Tamron AD2 135/2.5

scsambrook · Expire: 2011-11-18

So I took the Tamron 135/2.5 for pretty much the same walk I had yesterday with the Macro Elmar 100/4 on the Lumix G1. Not really a comparison exercise, more curiosity as to what sort of close-up pictures I could get with a non-macro focusing lens which gives us f2.5 using only four elements. Closest focus is 1.2 meters.

Today we had some bright sunshine, so I could drop the ISO setting to 200. But, when the sun shines the Lumix finder is . . . well, not quite as good as one could hope for. So in many shots I missed the exact point I wanted to be sharp. Never mind, it still gave me fair idea of how useful the Tamron 135/2.5 is for these kinds of pictures. When I get my new specs I'll put it back on the Pentax and try it again. I think it cost about 1/15th of what the Marco Elmar set me back . . .

SonicScot · Posted: Thu Apr 10, 2014 3:47 pm Post subject:

Excellent results Very Happy

Lloydy · Expire: 2022-01-01

Yes, I agree. I would be happy with that. Cool

atiratha · Posted: Fri Apr 11, 2014 6:58 am Post subject:

In my experience, this Tamron is on par with the legendary SMC Pentax 135/2.5, only the CA is worse wide open

vlousada · Joined: 11 Dec 2010 Posts: 345 Location: Portugal

Very good results and lens too.

Basilisk · Joined: 21 Mar 2013 Posts: 356 Location: UK

It looks pretty nice. Would be good to see some full frame results. One on Ebay UK for £40. There are plenty of good 135s, but not as many that would mount on my D600, and a touch of extra speed over a f2.8 (is it sharp at f2.5?)

scsambrook · Expire: 2011-11-18

There aren't as many on eBay as used to be the case - I've seen buy-it-now prices over £80 but I don't know if they were sold.

I think pixel-peeping at the edges on a full frame camera might not overjoy the quality-enthusiast, but does anyone actually peer at the edges when looking at a picture?

It does very well at f2.5 in low light but it's less good if you use it outdoors wide open on a bright day. The built-in hood is really a joke and a long one does seem to help in some situations. If you point it at test targets at f2.5 or f2.8 it will deceive you into thinking it's not nearly as good a lens for taking 'real' pictures as it actually is.

MacTak · Joined: 15 Jun 2011 Posts: 108

I had one too for a time, along with the S-M-C Takumar 135/2.5 (version 1). While I never did any brick-wall sort of comparative tests between the two, based on a good number of actual photos I took with the two, I found the two of them to be virtually equal in image quality (both very good lenses), in sharpness at all aperatures, CA, and contrast. The Takumar had a slight advantage in colours and flare resistance, the AD2 had the obvious advantage of the close focusing. It is worth bearing in mind that the performance at and near MFD with this Tamron lens was in my experience poor until at least f5.6 (but then it was fine). It's quite an underrated lens capable of producing excellent results, as the OP's photos amply demonstrate.

marcusBMG · Joined: 07 Dec 2012 Posts: 1318 Location: Conwy N Wales

compliments on the pics scsambrook , good work with the G1

FYI the average auction price (UK) is £30-35. They're pretty readily available actually I mark them as O = often for availability on my adaptall lens list page. I was lucky with mine (perhaps I'll post in the lens bargains thread...!!) and I really like it - a nice complement to the Jupiter 11A, with its different character and faster f.

Adam: I put a couple of pics in the "best of" gallery but then noticed the lens was already there, perhaps you would like to tidy this.

http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-adaptall-2-135mm-f2-5-03b-t64966.html

http://forum.mflenses.com/tamron-adaptall-2-135mm-f-2-5-03b-t65087.html