Tamron 300mm f/5,6 (m42)

[revinhood]

I bought the Tamron 300mm f/5.6 (M42).
you know something of him.

[Attila]

Not a good quality lens, pretty average I expect this result.

[revinhood]

you know where I can view photos taken with this lens

[Attila]

I remember somebody already tested from us. Please try search function.

[revinhood]

I found photos with the Tamron 300mm SP, but not with this model.
Nor gathering evidence on this Tamron

[Attila]

Not many people publish it, because result is weak.

[Wormhandler]

I have this lens and I used it for some bird photography before I got better and longer equipment.

It is not stellar, but for the price it is good. I have not tried the SP variant but if it is better then it most be an impressive piece of optics.

Examples.
First one may be at F8. It is unprocessed.



And a 100% crop from the above.



Another one F5,6 and unprocessed:




Hope that will help some.
/Jan

[revinhood]

good example. does not seem so bad.

[luisalegria]

Is this is the Adaptamatic ? I have been looking for a cheap one.

I find its very hard to make a distinction between long lenses. It takes a very great difference in quality to separate them, because it is fundamentally difficult to take a quality shot - there are so many things that affect image quality that are more significant than the lens quality.

I find the Tamron 200/3.5 Adaptamatic to be excellent, for what its worth.

The bird pictures seem like what one could expect from many lenses of this type, when everything else is right.

[Laurence]

I would be HAPPY to get these results! I simply can't see how these could be APPRECIABLY better, at least based on the web.

Good work!

[revinhood]

The first print of the Tamron are good.
I have to prove it better, these shots are at home.

[ManualFocus-G]

I received one of these through the post this morning, and what a heavy fella he is! I've taken a few shots and all seems well, except the lens doesn't seem to screw all the way into my camera (fitted with M42 adapter).

I checked the Adaptamatic mount and I have the correct Pentax M42 one, and looking at the mount, it is only worn (silvery) up to about 2/3rds of the way into the screw, so I guess no-one has ever screwed it all the way in!

Is this is the same experience for you guys? The lens is literally stuck out from the camera body a bit.

Cheers

[luisalegria]

The M42 thread doesn't screw all the way into your M42 adapter ?

It certainly should ! If not theres a thread problem somewhere, maybe a cross-thread.

The more usual problem with Adaptamatics is that the retaining ring (silver) that holds in the lens mount can be screwed in while the mount is not installed properly. The lens mount has a socket that needs to engage a pin on the lens to be aligned. If this is off, the lens won't go to infinity.

I'm still looking for one of these 300mm's, as I'm collecting the Adaptamatics. The 300mm is pretty easy to find, I expect I'll get one for a good price eventually.

The real collecting prizes among the Adaptamatics are the ones at either end of the line, the 21mm and the monster 200-500mm zoom, and that rare bird the 105/2.5. I saw the 105mm just once, and I failed to get it.

[martinsmith99]

I picked up a Tair 300mm/F4.5 PhS for £15. It's faster and sharper. And probably heavier too.

If you can get over the odd focus ring and the strange stopdown lever, it's a good lens for the price.

[Wormhandler]

I have the 105mm 2,5 but it has a slight haze.
Luisalegria: If I have known you wanted one and it was rare, I would have bid on one the other day.
It was a large lot of equipmnet with one meyer 135mm and the tamron.
Look Here
Since I had both I did not bother.
I actually spotted one a few months ago also. Maybe it was popular and sold well in Sweden.

If you want me to be on the lookout for one, just send me a pm. Nothing extra charged.

/Jan

[Screamin Scott]

Luisalegria,
There was one just a few days ago on the Goodwill auction site...I had it on my watch list but did not bid on it though...

[ManualFocus-G]

[ManualFocus-G]

Arrrgh, I'm such a divvie!! The lens IS mounted correctly, when I looked at it from the side it didn't look like it was (looked like there was a gap in between the silver M42 adapter on the camera body and the silver ring holding the Adaptamatic mount in place) , but that's because the black Pentax Adaptamatic mount petrudes a bit.

Here's what I mean:



The lens itself (well used, but optically and mechanically perfect by the looks of it )



This should be some fun to use, must buy a monopod or something portable first though, as hand held in low light = a right old pain with this lens

[katphood]

I'd say its a decent lens. I used it this morning on a Canon 20D (or D20, oh hell, its the 8MP one). I'd say its not too shabby. Granted, I got lucky with this spray and pray shot:



I've cropped the raw image and done just a bit of cleanup. There's still room for more tweaking. Like a bit more light for one thing. It was not so dark.

BTW, that's a redtail hawk, just after he got a little pissed at me pointing the lens at him while sitting on a branch.

[ManualFocus-G]

[luisalegria]

Well done !

A good BIF - "bird in flight" - is a real challenge for MF lenses.