View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
drjs
![Level 2 Level 2](rating2.gif) Joined: 25 Feb 2013 Posts: 484 Location: USA
|
Posted: Tue Apr 09, 2013 2:49 am Post subject: Tamron SP 52A, 70-210mm |
|
|
drjs wrote:
First, I want to say I am deeply conflicted about this lens. It is my first Adaptall SP, my first manual zoom, and my first macro lens. As you can see, it is fully capable of producing excellent results, but it takes a lot of work. Post processing is almost a must and takes a lot of time to get it just right. I suppose it is like your first love. When you are with her, you see all of her faults; yet when you are apart, you miss closeness and feel nostalgic about it all the time.
Absolutely not the sharpest lens I have, not the longest I have, or the best macro I own. Yet, there is something indefinably charming about it. It feels nice in the hand, with that 80ish Japanese quality, the focus is long and smooth. Pictures are definitely on the soft side, yet I often get those dreamy quality not seen in very sharp lenses. I think this is one of those lens I will never sell.
I must had too much to drink tonight. For your grins and chuckles.
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#6
#7
![](http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20134/6631_52A_Test5017_1.jpg) _________________ Follow me on 500px |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
FotoPete
![Level 1 Level 1](rating1.gif) Joined: 20 Nov 2012 Posts: 126
|
Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
FotoPete wrote:
Thanks for posting! I bought this lenses after reading about its supposed benefits over a similar Vivitar lens.
You are right about the lens sharpness, its not going to draw attention but the lens is surprisingly well corrected of aberrations. The continuous close focusing is also a blessing! _________________ My Gear and Other Ramblings :: http://filmlensaddict.blogspot.ca/ |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
drjs
![Level 2 Level 2](rating2.gif) Joined: 25 Feb 2013 Posts: 484 Location: USA
|
Posted: Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
drjs wrote:
FotoPete wrote: |
Thanks for posting! I bought this lenses after reading about its supposed benefits over a similar Vivitar lens.
You are right about the lens sharpness, its not going to draw attention but the lens is surprisingly well corrected of aberrations. The continuous close focusing is also a blessing! |
I note this as well. This is a few lens from the era where aberration is a none-issue. Sharpness is also better shooting close by objects (which is what this lens is designed to do). I find it interesting the adaptall-2.org review goes on length about how this lens is designed to shoot at macro range then turns around testing resolution at a distant target. I think this lens is much better than what test charts makes it out to be. One thing I hate about this lens has nothing to do with its native design. The focal length of 210 means I can no longer use my speedlite for fill in since I have to lock the speed at 1/350 or so. _________________ Follow me on 500px |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
Paul
![Level 1 Level 1](rating1.gif) Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Posts: 173 Location: Hamburg-Germany
|
Posted: Sun May 12, 2013 5:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Paul wrote:
I have and love this lens too:
No CA at all!
Very good macro-function!
Superb build-quality...
For all items that are not so far away I prefer this lens even over my primes with these focal lengths. _________________
Paul
(SLR-experiences since 1981)
Pentax and Canon - Sony digital as well
too many lenses and flashes |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
drjs
![Level 2 Level 2](rating2.gif) Joined: 25 Feb 2013 Posts: 484 Location: USA
|
Posted: Thu May 16, 2013 2:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
drjs wrote:
The lens is really pretty decent. I took some more shots a few days back and here are the results.
#1
#2
#3
#4
![](http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20135/6631_untitled0436_1.jpg) _________________ Follow me on 500px |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
Laurentiu Cristofor
![Level 3 Level 3](rating3.gif) Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Posts: 524 Location: WA, USA
|
Posted: Thu May 16, 2013 4:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
Paul wrote: |
I have and love this lens too:
No CA at all!
|
Oh, I see LoCA in several shots.
First set:
#3 red fringing on the box border, green fringing on the top of the decoration edges
#4 green fringing top left
#5 green fringing on the petal on the upper left
Second set:
#2 green outline around the King's contour.
