Komura 105mm f/2.5 and Tamron 105mm f/2.5 compared

[woodrim]

I have provided pictures from the Komura in an earlier post, but now have my Tamron Adaptamatic to compare to. I was looking forward to using both lenses at a shoot and comparing results because several people spoke highly of the Tamron, while the Komura receives little attention. Yesterday was a nice bright day, so headed to the beach with daughter (OMG, the second Saturday in a row she spent with me). I have a loose rule where I typically only take one lens with me and just make the best of it, but since I was taking two for comparison purposes, I said WTH, I'll take another two, so I had a good day of it.

I'll post some more photos of the best from each lens after I've done my post processing and after folks have had a chance of seeing this first comparison. It is very difficult to get the seagulls to cooperate, so the Tamron and Komura sets were taken at right angles to each other. The lighting isn't drastically different, but I thought I should mention any differences in environment. I'd like comments from anyone willing to do so before I give my own assessment of these two lenses and how they compare. All pictures taken with Sony A200 and ISO 100. Out of camera jpg, no post anything.

Komura 105mm at f/2.5 and 1/2000 sec.


Tamron 105mm at f/2.5 and 1/2500 sec.


Komura 105mm at f/4 and 1/1000 sec.


Tamron 105mm at f/4 and 1/1000 sec.

[estudleon]

I find the Komura like a classic of the brand. Strong contrast and less resolution power.

Very nice to B&W pics. For colors, i prefer the Tamron, with more subtle tonality

Rino.

[ludoo]

I had the Tamron 105/2.5 and regret selling it: at 2.5 it's pretty awful, but close half a stop and it gives great sharpness, colorus and a kind of 3d effect that makes your images pop. Looking at your pictures, the Komura wide open seems front focused, stopeed down it looks ok but I much prefer the Tamron, I find the same qualities in it as I had in mine.

[Excalibur]

Just flicking backwards and forwards, the Tamron overall looks to be slightly sharper.

[martinsmith99]

When shooting gulls, use live ammo!

I think the Komura @ F4 is quite good. The other 3 images don't look great to my eyes.

[woodrim]

Thanks for the comments. I should have mentioned that following the photos' link will provide the ability to view full size, original image.

ludoo: I don't find the Tamron bad at all fully open, but I do agree it gets very sharp stopped down. The focusing remains my challenge to get it right. I did my best to take several images while refocusing for each one. I then selected the best from each lens and aperture. It's so easy to just miss the focus when wide open. As for the 3D effect, I do see very good separation of subject from background with both lenses, but on this day I also had my "new: Tair with me and the images from that really popped.

As I have said before, I am a komura fan for the build quality, bokeh, and colors. However, the Tamron seemed to provide warmer colors. The Tamron also seems a little sharper, but the Komura has better bokeh in my opinion. There were no specular highlights, otherwise it would have been more obvious. After doing this, I think if I were to see a shoot from either of these lenses, I would be hard pressed to tell which one. Sharpness is more than adequate from both lenses, CA fairly well controlled, but if there was to be a giveaway, it would be the bokeh. But still, would be difficult to differentiate without side by side comparisons. And in the end I do a regimen of post processing that equalizes the color and exposure differences.

I will no doubt keep both lenses, but if I had to part with one, it would come down to me keeping the Komura just because it's a Komura. And by the way, it appears that both lenses don't quite reach infinity with adapters. I will post what I think are the better pictures of the day from both lenses (after PP); can you tell which images are from which lens? WITHOUT cheating!!!

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.


6.


7.