| Author: | | New Member Registered: February, 2016 Posts: 3 | | Review Date: April 2, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Good sharpness from wide open, good macro capabilities | | Cons: | A bit heavy and clunky | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 9
Camera Used: Sony a3000
| |
I really like this lens, I also have the 103A that is very similar and equally nice, although 100grams heftier. I usually shoot them at the tele end, and wide open or nearly, and the pictures come out clean and nice.
| | | | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: October, 2016 Location: Euless Texas Posts: 268 | | Review Date: October 22, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $23.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Price, nice macro performance, flexible | | Cons: | Heavy, sometimes tricky to focus | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 8
Value: 9
Camera Used: Pentax K-s2
| |
It has been a long time since I used a manual focus lens. Based on the reviews I targeted this lens to try as both a manual focus and macro lens. I found this one on eBay for $23 so it was a good investment. I mainly wanted it for macro shots and I although I have only had one day to play around with the lens I am pleased with the macro shots. (see example). My only problem is it is a tank and a real challenge to hand shoot. Overall I am very pleased to add this lens to my arsenal. | | | | | New Member Registered: April, 2016 Posts: 1
1 user found this helpful
| | Review Date: April 2, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $33.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharpness, colours, overall | | Cons: | heavy | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 9
Camera Used: Sony A3000, Pentax K-50
| |
I bought this lens to use it with my Sony A3000. I like this lens. It's nice and cheap lens.
Some photos (all with F3,8 210mm):
 | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2012 Posts: 17 | | Review Date: April 18, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp, light, relatively fast at 210mm | | Cons: | None | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 8
| |
I bought this new in 1988 for something over £100; I can't remember what the exchange rate to dollars was back then so apologies if $150 is wildly wrong. I used it initially on an S1, and then bought a P3n and PK/A adapters for this and my 17A. I also bought an 01F 2x Teleconverter, and that was me until I went digital in 2006. The lens travelled the world with me, and later with my children, and never disappointed us. It has lost a rubber plug of unknown function on the grip, which exposes shiny metal beneath the hard plastic, and its pinch lens-cap disintegrated, but the glass remains unmarked, even though for most of that time it didn't boast a protective UV filter.
In 2007 I bought a Samsung GX-20. This was my first autofocus SLR, so to begin with I used the 46A plus the 01F 2x Teleconverter (TC) to give me 140 to 420mm of zoom (adding or removing the TC is a pain, so I used a Samyang 70-210 f4.5-5.6 for less than 140 mm).
Flare is an issue shooting towards the sun (and I lost the screw-on hood early on), and a maximum aperture of f 8 mandates a tripod if it isn't sunny, but this works fine.
Then I bought a Pentax 80-320 f4.5-5.6, and various other auto-focus things, and the 46A went back in the cupboard. Where it stayed until I bought a Pentax 1.7x AF adapter, and found that it needs a K-style aperture lever to function.
The cupboard already boasted a 52A, and a flurry of Oxfam and e-Bay activity added a pair of 103A's and a 104A.
One of the 103A's is better than the other, but neither the 103A, the 52A nor the 104A can hold a candle to the 46A.
The zoom range and the aperture for the 46A appear to be honestly quoted. The 52A, contrary to its claimed minimum f 3.5 aperture, seems to be the same as the 46A. My 103A's seem to be slower, and I would say are more like 200mm maximum than 210mm. (The 104A's apertures seem to be honestly quoted as well, although it might not quite go all the way to 250 mm, from comparisons with the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 DG AF).
Unadorned, the 46A is the sharpest of these lenses. It matches the Sigma 70-300 mm f 4-5.6 DG AF over the range they have in common, although I prefer the Sigma colours; a bit more saturated perhaps. I haven't had the good fortune to try a 19AH, but according to the figures quoted on adaptall-2.org, the 46A is sharper than the 19AH as well, and not just wide open. The 19AH offers superior contrast, but not resolution.
So what of their performance with the Pentax 1.7x AF adapter? Of all the Adaptall-2 lenses I tried, the 46A was the only one that it worked with acceptably. All of the others gave images that were ridiculously marred by fringing. The 46A images aren't exactly fringe free, but the combination of the 46A and Pentax 1.7x AF adapter (effective f 6.8) out-resolves the Sigma 70-300 f4-5.6 DG AF when the latter is at 300 mm (where the Sigma is at its weakest) and the program has chosen f 6.7. And the combination goes up to 357 mm.
So the 46A may deserve promotion from the cupboard.
