Tamron 71DE - I was disappointed

bazza59 · Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 2:03 pm Post subject: Tamron 71DE - I was disappointed

Hi
I was taking some portraits for comparison (see manual lenses section) and while my "model" was available I took some to check the IQ of my Tamron AF 28-200mm 71DE. I was very surprised, probably I did something wrong but this doesn't look as sharp as I would have expected from Tamron glass.

Delta 100 developed in ID-11 scanned on a Zennox 5MB scanner.
Anybody got experience with this lens?

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

It was handshaking I am pretty sure, Tamron glasses at least good without exception. I have Adaptall-2 lens in this focal length, which is produce nice, contrasty images.

bazza59 · Posted: Mon May 16, 2011 2:40 pm Post subject:

good point - this was taken at the end of a hand held "session" so hand shaking is very possible - the lens is a little heavy.
I'll try some more with it.

I have several tamron lens and have been very happy with them all!

thanks

Olivier · Expire: 2015-08-06

Hi Bazza.
My daughter has this lens on a 40D and obtain good or average results.

What was the focal length ? 200mm ?
What were the aperture and speed ?

It seems to me as you shot at 200mm with a lower speed than 1/200 s.
Am I right ?

nemesis101 · Expire: 2015-01-22

If this is the Tamron 28-200 4. something to 5. something then it has the dubious honour of having one of the poorest MTF figures ever recorded!

I had one for 1.6 seconds on my Pentax K10D before an urge to save the world from mediocrity (for once the equipment's not mine) made be hurl the thing away!

It was also sold by Pentax under their branding to universal derision/

Doug

It took me to come here and find out how good Tamron Adaptall SP lenses can be to restore my faith in Tamron...

bazza59 · Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 9:25 am Post subject:

Olivier - good to hear your daughter has had reasonable results with the lens. The example provided above was taken at 200mm and I suspect was shot closer to 1/60, aperature not noted at time. I have included another image taken at the same session with 100mm (again not sure of details) - but as you can see was overexposed!!!!!
tamron 71DE 100mm

Doug - yes its the 28-200mm / 3.8-5.6 version. My gut reaction was that I was doing something stupid as all of my manual Tamron lenses are way better than this. This image taken at 200mm details not recorded but to my eye is sharper than the one above

Olivier · Expire: 2015-08-06

To be sure we're talking about the same lens, this is my daughter's one :

bazza59 · Posted: Fri May 20, 2011 11:25 am Post subject:

Olivier - thanks for photo - looks like I have an earlier version.

Tamron 71DE (28mm)

Tamron 71DE (200mm)

calvin83 · Joined: 12 Apr 2009 Posts: 7584 Location: Hong Kong

Found this on their product awards page:

nemesis101 · Expire: 2015-01-22

I'm led to believe the latter example is the deeply crappy version.. The first photo of the lens shows a 're-engineered' version that is much later.

The earlier version with much less ribbing IS truly awful, the newer version seems better thought of, but anyone buying the old version is buying a great door-stop or assailant defence weapon... Smile

Doug

Olivier · Expire: 2015-08-06

So, I'm sorry. It's not the same lens.
Cheers,

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

my lens like exactly same lens but manual and it has adaptall-2 mount and a great lens with good IQ.

bazza59 · Posted: Thu May 26, 2011 10:32 am Post subject:

Attila - I just viewed your images posted in the digital gallery with the manual version of this lens (71A). They are very sharp compared to mine. I will try again with this lens, when the opportunity arises, and try to match the quality of your images. thanks barry