Luballs
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.1 #1 · Tamron Zoom Shootout (28-75, 28-200, 35-150 EF, and 70-180) | |
So I am new to this but wanted to contribute to the forum. I deplore testing new lenses, but have learned on FM that it can be worthwhile to do it once and then move on (like a mathematical proof). I will explain my tests. I will almost certainly not re-shoot anything that you ask, as I am anxious to understand my gear, draw my conclusions, move on and make images!
I have been into photography since only about 2017 other than snapping images with a point and shoot while backpacking. I have been a fan of Tamron zooms for overall balance of features since I got into the game, so I have acquired the 28-75 f2.8 as one of my first FE lenses. I knew the 70-180 f2.8 would be an instant pre-order as soon as the rumors started. I couldn't stop thinking how awesome the 35-150 f2.8-4 for EF sounded, and adapted it with an MB V for my first non-native lens experience. And today I was running errands for my wife and decided to call Samy's in Pasadena to see if they had a 28-200 f2.8-5.6 in stock and they did, so.... here we are! I could give you some rationalization BS about a niche use for every lens (which there certainly is!), but let's be honest.... the reason is simply because MOOOAAAR. Moar is moar. More.
I claim zero expertise on lens testing, but every shot is on a A7rIII with stable tripod (Manfrotto MT055CXPro3 and BH40 ballhead), focused with 12.8x zoom in AF-S (except the adapted 35-150 which can't do 12.8x AF for dog $#*^ so it is the only lens I used MF in 12.8x zoom). 2 second timer. Manual exposure using f8, 1/160 second, ISO 100 was unchanged for all images (I chose a middle exposure to average 28mm and 200mm so that all focal lengths were within approximately +/-1 EV of ideal). I tested 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 70mm, 100mm, 135mm, 150mm, 180mm, and 200mm for all shared focal lengths.
The images were processed in Capture One 12 and no editing was done (only default manufacturer lens profiles and default sharpening that happens upon import). Obviously the comparisons are just a screenshot of various levels of zoom (200-400% on what seemed most relevant for each focal length and area being compared). I used Affinity Photo to resize the screenshots for sharing size (2400px long edge) and converted them into jpeg (at 45-85% quality to keep the file sizes to posting limits) without any other processing whatsoever. I did not always use exact extreme corners, as I repositioned the frame somewhat to line up relevant and discernable landmarks for comparison. I am not going to get into the minutia of any slight decentering/tilting/front or back focus on any single shot, as I was able to draw meaningful conclusions for my own satisfaction comparing two adjacent focal lengths (35mm vs 28mm and 50mm for example) if anything ever seemed kinda off in any one image. For the wider focal lengths I showed a general point of interest in the foreground and midground, but for the longer tele focal lengths, I just used center, UR, and UL areas that are all basically along the plane of focus (the tele focal lengths basically had varying amounts and locations of extreme foreground defocus/bokeh anyways).
Here was the image as a whole. I never moved the tripod head/camera once set up and always focused on the bikes leaned against the tree in the center of the background to simulate "infinity" landscape shots, which are my primary interest. I tried to choose a composition while zooming that quickly put trees in the upper corners and had a few foreground/midground elements other than grass to help judge any interesting depth of field/field curvature/missed focus issues to give context. So here goes!
Edited on Jun 27, 2020 at 03:04 AM · View previous versions
|
. I'd say the good news is that there are other excellent options that cover that, the bad being that in my case that would probably the most used range ...
.
