This topic is in the 2010 archive. You can read it and like its posts here. It is read only.
Archive 2010Adaptall thread
p.5 #1Adaptall thread
@Paul: That 17 looks pretty good. I like that shot, nice colors.
Apr 30, 2011 at 08:53 AM
p.5 #3Adaptall thread
pdmphoto wrote:
Picked up a Tamron 17 here on the B&S board. It's the fourth one I have owned in the last ten years. This copy is performing better than any of the previous, but those were all used on a Kodak SLR/c, which I found to be picky when it comes to wide angle lenses. It's no Zuiko 18/3.5, but I think it's a keeper anyway.
Oregon Bayou (5DII, f5.6):
http://www.imaginenature.com/_MG_3187.jpg
Great shot Paul.
Picked up a Tamron 17 here on the B&S board. It's the fourth one I have owned in the last ten years. This copy is performing better than any of the previous, but those were all used on a Kodak SLR/c, which I found to be picky when it comes to wide angle lenses. It's no Zuiko 18/3.5, but I think it's a keeper anyway.
Oregon Bayou (5DII, f5.6):
http://www.imaginenature.com/_MG_3187.jpg
Great shot Paul.
May 02, 2011 at 09:48 AM
p.5 #4Adaptall thread
I am looking for an inexpensive macro lens. How is the Tamron Adaptall 90 mm f/2.5 compared to the Micro Nikkor 55 mm f/3.5 PC or the older auto compensating 55 mm f/3.5?
Thanks/Brgds,
Chris......
Thanks/Brgds,
Chris......
May 02, 2011 at 08:02 PM
p.5 #5Adaptall thread
Thanks Edd. Only the 52BB is available at the moment. Thinking of buying both the 90 Tamron and the 55 Nikkor to save on shipping cost from the U.S. to the Philippines (big day today here due to Pacquiao-Mosley fight). My 60-300 mm Adaptall is arriving hopefully next week from New York.
Regards,
Chris......
Regards,
Chris......
May 07, 2011 at 05:11 PM
p.5 #6Adaptall thread
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2581/3691372759_f1aeaeb09e_z.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3575/3691324307_93f1aff53a_z.jpg
SP 28-80mm F/3.5-4.2 (27A) with 01F 2X converter
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3575/3691324307_93f1aff53a_z.jpg
SP 28-80mm F/3.5-4.2 (27A) with 01F 2X converter
May 09, 2011 at 07:31 PM
p.5 #7Adaptall thread
From my latest acquisition, 75-150/2.8 SP soft focus
http://i.pbase.com/g4/63/551663/2/134404272.g4z6iIrC.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/g4/63/551663/2/134404271.5Thvg9FC.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/g4/63/551663/2/134404270.g9JFpsNz.jpg
Mike
http://i.pbase.com/g4/63/551663/2/134404272.g4z6iIrC.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/g4/63/551663/2/134404271.5Thvg9FC.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/g4/63/551663/2/134404270.g9JFpsNz.jpg
Mike
May 10, 2011 at 03:34 AM
p.5 #8Adaptall thread
I just got back from a trip to the mountains where I had planned to try out a new telescope. I brought the 300/2.8L, the Telescope and a new-to-me Tamron SP 28-80/3.5 Macro (27A). I dunno what to say - if FM had that smiley with the 10-line jaw-drop I'd totally be using it! This may well be the sharpest zoom I own now. Wow, just wow. It's certainly the sharpest in this zoom range. Needless to say i ended up spending most of my time shooting with it. I know, I'm easily impressed. but man...
For example if I hadn't processed these myself and thus knew better, I'd totally think they were just sharpened/over-sharpened water shots and therefore kinda lame. Lameness may still be granted them but not for any processing. Anyone else have the 27A? Is yours ultra sharp too?
28mm f/4
55mm f/4
80mm f/4 - which is wide open for 80mm on this lens (it nudges via zoom to f/4.2 I think).