But I may not bother with its PK/A adapter. Unlike the lenses, these have not lasted well, and neither of them still work properly after 25 years, if they ever did. A mechanical problem with one means that it can only communicate f 3.5 or f 4 maximum aperture to the body, whilst an electrical issue with the other means that it identifies all lenses as having a maximum aperture of f 4. But since the 17A is constant f 3.5, whilst the 46A is in effect constant f 4, I wouldn't have noticed ...
| | | | | | | Junior Member Registered: May, 2010 Posts: 48 | | Review Date: March 13, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, constant-ish aperture | | Cons: | Screw-on lens hood | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 10
| |
Just like most people, I got this lens for it's PKA mount which it came with.
I took it for a test run and am very pleasantly surprised by the performance of the lens. Having a 19AH, this lens is half the size and weight and a third of it's price, but only less than half a stop slower (f3.5 vs f4).
I tested it wide open and found it sharp at 70mm and 210mm. Contrast is a little lower wide open, but still good. I didn't have any problems with CA except at very strong backlight. Didn't test for distortion, so can't say. Bokeh is average.
My copy did not come with a lens hood, but it's screw-on and not bayonet which I feel is a little cumbersome. But then again, I can get a cheap-o china made screw-on hood anytime. The lens does not retract at all, so the length remains the same at all zoom level. The push-pull action is something I got used to with the 19AH, so nothing new here. The focus ring in my copy is a bit stiff, but I think it's just mine.
If you want a good and cheap telephoto zoom, this one is an excellent choice.
At 210mm f3.8
At 210mm f8
At 210mm f3.8
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: July, 2009 Location: Saffron Walden, Essex Posts: 362 | | Review Date: March 20, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Sharp, inexpensive | | Cons: | Push-pull zoom, awkward to hold | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 4
Value: 10
| |
Used my copy on a 6 megapixel K100Ds, but with that caveat my copy was sharp even when used wide open.
Both at f4:
The Human League by thoughton, on Flickr
The Human League by thoughton, on Flickr
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: May, 2011 Location: Las Vegas Posts: 366 | | Review Date: March 10, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $20.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Cheap. | | Cons: | only 1:2.9 magnification @ 210mm. | | Sharpness: 7
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 6
Handling: 6
Value: 9
| |
Bought it for the adaptall 2, but I ended up liking it.
I wouldn't use it wide open all the time, but It's not so bad.
Hard to keep the focus since the throw is sensitive (might be this copy), and hard to hand-hold it steady past 85mm since the zoom barrel is a pump, once pumped in to tighter FL, you run out of places to hold it steady without messing with the focus.
Technicality aside, it's not a bad lens for such a low price. Won't take it with me to an important event, but will use it from time to time for fun.
IMGP7568 by RickyFromVegas, on Flickr
Tamron Adaptall 2 70-210mm f/3.8-4 by RickyFromVegas, on Flickr
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: February, 2010 Location: Doylestown, PA Posts: 177 | | Review Date: October 30, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Way cheap, solid construction, IQ is amazing for such an old cheap lens! | | Cons: | FOV is very (VERY) narrow wide open, Adaptall 2 P/KA is ultra expensive | |
Despite the views of the other reviewer (with all due respect...individual copies of old lenses are always subject to many variables), my copy of this lens, even with some fungus growth, FAR exceeded my expectations. The main limitation is the very narrow FOV when the lens is used wide open.
With respect to the other review's comments using the lens at 210mm wide open, the squirrel photo below is (reduced to be eligible for upload)...shot at 210mm wide open. In my opinion, very nice IQ and contrast.
An very nice "positive" that I didn't realize the benefits of until I used the lens, is the fact that once focused, zooming doesn't change the focus. Awesome in my humble opinion. Anyway, if you end up with a good copy of this lens, and there are lots of specimens available on eBay on any given day...I can't imagine a better way to spend $25 bucks.
 | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: October, 2009 Location: Northern California Posts: 442 | | Review Date: September 28, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $30.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | construction, handling, close focus, low distortions | | Cons: | slow, poor performance wide open, heavy | |
Well, I guess I will be the first to review this lens 
I think this is a very nicely made lens. The zoom/focus and aperture rings are hard plastic and the rest is metal. It has heft to it and the zoom/focus action is lightly dampened and feels smooth. Distortions are not noticeable in most photos and chromatic aberration has not been an issue for me. The close focusing 1:2.9 at 210mm is really nice! I find the performance (sharpness) in close focusing to be quite good for macros where the subject is in the center of the frame.
I find it difficult to focus in low light with this lens in a dim pentamirror VF due to the relatively narrow max aperture. This lens is much better outdoors in bright light. The IQ wide open is pretty bad - especially at 210mm; it is soft and low-contrast. At 210mm f/4 it is just awful, but there is a huge improvement at f/5.6 at all focal lengths. at f/8 it is nice and sharp across the frame - f/11 and f/16 are also quite sharp across the frame.
Overall this lens is a decent tool. It loses points for it's awful performance at 210mm f/4, but gains points for it's very nice and capable close focus feature.
| | |
