Opinions on Kiron 28-210 vs Tamron 35-210 vs Tokina 35-200 A

[nethersole]

Hi,

this is my first post here, but I have benefited a lot while wandering in the forum in the past few months.

My question is, provided that the wide shoots are being taken care of by a wide angle zoom, which one of the two lenses is a better choice for travel photography, Kiron 28-210, Tokina 35-200 ATX, or the Tamron 35-210 (MF of course)?

Thanks in advance for your input.



Happy shootings!

[Ymmot]

Welcome to the forum,

I don't know if you will find anyone who used all three of them (they are not hugely popular).
I have a Tamron 35-210, and although it is not bad it is not great either, though my copy is not very clean.
From what i know it has a good reputation, in that it is much better than it should be for an almost 30 years old zoom, which I think is probably true.

I guess it also depend on which camera you use, as for my case I use a 4/3 camera, on which lenses may perform differently than on a APS or Full frame camera.

As a final note, I would also like to note the weight of the thing, it is quite long and slightly under 900 grams depending on the adapter attached.
That can make it quite uncomforble to hold, especially if your camera has a small handgrip, or wear it around your neck (no tripod socket either), at least for me, as even a Tamron 103A becomes somewhat unconfortable without the portrait grip on my camera.
Though some people prefer heavier lenses, so I can't really judge that for you.

Also since they are generally cheap if you have the patience to search them out, it can't really hurt to try one or two them I would say.

If alternative suggestions are allowed, a Tamron 17A and 103A together (or equivalent) will cover the same range at a slightly higher weight (slightly under a kilo), though they will probably be more comfortable to manouver around as the 103A is the heaviest at ~650 grams and for walk around the 17A at ~350g is quite doable on a camera dangling on your neck.

[nethersole]

Hi Tom,

thank you very much for your reply.

I am going to use the lens on a disproportionately small Sony NEX5.

I have tried a Tamron 35-210mm this morning. It is indeed substantial in weight, but relatively slender. When extended to 210mm, it is almost a mini bazooka. With the rubber hood on, it is pretty intimidating. However, there was no time to take photos so its image quality remains uncertain.

I had a Kiron 28-210 somewhere in storage after using it for a trip to China almost 10 years ago. I liked it, but the tele end is only f5.6, and I recalled the shoot of the peak of Kagebo to be rather soft. Not sure if I can dig it out now, and if it is still clean as 10 years ago though.

By the way, the wide angle zoom I am going to use is a Sigma 21-35 AF version with fixed plastic hood. I got it rather inexpensively, as the aperture was fixed at the wide open position. (if the reviews on the internet is correct, its performance at wide open is not considered as bad at all, hopefully)

Thanks again for your reply!

[Attila]

I think better to split focal length to two parts one 35-80 or 28-80 and one 80-200 both Tamron SP or 70-210 35-70 etc
they are good ones. Kiron is heavy and less good I have , had all

Best ones what I did try made by Olympus and Konica , both compatible with NEX.

[nethersole]

[Ymmot]

If this list is correct/complete, there are probably no superzoom Konicas:
http://www.buhla.de/Foto/Konica/eHexanonUebersicht.html
I know this one to be pretty much complete, so no superzooms from Olympus (in German):
http://olypedia.de/OM

Though I can't really imagine where you have to dig it up from, though if you already have the Kiron,
I would at least try that one out before buying another one (also a bit dependent on which mount it is/for how much you can get an adapter)

Just shine a LED light/torch through it you should be able to see quite well if there is any crap/fungus/animals/rainforests/etc. in there.
Digging up my Tamron for a minute it was not as large as I remembered it, though my right hand still cringes at the thought of that on a NEX5.

[Attila]

[diddy]

I have the Tamron SP 35-210mm and I was very surprised about its quality. I use it on a Canon 5D and I am very pleased with the output. I also has a macro setting, although it is a bit awkward to use, it is a very nice extra. I posted some pictures here about two months ago about this lens.

[Attila]

http://forum.mflenses.com/macros-with-tamron-sp-35-210mm-f3-5-4-2-t51469,highlight,%2Btamron.html

Do you have sample from 35mm end too ? Usually that is worst part.

[diddy]

Thanks for providing the link, Attila! I have mainly explored the 35mm length and the macro setting. Please find below an example of a shot taken at 35mm with the Canon 5D mark 1:

IMG_1431