For example if I hadn't processed these myself and thus knew better, I'd totally think they were just sharpened/over-sharpened water shots and therefore kinda lame. Lameness may still be granted them but not for any processing. Anyone else have the 27A? Is yours ultra sharp too?
28mm f/4
55mm f/4
80mm f/4 - which is wide open for 80mm on this lens (it nudges via zoom to f/4.2 I think).
Jun 09, 2011 at 02:05 PM
p.5 #9Adaptall thread
Here's two taken with the same 27A lens but in macro-mode. I wasn't counting on doing any insect macros so this is only available light, near f/4.0, and at ISO 100:
That flower is approximately 1.5cm ~ 1.7cm so I guess this little guy is about 8mm ± 2mm, in body length.
Slightly OOF but I like the image OK. (I wonder what this thing is called - they sure were orange... )
These are about 60% crops BTW.
 |
||
| http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190285.jpg | ||
|
That flower is approximately 1.5cm ~ 1.7cm so I guess this little guy is about 8mm ± 2mm, in body length.
|
||
| http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190296.jpg | ||
|
Slightly OOF but I like the image OK. (I wonder what this thing is called - they sure were orange... )
These are about 60% crops BTW.
Jun 09, 2011 at 06:19 PM
p.5 #10Adaptall thread
Looks nice, BIF. Looks like you got a nice copy which is all that matters.
My copy, though not bad, didn't give the WOW factor (on full frame) I barely touched it.
The 35-80/2.8-3.8 and the 24-48/3.5-3.8 are picked more often.
My copy, though not bad, didn't give the WOW factor (on full frame) I barely touched it.
The 35-80/2.8-3.8 and the 24-48/3.5-3.8 are picked more often.
Jun 09, 2011 at 09:27 PM
p.5 #11Adaptall thread
I tried 35-80/2.8-3.8 and 28-80/3.5-4.2 SP Tamrons - both very sharp plus useful macro function.If I hadn't Zeiss VS 35-70/3.4 I would probably have kept one of them.The only shortcoming I noticed was poor flare resistance,but it's not a major flaw especially for that price/built quality.
Jun 10, 2011 at 06:32 AM
p.5 #12Adaptall thread
debuggerus wrote:
Looks nice, BIF. Looks like you got a nice copy which is all that matters.
My copy, though not bad, didn't give the WOW factor (on full frame) I barely touched it.
The 35-80/2.8-3.8 and the 24-48/3.5-3.8 are picked more often.
Peire wrote:
I tried 35-80/2.8-3.8 and 28-80/3.5-4.2 SP Tamrons - both very sharp plus useful macro function.If I hadn't Zeiss VS 35-70/3.4 I would probably have kept one of them.The only shortcoming I noticed was poor flare resistance,but it's not a major flaw especially for that price/built quality.
Yeah, mine looks like it would be prone to flaring and probably show most at the wide end. I haven't really sun tested it yet. All of the above were shot with that low looming mountain fog/haze that happens so often this time of year. "conversion layer" or something like that.
Anyway for the going rate on these I think they're really underpriced. I wonder if it's because of the public perception created by Tamron mixing crap glass with good lenses all under the same name - I know I used to think all tamrons and tolkinas were to be avoided. How does Sigma get away with doing the same thing without having to wear the jacket? I have another Tamron SP Zoom that's hell'a sharp too. The 60-300mm f/3.8 (23A) with a very usable 1:1.55 macro... And you guys say those other two are also excellent... Hmmm...
Let's start a cartel where we buy all of them at the current incredibly cheap prices and then wait a few years for the world to forget about them. We can reintroduce them at 10x the price and consumers will eat it up!
Looks nice, BIF. Looks like you got a nice copy which is all that matters.
My copy, though not bad, didn't give the WOW factor (on full frame) I barely touched it.
The 35-80/2.8-3.8 and the 24-48/3.5-3.8 are picked more often.
