Critique Request Old Tamron AF 28-200 lens Photos

nanhi · 05-30-2011, 07:45 AM

Found a Tamron AF 28-200 zoom Model 171D in the attic. The Pentax Digital Camera Utility reports this lens as FA 28-200 mm f3.8-5.6 AL IF ?
Request your critique on this lens and sharpness of the photos attached, as the Pentax Forum grades this lens 7 out of 10 - rather poor. I am hung on sharp optics, so based on your critique, I might sell this lens.
The K20D v1.04 was hand held. The camera settings are:- a) Av - Aperture Priority; b) Spot metering; c) WB - Auto; d) ISO - 200; e) Hi ISO NR - Weak; f) AF Area Mode - Spot; g) BRIGHT - Saturation 1, Hue 0, Contrast 3, Sharpness 3 Fine; h) SR - On, i) photos taken around 11.30 AM on a bright - overcast day, j) No AV adjustment.
All photos were resized from 10 MB using the Open Source Fast Image Resizer, which keeps the Exif data intact. My God the photos uploaded as just 50 KB.
Photo 1 - Ad Board: At 200 mm, 1/300 sec, f8
Photo 2 - Anushka: At 113 mm, 1/125, f8, in camera fill flash
Photo 3 - Staircase: At 28 mm, 1/15 sec, f6.7
Thank you in anticipation - for your valuable critique.

Last edited by nanhi; 06-29-2011 at 08:09 AM.

Edgar_in_Indy · 05-30-2011, 07:47 AM

How is one supposed to judge lens sharpness without full-size photos? It could be soft as butter or razor sharp, but with the images down-sized to a fraction of their original size, it would be impossible to tell.

nanhi · 05-30-2011, 07:52 AM

Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy

How is one supposed to judge lens sharpness without full-size photos? It could be soft as butter or razor sharp, but with the images down-sized to a fraction of their original size, it would be impossible to tell.

Dear Edgar, grateful for the instant reply. How do I upload a full size photo. Also I do not have a web site address. Thanks in advance.

eddie1960 · 05-30-2011, 08:01 AM

I'll give mine on the lens as I own one (non DI version) and have also owned the Pentax Variant (which was the same lens and why you get that reading). It's not particularly sharp, or fast. it is Light and has what was a very useful range for 35mm, less so for digital. I've gotten some good results with this lens but nothing I would define as astoundingly sharp like a good prime, more in Kit lens territory. I haven't sold mine off as they really don't get much in the way of returns ($70 say) so for what it;'s worth I keep it and use it when i want a light travel lens (or the AF at longer lengths since all my longer lenses are MF)
As long as the Light is good and you use the hood results can be pretty decent, but in low light or without the hood they fall off pretty quickly
overall for the price it goes for it's a pretty decent lens despite it's faults (zoom creep being the most annoying I find)

Last edited by eddie1960; 05-30-2011 at 08:19 AM.

Edgar_in_Indy · 05-30-2011, 08:08 AM

Sorry, I can't give you any help on uploading full-size images. I have space on servers from my university where I upload my full-size images. I believe there may be free servers available, but I'm not familiar with any such services. Maybe somebody else knows of something?

As far as the lens image quality, the down-sized pictures look decent. Based on what eddie1960 said about his copy, it sound like it might be a good lens to use if you're going to be shooting in dusty or other hazardous conditions where you don't want to risk one of your more expensive lenses.

**pacerr** · 05-30-2011, 12:09 PM

Used as a general outdoor scenic lens it serves at least as well as the kit lens and offers a much wider choice of focal lengths. At the typical used price, I'd consider it a bargain for a one-lens day-trip kit. There are better choices for low light, indoor use.

H2

Marc Sabatella · 05-30-2011, 05:15 PM

Instead of posting a full-size picture - no one needs to see that - just post a cropped out section of a photo and post that without resizing it. Be sure to pick out a section that is actually in focus.

But really, there's no need for that. I don't think there would be any chance that this lens would be in the top 50, or even the top 80%, of lenses for sharpness. It's got to be a lot less sharp then the kit lens, for example. But you should be able to see that for yourself; not sure why you'd need someone else's opinion on that.

