| Author: | | Pentaxian Registered: May, 2015 Location: Hampshire Posts: 892 | | Lens Review Engagement: May 11, 2017 | I can recommend this lens: Yes | Toll: $15.00 | Rating:8 |
| Pros: | Cheap, well built | | Cons: | Purple fringing. | | Sharpness: nine Aberrations: half dozen Bokeh: six Handling: 8 Value: 10 Camera Used: K-5 | |
I took a couple of large crates of books to a clemency shop this morning, while waiting to go my breath dorsum and my artillery to stop aching I noticed a couple of Tamron Adaptall boxes in a drinking glass cabinet. When the young lady assistant had finished unpacking the crates I asked to have a look at her camera "stuff".
1 boxed 03A, one boxed Canon FD adapter, ane boxed Canon FD fit 2x converter and a modest pile of filters and a holder all in their cases / boxes. The young lady bodacious me that they were all new! I didn't say annihilation about their likely age.
I noticed that they were request �xx for the 2x teleconverter so ignored that. �20 for the filters and holder so ignored them. The lens was �ten so I made an offer on the lens and adaptall mountain (not priced for some reason) and went abode happy. The lens (and mount) are in skilful condition, improve than my copies of 46A and 103A. Also better than the SP19AH I sold on recently and my favourite SP23A. The tiniest amount of zoom pitter-patter at either end of the FLs if I shake the lens, smooth focussing, clear eyes, I like the Tamron Adaptalls so I couldn't not buy it.....(Well that's what I said to my wife equally she looked daggers....she didn't assist me carry all those books in!) My review;
Pretty sharp, early indications are that it is close to the 103A in sharpness. ie good.
Great to be able to swap mounts on the lens to use another brand torso. I used a P-KA mount.
Focussing is relatively piece of cake in good calorie-free and starts at less than 1 metre only the 10 metre to infinity focus is a short throw so intendance must be taken to correctly focus and not nudge information technology.
Downside is CA, as yous would await. Try and avoid situations that exacerbate this
.
Recommended as a budget (as in cheap to buy) lens with adaptall capabilities if you are prepared to focus manually.
Much the same can exist said of all the Tamron adaptalls I imagine. | | | | Junior Fellow member Registered: July, 2016 Location: Southern Indiana Posts: 39 | | Lens Review Date: Oct 17, 2016 | I can recommend this lens: Yes | Price: $25.00 | Rating:8 |
| Pros: | Warm photos, sharp enough, solid build. | | Cons: | Heavy CA | | Sharpness: eight Aberrations: five Bokeh: seven Handling: 9 Value: 9 Camera Used: K-v | |
Considering the cost, this is a fabulous lens� as long every bit you know its limitations. I�ve had this lens for almost a calendar week, and I�ve been testing it in various conditions. Once you figure out when and where to utilize it, you can get great results. Just the CA is persistent in my re-create, and too heavy to get easily rid of in PP. Low light and loftier contrast daylight creates heavy CA, merely stopped down in cloudy atmospheric condition or exterior direct sunlight you can find marvelous opportunities with this. Fall colors will glow with this lens. The activeness and build are stellar, and while it is a adequately heavy piece of equipment, I expect to exist carrying information technology around quite a chip.     | | | | New Member Registered: January, 2010 Location: Auckland Posts: 18 | | Lens Review Date: March seven, 2014 | I tin can recommend this lens: Yeah | Cost: $70.00 | Rating:6 |
| Pros: | Singe focus >< zoom band, sharp, compact + pocket-size MFD | | Cons: | Some CA at long end | | Sharpness: vii Aberrations: 4 Bokeh: 6 Handling: 10 Value: 7 Photographic camera Used: Sony a850 | |
I take owned this lens for 24 hours and have adapted it to a full frame Sony camera. My expectations were quite low and it has exceeded them:
1) Excellent design and build - solid but lite and meaty with an easy one activeness zoom and focus ring. Constant aperture at 3.8 is a bonus. No zoom creep and built in lens hood.
2) Sharpness - sharp stopped down at all focal lengths. Soft at f5.six or wider
iii) Aberrations. majestic CA present - very marked until stopped right down and not possible to eliminate in PP. 
4) Bokeh - can be harsh with backlights - but generally fair.
5) Colour - very warm tending to the magenta. Likeable.
vi) Flare - nil
7) Vignetting - nil
8) Spherical aberration - nil I have updated and downgraded my review of this lens having now endemic information technology for about a calendar week. Its a very useful focal length and its main strength is COLOUR and SHARPNESS when stopped down. Notwithstanding the CA is a reall issue and the Bokeh on this lens is over rated. It appears from reviews that the SP version may be a better bet in terms of aberration control. Its nevertheless a likeable lens mainly due to sharpness (stopped down) and coluors and its compact size and skillful handling.        Malcolm Lyons March 2014 | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2013 Posts: 9 | | Lens Review Date: February 22, 2014 | I can recommend this lens: Yeah | Price: $30.00 | Rating:9 |
| Pros: | very sharp lens at f viii, very prissy macro photos possible | | Cons: | few CA'due south, focus ring slipping very easily | | Sharpness: ten Aberrations: 9 Bokeh: x Handling: 8 Value: 10 | |
my lens hasn't these potent CA bug (perhaps version II). Any phenomena of CA will disappear; when stopped down to f11 in shut up range and using an achromatic focal reductor.