All these are very nice images but the CA flaws of the lens are hard to hide. I now expect this behavior from any adaptall-2 lens - in fact, it seems to be the distinguishing feature of this lens line. Even the ED element in the 80-200/2.8 lens is not able to eliminate this problem. I like these lenses very much for their build and features (aperture range, macro capabilities), but their LoCA annoys me every time I mount one on a camera.
Pentax/Takumar lenses also have LoCA, but it is a bit better controlled than in the adaptalls. I wonder whether it is a Japanese lens design issue, but I have not used Olympus/Canon/Nikon lenses from that era to know if they share this characteristic. I did use some older Vivitar lenses that fared better in this area, but they were more of an exception. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
Arctures
![Level 2 Level 2](rating2.gif) Joined: 10 Jul 2009 Posts: 295
|
Posted: Thu May 16, 2013 7:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
Arctures wrote:
I have got my Tam 19AH 70-210 3.5 recently. I love the colors but it's a bit soft wide open and there are so many CA on the shots! May be I've got a bad copy. Well overall it is not bad but... there are so many admire posts about those Tams so I've had some other expectations. It surely doesn't shine on my 5DII. Your Tam 52 shots look fairly good though. Now thinking about having a good 135 and 180-200 instead or pay more and get Contax 80-200. _________________ Sony A7, NEX-5n, Panasonic GH5(Oly12-40/2. , Contax Distagon T* 28/2.8, Contax Planar T* 50/1.4, Contax T* 80-200/4,
Minolta Rokkor MC 58/1.2, Minolta MC Rokkor-X PF 50/1.7, Minolta MD 50/2.0, Konica Hexanon AR 50/1.8,
Konica Hexanon 57/1.4, Rokkor-PF 55/1.7, Konica Hexanon 40/1.8, Auto Yashinon 50/2.0, Canon FD 50/3.5
Voigtl�nder APO Lanthar 90/3.5 M42, Topcon RE.Topcor 58/1.8, Helios-44-2 58/2.0, Canon FD 24/2.8,
Canon FD 135/2.5 SC, Auto Topcor 135/3.5, Pentax SMC 55/1.8, Minolta 35/2.8, Minolta MD 35-70/3.5 |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
drjs
![Level 2 Level 2](rating2.gif) Joined: 25 Feb 2013 Posts: 484 Location: USA
|
Posted: Thu May 16, 2013 12:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
drjs wrote:
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote: |
Paul wrote: |
I have and love this lens too:
No CA at all!
|
Oh, I see LoCA in several shots.
First set:
#3 red fringing on the box border, green fringing on the top of the decoration edges
#4 green fringing top left
#5 green fringing on the petal on the upper left
Second set:
#2 green outline around the King's contour.
All these are very nice images but the CA flaws of the lens are hard to hide. I now expect this behavior from any adaptall-2 lens - in fact, it seems to be the distinguishing feature of this lens line. Even the ED element in the 80-200/2.8 lens is not able to eliminate this problem. I like these lenses very much for their build and features (aperture range, macro capabilities), but their LoCA annoys me every time I mount one on a camera.
Pentax/Takumar lenses also have LoCA, but it is a bit better controlled than in the adaptalls. I wonder whether it is a Japanese lens design issue, but I have not used Olympus/Canon/Nikon lenses from that era to know if they share this characteristic. I did use some older Vivitar lenses that fared better in this area, but they were more of an exception. |
I agree with this. But comparing to 60-300, which is from the same era, it should be defined as well controlled. ![Smile](images/smiles/icon_smile.gif) _________________ Follow me on 500px |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
phoeniks
![Level 1 Level 1](rating1.gif) Joined: 18 Jun 2011 Posts: 62 Location: Czech Republic
|
Posted: Thu May 16, 2013 6:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
phoeniks wrote:
this lens is somehow controversial. I also have one and sometimes it's great and sometimes poor. See for yourselves. Most of these samples are at 210mm and wide-open. CA almost none, very well controlled.
