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

Tamron SP 200-500 f/5.6 Zoom Resolution Tests
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Aug 19, 2014 11:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Marcus......I just upgraded to the EM2(will be selling myEM1)and I am blown away with mirror less,in fact I can see an EM-D-1 sitting with all my other cameras very soon and coupled with the Sony a7 this is all I will need so a clear out is imminent.
As I mentioned I have not used this lens so far, this is first time out of the case as I shoot mainly Macro but it is certainly a thing of beauty and is in as new condition. I also think that my heavy duty tripod would help as this one seems a tad flimsy. I could be open to realistic offers for the lens and case. Thanks again.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 1:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I've mostly used mine in the hides at the bird reserve, I just use a large bean bag on the window sill. Avoids the balance problems with the TM. I see you have used some sort of strapping of the camera to an extension on the TM. If you look back in this post you can see my solution using a cheap far east macro rail and an extra support moulded from a bit of hard wood with my dremel.

Check it out and post some images.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 20, 2014 2:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thats the camera strap(not tied to rail) and a 4way fairly expensive focusing rail and probably will not use the lens so don't want to spend time doing any mods,thanks for tip anyway.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2014 7:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
marcusBMG wrote:
visualopsins wrote:


The test images have been sharpened -- the in-camera sharpness setting of '5' was applied on conversion of images from raw to tif -- surely that is why images look like those from lenses costing 4-figures or more.


Sharpening works on edge contrast. It doesn't produce detail that isn't there. It won't make soft(er) images from a less sharp lens look like images from a sharper lens. cooltouch is using a relatively high MPx camera and the lens IMO has shown its good resolution in those 100% crops.


Based on my own experience enhancing (and attempting to enhance) thousands of images, both film and digital, I'd say that I have to agree with Marcus. If the sharpness isn't there to begin with, no amount of high-pass, unsharp masking, edge-enhancement or any other type of trick is gonna substitute for it. In the last set of pics of the fire hydrant I used a very mild amount of unsharp masking to the photos. I'm not at that computer or else I could give you the actual numbers I used. Also, it is typical for me to bump the camera sharpness up to 7 or so when working with the raw files in Canon's DPP, which I didn't do with these photos. Anyway, as I mentioned before, I am very pleased with the outcome. I own a variety of Tamron telephoto zooms, the 103A 80-210/3.8-4, the 23A SP 60-300/3.8-5.4, and 19AH SP 70-210 f/3.5 This 31A is the best of the lot. But it comes at a price. Its often steep price on the used market aside, its sheer size can be a real drawback for casual use. One really has to want to use this mortar tube, which necessitates not only having to deal with its bulk and weight, but the bulk and weight of a good, solid tripod as well -- unless one has window sills and bean bags handy Smile


PostPosted: Thu Aug 28, 2014 10:08 pm    Post subject: More sample pics with a 31A. Reply with quote
An obliging cormorant gave me the opportuinity to do some shots with different combo's:
K-r + 31A
K-r + 31A + 014F tc
Lumix G1 (12MPx mft) + 31A

I thought it would be interesting to see if a bit of perspective might be seen on more focal length vs more crop factor, and on K-r vs G1.

Heres some full size crops, processed from RAW (except #5 - OtC jpg) but with similar adjustments - clarity + ~30-40; sharpening + ~40-50; shadows bumped to lighten dark feathers; exposure adjustments as necessary. G1 was at 200ASA, K-r at 400ASA.











My impressions from the score or so pics I took before the cormorant took off were:

- K-r takes sharper and more detailed pics than the G1.
- The 1.4x tc did pull more detail in, at the expense of more pronounced CA.
- for me upping the focal length was better than the higher crop factor.