(I apply it for 4/100 bellows, also) For this purpose you must fit a glass from 8x30 binocular into a PK maco ring. So I've got a cheap macro zoom from approx 65 to 175mm with excellent optical qualities | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2012 Location: Due north Wales Posts: ii,616 3 usersouthward found this helpful  | | Lens Review Date: February 16, 2013 | I can recommend this lens: Yep | Cost: $x.00 | Rating:8 |
| Pros: | sharp, treatment, lens hood, cheap! | | Cons: | persistent CA, 103A ameliorate shut upwardly | | Sharpness: viii Aberrations: 5 Bokeh: 6 Treatment: viii Value: 10 | |
I am a bit surprised there aren't more than reviews on this lens, its pretty common, so since I acquired ane every bit part of a task lot here are my thoughts.
There question basically is: we know how readily available the 103A is; if instead yous find yourself looking at a 03A should y'all walk away? Adaptall-2.org makes no basic that the later on model is a revised and improved blueprint. Just does that hateful forget it, or does it hateful well really if you have a choice so definitely become for the 103A, but otherwise don't worry about it, both reflect Tamron quality?
So we are primarily comparison the two. In advent and handling the two are almost identical, with similar markings. If you are looking at a tamron eighty-210 and don't know which it is, 03A is the one with the built in hood, and the bigger discontinuity collar (that extends further along the butt of the lens). Mechanics of both are slap-up. One thing I noticed was a tendency to dorsum focus at high zoom: since this was with both I am now inclined to arraign the camera (user..?). Focus is millimetric at that end; with both I used alive view. On the 03A focus is covered in half a rotation of the sleeve, on 103A in 2/3rds. Sharpness get-go and my impressions are that they are broadly equal. I did some comparisons of the same subject at f4, f5.6, f9 at different focal lengths and felt the differences were relatively insignificant.
For what its worth I thought this lens was stronger at the long cease, while I idea the opposite of the 103A. Both were softer broad open up simply not unacceptably so except below ~120mm - I would say avoid f3.viii at the short focal lengths. Contrast wise I have to say I preferred the contrast of 03A when scrutinising the slate roof but that could exist more than related with 03A's blue tone.. both were pretty good. Optically the lenses do offer a different look - bluer for 03A, yellower for 103A (unprocessed jpg'due south hither). I checked both out with the 01F 2x TC. test subject: the estuary marker. Long distance (~500m) high mag shots like this are a scrap pernickety, a passing draught can make a difference, simply I tentatively offer a conclusion: 03A consistently showed a bit better (and that yellowish bounding main looks a scrap !*!*). This is representative (f5.vi, 200mm x2, x1.5 crop = 600mm). Now I need to do the same with close upwards subjects (watch this space).  Shut upward I seemed to get better results with the 103A. Both focus to 0.9m/3ft, 03A has an eight blade iris, 103A six blades. Bokeh was similar at wide apertures, stop down and 103A becomes spotty, just ok, while 03A becomes scratchy - ugh (looking through the lens while closing the iris the edges of the aperture at f4-f8 are non shine!). I also noticed sensor reflections with both lenses. But overall 103A gets the vote on this one. Aberrations: here 03A virtually lost its case. Tree confronting the sky shots exhibited pronounced CA and strong purpling that was nonetheless axiomatic at f9; this was worst at 210mm. However this almost disappeared when the sun wasn't shining - RH crop. Merely reason I don't cry bye bye 03A: 103A isn't cracking on this either. Not equally bad, but I've had more a few instances of PF and complementary R-G fringing. 50% crops
 Below are two shots of the quay, ~180mm, tripod mounted, f5.vi, pentax k-r, click the links for full size. I'll leave it to you to evaluate them for yourself, and assign moving picture to lens. Then whats the verdict? 03A about lost it simply I find myself somewhat in the center. The CA was disappointing only the sharpness is skilful, and it does offering such a dissimilar look it actually asks to exist judged on its ain merits. Information technology seems the reply to the which 1 question is ....19AH! Play tricks question, see! Only these are bachelor for a tenner or less, and the terminal 19AH sale I watched went for over a hundred... .
Full size here
 Full size hither
 | | | | New Member Registered: Nov, 2008 Location: Los Angeles California Posts: 1 | | Lens Review Appointment: January 1, 2009 | I can recommend this lens: Yeah | Price: $22.00 | Rating:7 |
| Pros: | meaty- cheap toll- SHARP for not being a SP | | Cons: | | |
I purchased this lens for $22 since no ane else seemed to want it on Ebay... My purpose was actually to Go A PENTAX K ADAPTER! .
Turns out I got this overnice zoom in the process which I may apply on occasion outdoors when the weather is inclement. | | |
0 Response to "Tamron 80-210mm 45-56 / Mdl 178d / Canon Ef Review"
Postar um comentário