70mm
same place 210mm
![](http://forum.mflenses.com/userpix/20135/4391_DSC03602_1.jpg) _________________ HUGE speedbooster fan! http://www.metabones.cz/?lang=en |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
Laurentiu Cristofor
![Level 3 Level 3](rating3.gif) Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Posts: 524 Location: WA, USA
|
Posted: Thu May 16, 2013 6:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
drjs wrote: |
But comparing to 60-300, which is from the same era, it should be defined as well controlled. ![Smile](images/smiles/icon_smile.gif) |
My 60-300 is average in terms of CA control. The best adaptall-2 that I used were the 90 macro and the 80-200. Worst seemed to be the 300. This is strictly speaking in terms of CA, of course.
I have shots from the 60-300 where CA is on similar level with what I see in these 70-210 photos. I was actually surprised how low CA were with it given that it is a zoom and doesn't have much of a reputation. I don't want to side track this thread by mixing samples from different lenses, but you can check this link for samples from my copy. I would use the 60-300 more if it were not for its size and weight and push-pull handling.
Last edited by Laurentiu Cristofor on Sun May 19, 2013 9:19 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
Paul
![Level 1 Level 1](rating1.gif) Joined: 07 Mar 2007 Posts: 173 Location: Hamburg-Germany
|
Posted: Sun May 19, 2013 1:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Paul wrote:
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote: |
drjs wrote: |
But comparing to 60-300, which is from the same era, it should be defined as well controlled. ![Smile](images/smiles/icon_smile.gif) |
My 60-300 is average in terms of CA control. The best adaptall-2 that I used were the 90 macro and the 80-200. Worst seemed to be the 300. This is strictly speaking in terms of CA, of course..... |
Do you have the 5.6/300?
if yes:which version? There are at least 2.... I have the latest SP version and no reasons for complains... _________________
Paul
(SLR-experiences since 1981)
Pentax and Canon - Sony digital as well
too many lenses and flashes |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
hifisapi
![Level 3 Level 3](rating3.gif) Joined: 25 Sep 2012 Posts: 941 Location: USA
|
Posted: Sun May 19, 2013 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
hifisapi wrote:
I had this 70-210 F3.5 lens for a brief while but I got rid of it because there was something I didn't like about it.
Damn if I can remember what the problem was though... Oh well... _________________ ===========
ACQUIRED OVER 30 YEARS:
Cameras: DSLR=Pentax istDS FILM=Pentax SP, SP-F, ESII, SP1000, KX, K2
Lenses : Pentax M42 = Super Multi Coated Takumars 50/1.4 55/1.8 100/4-BELLOWS 500/4.5 1000/8 135-600/6.7 Pentax PK= SMC Pentax-Ks K17/4-FF Fisheye K18/3.5 K20/4 K24/3.5 K28/3.5 K28/2 K35/3.5 K35/2 K50/1.2 K50/1.4K 50/4-MACROK 55/1.8 K85/1.8 K100/4-MACRO K100/4-BELLOWS K105/2.8 K120/2.8 K135/3.5 K135/2.5 K150/4 K200/4 K400/5.6 K45-125/4K 85-210/4.5 Pentax PKM = SMC Pentax-M M40/2.8-Pancake M50/1.4 M75-150/4 M80-200/4.5 Pentax PKA= SMC Pentax-A A15/3.5 A50/2.8-MACRO A28/2 A35/2 A50/1.4 A135/2.8 A200/4 A*300/4 A35-105/3.5 A24-50/4 A70-210/4 TAMRON AD2= SP80-200/2.8 SP180/2.5 TOKINA AT-X PK= ATX28-85/3.5-4.5 ATX35-70/2.8 ATX60-120/2.8 ATX80-200/2.8 ATX100-300/4 ATX90/2.5 MACRO KIRON-LESTER DINE PK = 105/2.8-MACRO VIVITAR PK = 135/2.8-MACRO 28-85/4 NOFLEXAR AUTOBELLOWS PK = 60/4 105/4 |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
Laurentiu Cristofor
![Level 3 Level 3](rating3.gif) Joined: 23 Oct 2010 Posts: 524 Location: WA, USA
|
Posted: Sun May 19, 2013 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Laurentiu Cristofor wrote:
Paul wrote: |
Do you have the 5.6/300?
if yes:which version? There are at least 2.... I have the latest SP version and no reasons for complains... |
I only know of one SP version - the 54B. Here are my samples from it. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/mflenses/images/spacer.gif) |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|