Peire wrote:
I tried 35-80/2.8-3.8 and 28-80/3.5-4.2 SP Tamrons - both very sharp plus useful macro function.If I hadn't Zeiss VS 35-70/3.4 I would probably have kept one of them.The only shortcoming I noticed was poor flare resistance,but it's not a major flaw especially for that price/built quality.
Yeah, mine looks like it would be prone to flaring and probably show most at the wide end. I haven't really sun tested it yet. All of the above were shot with that low looming mountain fog/haze that happens so often this time of year. "conversion layer" or something like that.
Anyway for the going rate on these I think they're really underpriced. I wonder if it's because of the public perception created by Tamron mixing crap glass with good lenses all under the same name - I know I used to think all tamrons and tolkinas were to be avoided. How does Sigma get away with doing the same thing without having to wear the jacket? I have another Tamron SP Zoom that's hell'a sharp too. The 60-300mm f/3.8 (23A) with a very usable 1:1.55 macro... And you guys say those other two are also excellent... Hmmm...
Let's start a cartel where we buy all of them at the current incredibly cheap prices and then wait a few years for the world to forget about them. We can reintroduce them at 10x the price and consumers will eat it up!
Jun 10, 2011 at 09:27 AM
p.5 #13Adaptall thread
Here's some more with the same lens taken on the same day. I think these are still all at f/4.0 - again unless the zoom was at 80mm where it nudges it over to 4.2.
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190073.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190079.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190082.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190100.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190102.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190247.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190265.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190172.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190336.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190323.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190321.jpg
I think these are still all at f/4.0 - again unless the zoom was at 80mm where it nudges it over to 4.2. http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190073.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190079.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190082.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190100.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190102.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190247.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190265.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190172.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190336.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190323.jpg
http://tesselator.gpmod.com/Images/_Image_By_Lens/TamronSP_28-80mm_f3.5_Macro/Tamron_SP_28-80mm_F3.5_Macro_1190321.jpg
Jun 10, 2011 at 09:05 PM
p.5 #14Adaptall thread
Bif,
One could think majority of these pictures were taken with a Zeiss lens
One could think majority of these pictures were taken with a Zeiss lens
Jun 11, 2011 at 12:09 AM
p.5 #15Adaptall thread
I feel the same way. I only wish it were one stop brighter and 4mm wider. Then it would be perfect and I'd almost never remove it from the camera.
So 24-80mm f/2.8-3.5 I know, dream-on.. :P
So 24-80mm f/2.8-3.5
I know, dream-on.. :PJun 11, 2011 at 03:40 AM
p.5 #16Adaptall thread
Bifurcator wrote:
Let's start a cartel where we buy all of them at the current incredibly cheap prices and then wait a few years for the world to forget about them. We can reintroduce them at 10x the price and consumers will eat it up!
Just snatched up one for the enormous price of 16,50€ off ebay based on your recommendation and images.
Now to find a Nikon adapter that's not more expensive than the lens itself.
Let's start a cartel where we buy all of them at the current incredibly cheap prices and then wait a few years for the world to forget about them. We can reintroduce them at 10x the price and consumers will eat it up!
Just snatched up one for the enormous price of 16,50€ off ebay based on your recommendation and images.
Now to find a Nikon adapter that's not more expensive than the lens itself.
Jun 11, 2011 at 12:20 PM
p.5 #17Adaptall thread
Heh, for a second there I thought you typed 16,500... And I was just kinda going; Holy crap... I missed the sale of a lifetime! I definitely would have let mine go for that!
If it's in good shape you should dig it - assuming all other things are equal (like that you're on a crop sensor - similar to me, etc.). If you read the top of this page someone mentions "sample variation" and I'd only be guessing but I'm thinking it's all/mostly due to the fact he was on a FF sensor - and might even have been trying to focus with the OVF.
