mirrorless lenses are the worst for adapting to anything else.


Juha-P wrote:
But has to my taste best colours in jfif (often users say jpeg format is jfif and developer is jpeg!) pics what i use often becouse i need sometimes quickly pic uses what are not so serious.


JFIF stands for JPEG File Interchange Format and its official MIME media type is “image/jpeg” so calling it just the “JPEG file format” for short would be fine (and usually the “file format” is implied by the context, hence just “JPEG”). Technically, however, most camera JPEGs are not strictly JFIF compliant* since EXIF is incompatible with the JFIF specification… So actually calling most JPEGs “JFIF files” would be inaccurate. =)

(And the image encoding used in both JFIF and other JPEG image files, such as those with EXIF, is called just the JPEG codec. After the Joint Photographic Experts Group, which is the committee responsible.)


Anyhow, for Nikon cameras, I don't think anyone intended to say that the cameras themselves are bad (personally I think they are among the best DSLRs currently, in some ways perhaps the best)… But it is an objective (pun intended) fact that they are the worst for adapting other lenses (which is also why I personally wouldn't buy a Nikon for my use, despite considering them among the best cameras in other ways).


* https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1514/~/what-is-the-difference-between-an-exif-and-jfif-compliant-jpeg-image%3F

Last edited by Arkku on Sat Apr 20, 2013 1:04 pm; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Apr 20, 2013 4:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I have had the 35-80, and the 24 2.5 ... both are good. the 35-80 I wish I had used more but my version was really in bad shape when I got it with fungus so I never gave it a real chance, But I did use it on film quite alot and it was remarkable.

I love the 24mm also on film, I have had a chance to use it on my E-PM1 and there is some flare, but not really any worse than other lenses of this era... I like it, Its a great focal length on a m 4/3 obviously and it has pretty good image quality. I prefer my 28mm f/2 that I just picked up though for the extra half stop or whatever of brightness since I like shooting inside, with available light. so If you really want it, You can buy mine Wink Its basically mint. haha.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1