But this was a very ad hoc set up, and at the end of the day, technique/lighting/nailing focus all more important IMO.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 5:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
When I look at bird pics, I pay most of my attention to feather detail and the eye(s). In this case I actually like your second G1 pic the best. The eye and the head's feather detail in that pic seem to be the sharpest. The first shot using the K-R with the 1.4x is also good, but doesn't seem to have quite the crispness of the second G1 shot. Although the detail at the cormorant's feet is very good. But given that we're talking about a manual focus lens here, I always try to see if I can find areas of the pic that seem to be more in focus than others. Most of the above pics are showing very good detail in whatever that was that the cormorant was standing on. This also reveals the difference between taking pics of a static as opposed to a dynamic subject. As the bird moves, portions of it will go in and out of focus and, if the shutter speed isn't high enough, motion blur can also become a detracting factor. I don't know about you, but I find getting good pics of birds, especially when using a MF optic, to be a real challenge. Their unpredictable jerky movement is usually what does me in.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 3:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I agree with everything you say cooltouch. Although the bird was relatively stationary in its position, it was moving, particularly the head, a lot. Shutter speeds were 1/250th - would have been beneficial to have been faster. but certainly with the G1 I am reluctant to push the ASA - gets grainy fast ( a lumix weakness).


PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 5:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
marcusBMG wrote:
visualopsins wrote:


The test images have been sharpened -- the in-camera sharpness setting of '5' was applied on conversion of images from raw to tif -- surely that is why images look like those from lenses costing 4-figures or more.


Sharpening works on edge contrast. It doesn't produce detail that isn't there. It won't make soft(er) images from a less sharp lens look like images from a sharper lens. cooltouch is using a relatively high MPx camera and the lens IMO has shown its good resolution in those 100% crops.


Which is sharper?:




The first is not sharpened or unsharpened; the second is sharpened with the DPP software maximum setting of '10'. Of course these are the same cropped pixels from the same image -- not two images, not from two lenses. I think sharpening can indeed "make soft(er) images from a less sharp lens look like images from a sharper lens" -- not all, but some, due to the nature of "sharpness", which is a combination of fine detail and edge contrast.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
High contrast image with edges that certainly look sharper when sharpness is applied. Thats just a statement of the obvious.
But take your point to its logical conclusion visualopsin, are you saying that there is no point to a $1000+ dollar pro lens? That all that needs to be done is bump the sharpness in PP?
Perhaps you could/should clarify your original point and say what we might do to get a more objective sense of the 31A's resolution.


PostPosted: Sat Aug 30, 2014 11:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
marcusBMG wrote:
High contrast image with edges that certainly look sharper when sharpness is applied. Thats just a statement of the obvious.


That's my thinking. Wink

marcusBMG wrote:
But take your point to its logical conclusion visualopsin, are you saying that there is no point to a $1000+ dollar pro lens? That all that needs to be done is bump the sharpness in PP?


I said the not sharpened 31A images probably do not look like images from a $1k+ lens. Wink

marcusBMG wrote:
Perhaps you could/should clarify your original point and say what we might do to get a more objective sense of the 31A's resolution.


Sorry, I assumed that is clearly to post only not sharpened images to use for comparison purposes online.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 01, 2014 5:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
visualopsins wrote:


Sorry, I assumed that is clearly to post only not sharpened images to use for comparison purposes online.


Ah Ok thats a valid point for sure... but I'm not sure how useful it is. All images surely have some processing, unless they are raw RAW, and I'm not sure how informative raw RAWs would be really, they just tend to look not that great!
I find it very difficult to try to get a sense of the difference between lenses from online images, there's just too many variables. I just acquire a sense from browsing that such and such a lens has images by a photographer that have impressed me.
What I'll maybe try to do is chat up another photographer with eg a Nikon and a Sigma 150-500mm (I haven't encountered another Pentax owner!), then with an adaptall Nikon mount one can get a few images to make a bit of a side by side comparison. That would certainly be of interest.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 4:58 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
There is some inevitable processing that takes place, even with "unprocessed" images. When I do a resolution test such as this one, I do not use any sharpening routines or contrast or saturation enhancements with my image processing software. But when I save a raw image to a tiff file with Canon's DPP, so I can bring it into my software, some processing takes place. And when I'm showing the 100% crops, more processing takes place when I convert from tiff to jpg. If I post the complete image, I have to resize it, which involves additional processing and then the resized image must be converted to jpg.

