Tamron Adaptalls

[bychance]

Just how good do you think these lenes were/are.
I personally love them all and am on my second collection having sold the first some years ago. The sharpest lens I have ever used is a Tamron adaptall. I won't say which one, but it was cheap, mint and a masterpiece of manufacturing with timeless appeal for pre computerised lens design.
Just curious to know what this forum thinks of these wonderfull lenses.

[kypfer]

I've used Adaptall-2 lenses since the '70's.
My #52B 90mm macro is on it's fourth mount (M42, Fujica screw, Fujica bayonet, and now PKA) and still in my bag and used regularly
My #104A 75-250mm f/4 was my "birding and butterfly" lens for many years, often with the 01F 2x flat-field converter, and the #55B 500mm mirror a regular standby.
I purchased the original 28-200mm #71A, which was vari-focus with a not-very-close minimum focus distance, but when the 171A became available I upgraded and used that lens until it developed fungus deep in it's internals and it became unusable.
To my mind, the 24mm and 28mm f/2.5 primes still hold their own, even if they are a little bulky by more modern standards.
I never did get the 17mm (maybe one day) and was disappointed Tamron never released a 35mm!

[Ultrapix]

[visualopsins]

mflenses loves Adaptall so much when http://adaptall-2.com domain expired, Attila (mflenses owner) purchased the domain and web site contents...

I've had good results from several -- 51B (SP 17/3.5), 52B (SP-90/2.5 all metal), 52BB (SP 90/2.5 macro), 55BB (SP 500/8 mirror), 23A (SP 60-300/3.8-5.4), and 03B (135/2.5)

http://adaptall-2.com/lenses/Adaptall-2_LensIndex.html
http://adaptall-2.com/lenses/SP_Adaptall-2_LensIndex.html

(edited to include 51B)

[D1N0]

[Alun Thomas]

They were among the top third party lenses for their era, IMO. All were competent at least, and some were excellent. Lenses from other sources were sometimes as good, i.e. some Vivitar Series 1 lenses, but in general they were above most other third party offerings, and often as good as offerings from top camera manufacturers.

My favourites are the 19AH 70-210/3.5 and the 35-80/2.8-3.5. The 17/3.5 is good, but the Tokina equivalent is even better. As others have noted, the 90/2.5 is highly regarded.

I have to be honest though, I don't use mine much. I prefer the 90/2.5 Panagor (Komine) as it goes 1:1 if needed, and in general lately my interest is in older, metal, lenses from the mid 50s to the late 60s, the modern 80s styling doesn't grab me.

[kansalliskala]

Lenses are great but adapters old, fiddly and worn.

I have had m42, Nikon, C/Y, Konica, Minolta and FD.

FD is absolutely worst.

[kypfer]

[MartinV]

But there are also adapters directly from Adaptall-2 to current mirrorless mounts, so you don't have to use the fiddly legacy mount adapters in between - here's one for E-mount:

https://www.kentfaith.com/KF06.164_tamron-to-sony-nex-e-mount-adapter

I haven't used one extensively yet, but it seemed to work OK.

[D1N0]

There new adapters for adaptall for most modern mounts (without aperture coupling but mirrorless doesn't support that anyway). Those are simple tubes so nothing can go wrong with them.

[RokkorDoctor]

[eggplant]

I would say the

Model 03A 80-210mm F/3.8-4
Model 103A 80-210mm F/3.8-4

Are the most common vintage lens to find second hand, after the Helios 58mm f/2 versions.

[Ultrapix]

Today I became curious to quickly compare my manual wide-angle, indoor shots at various apertures, and outdoor views at 1:8 aperture;
I shot with:
1: Lydith 30 mm 1:3.5; outstanding in the centre, but areas just outside the centre never become sharp at any aperture
2: Tamron Adaptall 2 - 24mm 1:2,5; lots of glow at higher apertures, peripheral areas (say 30 % of the image) never becoming sharp
3: Tamron Adaptall 2 - 28mm 1:2.5; practically the same as the 24, perhaps overall a little better
4: Vivitar 28mm 1:2.8, compact version, immediately preceding the short distance; very glowy up to 5.6, after that great sharpness and contrast, at f:8 and 11 it works really excellent excluding extreme corners, but we are talking about a few mm of sensor
5: APINAR 28 mm 2.5, same as the well-known Vivitar and Panagor; poor performance at all apertures, outer areas never sharp, very vintage look
6: Yashica/C 28mm 1:2.8, I think it's the first type, very good rendition and consistent with the aperture, for a vintage lens I consider it usable on all occasions
7: Super Takumar M42 28mm 1;3.5 SMC; really good, no glow, excellent colour and contrast at all apertures, at 5.6 / 8 usable for any critical use.

