Pentax 21/3.2 vs Tamron 17-50/2.8 Comparison

[walter]

I wrote a small java applet for merging image crops together. I hope some of you will find it useful and create a few images of lenses I don't have. The tools are available at weblightbox. The pixel stacker (also known as measurebator) was used to generate the images below.

Here's a brick wall test between the Pentax 21mm f/3.2 Limited and the Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8.








The Pentax 21mm f/3.2 Limited is one of my favorite and most used lenses. The size and focal length make it great for backpacking and travel. I haven't used the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 very much, but it seems like a good option for weddings and similar situations.

[k100d]

results seem almost identical, but interesting the tamron seems to meter a bit darker?
but can't imagine most people would shoot at F16, by then diffraction has probably kicked in pretty hard

[walter]

Originally Posted by k100d

results seem almost identical, but interesting the tamron seems to meter a bit darker?
but can't imagine most people would shoot at F16, by then diffraction has probably kicked in pretty hard

yeah, the tamron was consistently slightly darker at the same settings. I shot in manual mode and switched back and forth a couple of times so I'm pretty sure it wasn't a change in the lighting.

[lbam]

The Tamron is known for being a little dark, with slightly higher than usual vignetting.
I think it's pretty good otherwise though.
I wonder which of the two lens distorted the most at 21mm?

[Maxington]

Pretty good fight between them, a zoom with its inherant problem, vs a prime with its super compact design inherant problems.

Thanks for the test.

[Alfisti]

Again, it's about the size more than anything. Mind you Ithink the 21 will render slightly nicer and a BW will not show that but thanks for the applet.

[TourDeForce]

I'm picking up a yellow cast to that Tammy also. Anybody else see that?

The color definition is better with the 21mm for sure.