So there's no getting around it. Processing occurs. But additional processing does not, which is the best I can do for resolution tests like this one.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2014 3:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
There is some inevitable processing that takes place, even with "unprocessed" images. When I do a resolution test such as this one, I do not use any sharpening routines or contrast or saturation enhancements with my image processing software. But when I save a raw image to a tiff file with Canon's DPP, so I can bring it into my software, some processing takes place. And when I'm showing the 100% crops, more processing takes place when I convert from tiff to jpg. If I post the complete image, I have to resize it, which involves additional processing and then the resized image must be converted to jpg.

So there's no getting around it. Processing occurs. But additional processing does not, which is the best I can do for resolution tests like this one.


Sharpening does not occur if DPP "sharpening" setting is set at zero when RAW file is converted.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 05, 2014 2:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I never wrote that the sharpness setting in DPP was set to zero. What I meant by the above was that I didn't change the sharpness setting with DPP from where it was set in camera, which is usually either 4 or 5. Perhaps I should have been more specific.


PostPosted: Fri Sep 05, 2014 4:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
I never wrote that the sharpness setting in DPP was set to zero. What I meant by the above was that I didn't change the sharpness setting with DPP from where it was set in camera, which is usually either 4 or 5. Perhaps I should have been more specific.


?

I did write the sharpness setting in DPP should be set at zero when converting test images from raw, when images are to be used for comparing lens sharpness with other lenses. Wink


PostPosted: Sun Jun 03, 2018 7:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi Guys !
Urgent question Smile

I have the opportunity to get one without the case for 300€, what is yout opinion on that price ?


PostPosted: Sun Jun 03, 2018 12:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I would say that's a pretty, maybe even very, reasonable price if its a nice one.


PostPosted: Sun Jun 03, 2018 8:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nelson wrote:
Hi Guys !
Urgent question Smile

I have the opportunity to get one without the case for 300€, what is yout opinion on that price ?


You should check 'sold' Listings on ebay. I think this is too much. It would need to be mint and cased to justify that price (and I am not convinced it is worth that much whatever the condition). I wanted to sell mine a few months ago and took it to a local dealer who said he would only be able to sell it for £120 at most, based on current eBay listings. I checked and his opinion seemed accurate.


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nelson wrote:
Hi Guys !
Urgent question Smile

I have the opportunity to get one without the case for 300€, what is yout opinion on that price ?

NOT worth (+ beware : cannot be used handheld - opposite to some others long zooms - : very big and two touch)


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Well it's important to distinguish between the earlier 200-500mm f6.9's and the SP 200-500mm f5.6. A lot of the search results on ebay will be for the former, and yeah those can be picked up for not much more than fifty quid. The SP f5.6 is much superior and worth while. When I first got interested in adaptalls I kept a note of prices. Over the best part of a couple of years only about half a dozen 31A's came up, prices varied from £599 BIN to £245 winning bid, a wide range that reflects the lens relative scarcity and the vagaries of the auction market. These lenses can either attract strong interest and bidding, or pass almost unnoticed.
I stand by that around £250-300 is a fair price for a good 31A. Yep, really bide your time and you can certainly do better, as I have done, but it may take you a year ... or two! A bird in the hand....

Re the 31A one aspect is balancing the lens on a tripod. I used a macro rail with an extra support point for a while, then custom made a couple of plates. I prefer #2, really supports the lens well and seems to help to dampen vibrations.




And here's a few 31A pics.













PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Marcus, about your second method for stabilizing your 31A, I like it. I notice the aluminum plate you've "inlaid" into that piece of hardwood. And yes, wood is especially good for soaking up vibration. Maybe that's why so many large format photographers still prefer wooden tripods? I dunno, I don't shoot large format.

But your images certainly show just what a phenomenal lens it is. Great shots!


PostPosted: Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I tried insetting the 3/8 to 1/4 adapter that accepts the tripod or QR plate screw into the wood itself, but in a test it ripped out way too easily, hence the alu plate. I used some sorbothane type stuff on the front support off an old insole.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wow, I have some sorbothane insoles -- somewhere -- I bought back in the 80s. That stuff really works.


