Tamron Adaptalls

[bychance]

Simple question really, what would you say were the best Adaptall lenses back in the day?.

[luisalegria]

105/2.5

Its about the same as the rare Adaptamatic 105/2.5

Not quite a Nikkor 105/2.5 especially in bokeh but quite close imho.

The 300/5.6 is worthwhile as a cheap and light 300mm. Don't pay too much for it, there are many alternatives, especially the Adaptamatic and fixed mount versions which are pretty much the same thing.

The rest are I think rather pedestrian. Decent enough in their day.

I am talking about first-gen adaptalls, not adaptall-2's.

[marcusBMG]

Of the early adaptalls the 80-250mm f3.8 zoom could be sniffed at for its glowy and contrast-lite performance at f3.8, and considered too big and heavy for convenience, but it's an interesting, perhaps even historic, lens, a premium lens of its time with a price equivalent to a four digit one today, and its performance stopped down is really rather impressive imo.
Online comment suggests the 38-100mm zoom has some quality. I've bid on a few but not enough to win (cos I'm so cheap...)
I prefer the v1 adaptall 300mm over the later CT300, comes with a tripod mount like the adaptamatic.

[kypfer]

The only "original" Adaptall lens I've got (and used regularly until very recently) is the 200-500mm f/6.9. At over 2kg it really does need a tripod, or at least a monopod with a tilting head, but it does have a tripod mount fitted. Image quality is acceptable, probably more so when stopped down to f/8, the only inconvenient feature is the focus ring is at the front of the lens ... and it's a long reach!

[Slalom]

If i am out cycling I carry the 24-48mm and 60-300mm Adaptall 2 SPs in a backpack as they are so solid, I don't worry about them

[hoanpham]

70-150/2.8 soft: unique and very sharp.
300/2.8 360B, tc 2x 200F: very good iq. Cheaper than canikon.

Perhaps 180/2.5 but never use one.
Leica r 180/2.8 or nikon ais 180/2.8 ed are my preferences

[justtorchit]

If the Adaptall-2 stuff can be included, I'd highly recommend a few of those:

- 24-48mm: It's a pretty solid little performer, flare can be an issue. But it's so compact.
- 90mm f/2.5 (52B): great, smooth macro lens. Often can be found for little cost.
- 180mm f/2.5 (63B): I love this lens. It's quite sharp, with some noticeable CA wide open. I use it on my Nikons as well as via adapters on mirrorless (Sony A7iii, Fuji X-T2, and the Nikon Z7). I've used it for fun as well as in my professional work even today.
- 300mm f/2.8 (60B and 360B): This lens is one of the best bargains, in my opinion, for anyone in the market for a 300/2.8. I have used mine for sports as well as shooting live speaking performances, again, even in my professional work today. Like the 63B, it's plenty sharp, CA is present but generally not a factor in my experience. The 360B in good shape has a particularly exquisite manual focus experience. The focusing is whisper-smooth, with a single finger, and you can dial it in perfectly. The 60B has been optically similar but mechanically, not as refined in my experience.
- 400mm f/4 (65B) - Another hit, for me. Prices have fallen quite a bit on this one over the past number of years that I believe it's quite the bargain. Sharpness even wide open is very nice. As with all the big guns from the Adaptall-2 line, CA is present but disappears as you stop down quite quickly. And again, only really present in strong contrast scenarios. A beautiful lens when you want a little more reach.

Obviously I'm a fan of their bigger lenses. I would also add the 80-200/2.8 (30A) and the 200-500/5.6 (31A) are also a lot of fun and quite admirable performers. The latter is just enormous and a bit much to lug around in most cases. All of these optics are extremely well built.

I have some experience with the 28/2.8 (02B), the 135/2.5 Close-focus (03B), the 200/3.5 (04B), and probably a few others. My impression of these ranged from OK to poor. Fun to goof around with if you came across them for a few bucks maybe. Nothing I would doing anything beyond toy with though. The SP stuff on the other hand is some serious glass!

[marcusBMG]

Let's not forget two of the most successful adaptalls: the SP 01A 35-80mm and the "swiss army knife" SP 23A 60-300mm.

[MMouse]

90mm f/2,5 macro is an excellent lens. Not the same optically as the newer AF versions, only 1:2 but it is wonderfully sharp and bokeh is great.

135mm f/2,5 is a good lens too, often cheap, bright and nice bokeh.

[DConvert]

I can't think of any of their SP range that disappoint.
I wouldn't try to select 'the best' far too wide a range of types each with their own merits.

[cooltouch]

Justtorchit listed almost all of my favorites. In fact, he's mentioned most of my Tamron collection. The only ones I'd add are the SP 17mm f/3.5, the regular adaptall-2 24mm f/2.5, which to me should be an SP, and the SP 500mm f/8 mirror -- both versions. Oh, and the 60-300/3.8-5.4 is a surprisingly good performer.

[Focusthrow]