I've noticed two shortcomings with this lens so far: One is that it is one of those lenses where "pinto" doesn't stand out enough to nail the focus (every time) without going into the 15x MF Assist mode - some lenses you can just tell because things alias but this one doesn't so much. No biggy here tho I do that 80 to 90% of the time anyway. The second thing is that the aperture ring is hard to grasp and being additionally pretty tight, it makes it a bit of a PITA - especially for some shooting styles. My adapter's Lock<--->Open ring or Nikon's auto aperture will come in handy there I suppose.
Post some images when you get time!
If it's in good shape you should dig it - assuming all other things are equal (like that you're on a crop sensor - similar to me, etc.). If you read the top of this page someone mentions "sample variation" and I'd only be guessing but I'm thinking it's all/mostly due to the fact he was on a FF sensor - and might even have been trying to focus with the OVF.
I've noticed two shortcomings with this lens so far: One is that it is one of those lenses where "pinto" doesn't stand out enough to nail the focus (every time) without going into the 15x MF Assist mode - some lenses you can just tell because things alias but this one doesn't so much. No biggy here tho I do that 80 to 90% of the time anyway. The second thing is that the aperture ring is hard to grasp and being additionally pretty tight, it makes it a bit of a PITA - especially for some shooting styles. My adapter's Lock<--->Open ring or Nikon's auto aperture will come in handy there I suppose.
Post some images when you get time!
Jun 11, 2011 at 04:26 PM
p.5 #18Adaptall thread
Here's some numbers on the two lenses being talked about:
http://adaptall-2.org/lenses/01A.html
http://adaptall-2.org/lenses/27A.html
http://adaptall-2.org/lenses/01A.html
http://adaptall-2.org/lenses/27A.html
Jun 11, 2011 at 08:38 PM
p.5 #19Adaptall thread
I'm going to keep my eye out for the 01A as while the 27A is a little better at the wide end the 01A is a little better at the long end. The 01A seems to have no macro tho and that's kind of a bummer - I dig macro and 1:3.4 at 30mm zoom to 1:1.7 at 80mm with a working distance of 1.18 feet (36cm) is just about right for most hand-held stuff I do in the field or around the house! I've found that at much over 1:1 (1x) I start needing my tripod and macro-rails for framing and focus. It also looks like the 27A is more flat-field too and that's always good for a number of photography types!
Just to keep it fun here's a 90% crop of a little froggy I caught up in the mountains and released in a local park after not being able to figure out how to set up a shot on my macro table. This guy's got jump skills and a half!
This is wide open at the widest end of the macro (about 30mm) from about 1.5 feet away.
The frog is small enough to easily fit through the mouth of a coke bottle,
which was his transport container and home for two days.
Jun 12, 2011 at 03:14 PM
p.5 #20Adaptall thread
This was in the winter using the 35-80 .... I focused on his eye
http://i.pbase.com/g4/63/551663/2/135516559.SSp6ljR3.jpg
I got this in focus too though
http://i.pbase.com/o3/63/551663/1/135516492.Zt6RniMt.BOS1310.jpg
From the same walk, the 80mm end is especially sharp but that brickwork in the closeup is incredibly 3-d in the print I made.
Snow not dust on my sensor
http://i.pbase.com/o2/63/551663/1/132720603.uq9jcaTt.BOS_M8K1344copy.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/o2/63/551663/1/132720610.ii3jjRxP.BOS_M8K1445copy.jpg
Mike
http://i.pbase.com/g4/63/551663/2/135516559.SSp6ljR3.jpg
I got this in focus too though
http://i.pbase.com/o3/63/551663/1/135516492.Zt6RniMt.BOS1310.jpg
From the same walk, the 80mm end is especially sharp but that brickwork in the closeup is incredibly 3-d in the print I made.
Snow not dust on my sensor
http://i.pbase.com/o2/63/551663/1/132720603.uq9jcaTt.BOS_M8K1344copy.jpg
http://i.pbase.com/o2/63/551663/1/132720610.ii3jjRxP.BOS_M8K1445copy.jpg
Mike
Jun 12, 2011 at 03:59 PM