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 7:01 pm    Post subject: Re: Tamron SP 200-500 f/5.6 Zoom Resolution Tests Reply with quote
cooltouch wrote:
I won this Tamron SP 200-500 f/5.6 at auction on eBay several months ago. Since winning it, I haven't used it much. I've been busy with other projects and just haven't had much time for photography. I decided to take a break from my projects and, since I haven't tested this Tamron yet, I decided I should put it through the same set of tests I put all my telephoto primes and zooms through -- typically 300mm and beyond, though.

Any of you who have read through my telephoto lens tests in the past know that I have a favorite subject for my tests. It's a water kiosk about 400 meters down the street from my house and I always take a picture of the same sign, focusing as well as I can on the small words at its base: "We care about the water you drink." There's nothing scientific about this test, but it is a consistent yardstick I can use to compare my telephotos to, which in turn gives me a good idea as to their sharpness.

The camera I use is a 10.1 mp Canon XS (1000D), set to ISO 100, and mounted to a sturdy tripod. I use Live View to achieve as much focusing accuracy as I can. I then take shots from the largest aperture down to f/16. It's been my experience that, any aperture smaller than f/16 with my telephotos and they are beginning to get soft.

Because this lens is a long telephoto zoom, I decided to do two tests, one at 500mm and another at 300mm. I took photos at f/5.6, f/8. f/11, and f/16, which are shown below.

@ 500mm:


@ 300mm:


Observations and Conclusions:

At both 500mm and 300mm focal lengths the lens shows noticeable CA -- the purple variety -- all the way up to f/11. At f/16 the CA is essentially gone. Fortunately, I have found the purple CA to be very easy to remove with the image processing software I use: Paint Shop Pro X2. I've been able to do the same in PhotoShop CS5, but since I don't use it as much, I find it much faster to do the corrections in PSP.

Sharpness is remarkably consistent across the span of selected apertures. There is very little difference in sharpness between f/5.6 and f/16. Contrast is somewhat low at wider apertures, but this is an easy fix in PP. At 500mm, this zoom compares favorably with my sharpest 500mm telephotos. At 300mm, it is just as sharp as my sharpest 300mm. If you look closely at the text, you will note that wherever there is a blurry looking letter that just below it the white frame also shows signs of waviness, which means there was some convection currents causing air turbulence. So it's best to compare the sharpest groupings of text and ignore those that have been affected by the convection currents.

I'm really surprised by the image quality produced by this lens. In terms of sharpness, it rivals the sharpest zoom I've ever owned, which was a manual focus Nikon 200-400mm f/4 ED AIs. That Nikkor sells for $4000 and up these days, while typically you'll see this Tamron on eBay for $500 and up. I really lucked out on this one. The seller offered it as a straight auction with a low opening bid amount instead of as a Buy It Now, and there really wasn't much bidding interest. I bought it for $219.50. It didn't come with its original case and it has a bit of slight wear to its exterior. But the glass is perfect and it is mechanically sound.

For a complete description of this lens, with photo and schematic, go here: http://adaptall-2.org/lenses/31A.html

The biggest drawback to this lens is its size and weight. 2.72 kg or an even 6 lb. Whew! It is bigger and heavier than my Tamron SP 300mm f/2.8 LD. Shorter than my Century 500mm telephoto prime, but it weighs more. So if a person is willing to deal with the heft of this lens, it can definitely provide excellent images. IMNSHO.


Excellent work!!! It sure is great to have these kinds of go-to threads when considering a lens of this nature. Great people, like you, are a large reason why forums of this nature are an absolute gem! Best, jt


PostPosted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 9:37 pm    Post subject: K3 and 31A Reply with quote
I have just acquired a s/h K3-ii - a significant upgrade on my venerable K5, 24MPx vs 16MPx. Today was a first try with the 31A. How would this old lens measure up to the demands of a more demanding sensor? Over by the golf course some stone chats and linnets have been proving nice test subjects letting me get to within 8m, hanging out on the brambles and bushes while I tweak focus, check the result on the lcd, refocus. All at f9.4, 400ASA, 1/800-1/1600 sec shutter, monopod.



This is not resized - 1:1 crop.






The exercise reinforces how sharp critical focus is, particularly when there is big cropping of the image. Even with the long focus throw of the 31A, adjustment is millimetric.
One more:
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2