I'm a bit off topic, but the two Adaptall 2's come out badly for my taste; they are usable for creative images, you can exploit the good brightness, but for technical photos better to look elsewhere (my two best 28's I paid 70/80 Euros for, so I don't see much convenience in using lesser brands); soon I'll look also at Minolta, whose fame has not yet made 28mm prices explode

[Lloydy]

I like Tamrons, a few are a bit on the poor side, most are very good and some are excellent.

Tamron BBAR MC . CW-28 28mm f2.8
Tamron PFH-28Au. Adaptamatic 28mm f2.8
Tamron Compact Zoom. 07A 28-50mm f3.5 / 4.5
Tamron 59A 28-79mm f3.5 / 4.5
Tamron BBAR MC. 44A CF Macro 28-70mm f3.5 / 4.5
Tamron SP. CF Macro. 27A 28-80mm f3.5 / 4.2
Tamron Zoom BBAR. Close Focus SZ-38 38-100mm f3.5
Tamron BBAR MC CF Macro 17A 35-70mm f3.5
Tamron BBAR MC CF Macro 17A 35-70mm f3.5
Tamron SP BBAR 01A 35-80mm f2.8 / 3.8
Tamron BBAR C Zoom Macro QZ-35M 35-80mm f 2.8 / 3.5
Tamron BBAR 22A Macro 35-135 f3.5 / 4.2
Tamron 20AB 70-150mm f3.5
Tamron 20A 70-150mm f3.5
Tamron 46A 70-210mm f3.8 / 4
Tamron 46A 70-210mm f3.8 / 4
Tamron 52A 70-210mm f3.5 / 4
Tamron SP 19AH 70-210mm F3.5
Tamron BBAR Z-220 70-220mm f3.8
Tamron BBAR. 03A 80-210mm f3.8 / 4
Tamron BBAR. 03A 80-210mm f3.8 / 4
Tamron BBAR Z210 Macro 85-210mm f4.5
Tamron BBAR 04A Macro 75-250mm f3.5 / 4.5
Taisei Kogaku Tamron Twin-Tele 135- 225mm f2.8 / 5.5
Taisei Kogaku Tamron Twin-Tele SOLD 135- 225mm f2.8 / 5.5
Tamron BBAR MC. CT135 135mm f2.8
Tamron SP 52BB 90mm f2.5
Tamron SP 52BB 90mm f2.5
Tamron SP 52BB 90mm f2.5
Tamron Auto Adaptamatic 870AU 200mm f3.5
Tamron BBAR. O4B 200mm f3.5
Tamron SP 670AU (Black ) 300mm f5.6
Tamron SP 670AU ( Silver ) 300mm f5.6
Tamron 55B Mirror 500mm f8

I'm sure there's a few more somewhere...

[cooltouch]

Wow Lloydy! I thought I had a large Tamron collection! Looks like I got quite a way to go before I'm caught up with you.

There are a few aftermarket makers of lenses who made some really top-quality optics. I'v'e always felt that Tamron was consistently at the top of the list. Yes, the mounts can be fiddly at times, but they work and work well when used correctly.

With the exception of the 24mm f/2.5, all of my adaptalls are SP's. I bought my first Tamron -- an SP 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4 -- back in about 1986. I paid a lot for it too -- like about $300. Nowadays, you can often find them on the used market for $20-40. My second adaptall was a 90mm f/2.5 macro. A brilliant lens, one of the sharpest lenses I own. I own SP's ranging from 17mm to 500mm, which include a couple of 500mm mirrors and a 200-500mm zoom, a Brobdingnagian lens if I've ever owned one. But it is a very sharp zoom. One of my favorites is an SP 300mm f/2.8 LD (a 60B, I think), but my pride and joy is the 180mm f/2.5 LD. Only 3000 were made. A fantastic lens.

