Oly E-410 & Tamron 300mm SP, I need a sample, pretty ple

[duartix]

I just lifted this Tamron 300m f5.6 (Model 670Au) from customs but I'm still divided whether I should get a regular 300mm SP or not.
For the time being, I'd welcome an unprocessed 100% crop of a moon shot with the later on a 4/3 10MP camera. (Can't think of a more repeatable test)

Thank you in advance.

P.S. I hereby promise to publish a review on my lens once my E-510 get's back from the repair shop.

[Riku]

I have the model CT-300. SP lenses should be better but also much more expensive.

[Xpres]

I'd be very interested to see how your silver one performs. It looks so good.
I have a 410 and an SP version so will have a shot at the moon if I can see it.

[duartix]

[Xpres]

Well Ok then... just popped outside and made a couple of shots with the SP300 and also a Yashica ML 300/5.6 just out of interest. Used the tripod and mirror up and spot.
THese are raw shots converted in ACR at default settings with all the sharpening and noise settings set to zero. All iso 100

Tamron 54B

@f5.6 1/160


@f8 1/50



Yashica

@f5.6 1/80


@f8 1/50

[duartix]

This thread isn't forgotten, but since my camera got back from the repair shop I haven't had either the weather or a clear head to do it but I guess tomorrow I might see some white smoke.

[duartix]

This is bloody bad luck, now that I have the time only 3% of the moon is visible.
Guess this test will be posponed for around 2 weeks.
Well, I've got 8 dandelions remaining and 2 adapters to chip, I might get to work right away...

[duartix]

Well I'm not waiting anymore (who knows what the wheather will be for the coming week) so I made a quick and dirty test... I'll do a proper one should I find the time again.
I didn't follow my asked values because my tripod is very flimsy and I needed faster exposures to avoid blur, so I raised ISO.
As a consequence I had to process the RAWs in Bibble (just noise ninja with 0 luma strnght, 10 chroma strenght, 0 USM)
I do think for sharpness this might do.

Tamron 500mm SP @F8.0, ISO800, t=1/400


Tamron 300mm F5.6 (Model 670Au) @F5.6, ISO800, t=1/400


Tamron 300mm F5.6 (Model 670Au) @F6.7, ISO400, t=1/250


Tamron 300mm F5.6 (Model 670Au) @F8, ISO400, t=1/250


Tamron 300mm F5.6 (Model 670Au) @F9.5, ISO400, t=1/120


Zuiko 200mm @F4 + TC1.7, ISO400, t=1/800


Zuiko 200mm @F5.6 + TC1.7, ISO400, t=1/1000


Zuiko 200mm @F8 + TC1.7, ISO400, t=1/500


There are a lot of issues with this test.
a) ISO and exposure time is much faster than those posted before by Xpres
b) the Zuiko 200mm + TCon 1.7x had to be handheld because I couldn't mount it on the tripod.
c) Exposures with the TCon are very erratic with F5.6 beeing faster than F4.

Still after all this shooting I think there is little to be gained in sharpness between either the:
Tamron 500mm SP F8 (mirror),
Tamron 300mm SP 54B F5.6,
Tamron 300mm F5.6 (670Au) or
Zuiko 200mm F4 + TCon 1.7x

My preference is divided between these two:
Tamron 500mm SP F8 (mirror) - very light, easier focusing through viewfinder but much harder through Live View, less resolution per pixel (images must be reduced), needs good light.

Tamron 300mm F5.6 (670Au) - much bigger and heavier, not as easy focusing through viewfinder, but easier through Live View, more resolution per pixel (images need not be reduced) and more FOV captured with the same detail.

I must say the Zuiko 200mm + TCon is a desilusion, the size is huge (bigger than the 670Au), focusing is hard either way, chromatic aberrations at F5.6 are very heavy, and without a way to hold the lens on a tripod it's very heavy work...

I think I'll be looking out for a 300 SP F5.6 but only if the price is right...