[Ultrapix]

I apologise for the unscientific nature of the test, the position from which I shot with the Vivitar is noticeably different from the two Tamrons, but I didn't intend to publish these images. In any case, I think the differences are clearly perceptible. I specify that the diaphragm used was 11, and not f:8 as written yesterday; in the second picture, the lenses under this comparison

#1


#2


I would like to add that I own two samples of the 28 1:2.5, and this one is the best, being perfectly centred; the Vivitar may be slightly off-centre and this may have favoured it, the left side being the best side, in any case both the Yashica and the Takumar are on another planet

[D1N0]

This is my Tamron collection https://www.flickr.com/photos/randomdump/collections/72157709655549961/ Most are adaptall, two adapt-a-matics and two AF Tamron's

[bychance]

[John Shriver]

I very much like the 300mm 5.6 SP 54B "Macro". Light, easy to handle, sharp, close focusing.

[Ultrapix]

My personal favourites are the first 90 macro, which I have owned several times, the first of which I bought as soon as it came out, and the 500 mirror.

The 90 unfortunately has the defect of a mechanical construction that is not up to the standards of the optics, as far as the aperture is concerned; when the lens has some work behind it, in extended position, if you slightly force the front part with your fingers in a rotary direction, or even simply reverse the rotation of the focusing ring, you can observe that the aperture opens and closes, leading to errors of even more than 1 stop at the most closed values. This defect, in the days of film, forced me to sell the lens; today using it in stop down on digital the problem is not relevant. By way of information, the defect can be corrected (temporarily) by opening the lens, checking the perfect tightening of the screws that fix the two bars that guide the straight motion of the front optical unit, and above all by widening the end of the latter, a sort of fork that with use tends to acquire play in the respective guides. I remember that I am talking about the first version, I have no idea what the mechanics are like in the later ones,

[Slalom]

I have a good number of Adaptall-2 SP and a few plain Adaptall-2.

On my planned tour:

https://www.bikexplore.co.uk/Abroad/Italian-Lakes-and-High-Passes-GW222

I wiil have 2 SPs the 24-48 as a lens cap and the 24A 60-300, Both Solid lenses and will travel in my Back Pack with a few bits of clothing, to cope with weater issues.

[bp_reid]

I like them as they were among my first lenses - the small, late model 28-70 f/3.5-4.5 & it’s 70-210 f/4-5.6 counterpart. I still have this pair and find them OK and handy for shooting film with a small SLR like my Contax 139 or Pentax MX.

More recently I havole found the 24-48 to be one of my favourites, I have 2 copies of the hood which helps. I also like the SP 28-135, The SP 80-200/2.8 and the 90/2.5.

I have found the 70-210/3.5 (#19AH) and the 24/2.5 disappointing.

[Ricon]

[Paragon19]

I got hooked on Tamron Adaptall lenses after picking up what appeared to be an unused 60-300mm 23A, and I thought I had a sizeable collection, but it's dwarfed in comparison to the others being posted in here! So far I have:

28mm f/2.5 02B
28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 159A
28-80mm f/3.5-4.2 27A (wasn't thrilled with the 28-70)
35-105mm f/2.8 65A
60-300mm f/3.8-5.4 23A
70-210mm f/4-5.6 158A (in the box of a 28-200mm I thought I was getting)
70-210mm f/3.5 19AH
80-200mm f/2.8 30A
90mm f/2.5 Macro 52BB
135mm f/2.5 03B
200mm f/3.5 CT-200
Teleconverter 2X 01F

There is a 28-200mm f/3.8-5.6 171A in the mail currently.

Still on the lookout for good deals on the 17mm f3.5 51B/151B, 24mm f/2.5 01B, 24-48mm f/3.5-3.8 13A, 90mm f/2.8 Macro 1:1 72B, 300mm f2.8 60B, and 200-500mm f/5.6 31A. Also a 180mm f2.5 63B, and a 70-150mm f/2.8 SOFT 51A...but finding inexpensive copies is probably not realistic!

I mostly use them with EF adapters on mirrorless, but I do save all the adapters they come with in case I want to use them on any of my film SLRs. It's interesting to see that Tamron marked f/1.4 on a lot of the adapters too, too bad they didn't release any lenses that fast.

[RokkorDoctor]