05-30-2011, 07:45 AM	#1
nanhi Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Bangalore, India Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 469	Critique Request Old Tamron AF 28-200 lens Photos Found a Tamron AF 28-200 zoom Model 171D in the attic. The Pentax Digital Camera Utility reports this lens as FA 28-200 mm f3.8-5.6 AL IF ? Request your critique on this lens and sharpness of the photos attached, as the Pentax Forum grades this lens 7 out of 10 - rather poor. I am hung on sharp optics, so based on your critique, I might sell this lens. The K20D v1.04 was hand held. The camera settings are:- a) Av - Aperture Priority; b) Spot metering; c) WB - Auto; d) ISO - 200; e) Hi ISO NR - Weak; f) AF Area Mode - Spot; g) BRIGHT - Saturation 1, Hue 0, Contrast 3, Sharpness 3 Fine; h) SR - On, i) photos taken around 11.30 AM on a bright - overcast day, j) No AV adjustment. All photos were resized from 10 MB using the Open Source Fast Image Resizer, which keeps the Exif data intact. My God the photos uploaded as just 50 KB. Photo 1 - Ad Board: At 200 mm, 1/300 sec, f8 Photo 2 - Anushka: At 113 mm, 1/125, f8, in camera fill flash Photo 3 - Staircase: At 28 mm, 1/15 sec, f6.7 Thank you in anticipation - for your valuable critique. Last edited by nanhi; 06-29-2011 at 08:09 AM.

05-30-2011, 12:09 PM	#6
pacerr Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Paris, TN Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,350	171D opinion Used as a general outdoor scenic lens it serves at least as well as the kit lens and offers a much wider choice of focal lengths. At the typical used price, I'd consider it a bargain for a one-lens day-trip kit. There are better choices for low light, indoor use. H2

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Request for images from Tamron 70-200 at f/2.8	Ash	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	87	04-04-2011 10:42 PM
Black & White Tree by a Pond (My first critique request here)	lurchlarson	Photo Critique	13	01-20-2010 02:04 PM
I keep posting in critique photos	photolady95	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	41	07-17-2009 09:00 AM
First photos with Tamron 70-200 f2.8 - CC please	AlexanderMayorov	Post Your Photos!	7	04-10-2009 06:23 PM
first Tamron 70-200/2.8 photos	kenyee	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	37	07-18-2008 07:49 AM

05-30-2011, 07:47 AM	#2
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	How is one supposed to judge lens sharpness without full-size photos? It could be soft as butter or razor sharp, but with the images down-sized to a fraction of their original size, it would be impossible to tell.

05-30-2011, 07:52 AM	#3
nanhi Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Bangalore, India Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 469 Original Poster	Originally posted by Edgar_in_Indy How is one supposed to judge lens sharpness without full-size photos? It could be soft as butter or razor sharp, but with the images down-sized to a fraction of their original size, it would be impossible to tell. Dear Edgar, grateful for the instant reply. How do I upload a full size photo. Also I do not have a web site address. Thanks in advance.

05-30-2011, 08:01 AM	#4
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	I'll give mine on the lens as I own one (non DI version) and have also owned the Pentax Variant (which was the same lens and why you get that reading). It's not particularly sharp, or fast. it is Light and has what was a very useful range for 35mm, less so for digital. I've gotten some good results with this lens but nothing I would define as astoundingly sharp like a good prime, more in Kit lens territory. I haven't sold mine off as they really don't get much in the way of returns ($70 say) so for what it;'s worth I keep it and use it when i want a light travel lens (or the AF at longer lengths since all my longer lenses are MF) As long as the Light is good and you use the hood results can be pretty decent, but in low light or without the hood they fall off pretty quickly overall for the price it goes for it's a pretty decent lens despite it's faults (zoom creep being the most annoying I find) Last edited by eddie1960; 05-30-2011 at 08:19 AM.

05-30-2011, 08:08 AM	#5
Edgar_in_Indy Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,685	Sorry, I can't give you any help on uploading full-size images. I have space on servers from my university where I upload my full-size images. I believe there may be free servers available, but I'm not familiar with any such services. Maybe somebody else knows of something? As far as the lens image quality, the down-sized pictures look decent. Based on what eddie1960 said about his copy, it sound like it might be a good lens to use if you're going to be shooting in dusty or other hazardous conditions where you don't want to risk one of your more expensive lenses.

05-30-2011, 05:15 PM	#7
Marc Sabatella Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Denver, CO Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,685	Instead of posting a full-size picture - no one needs to see that - just post a cropped out section of a photo and post that without resizing it. Be sure to pick out a section that is actually in focus. But really, there's no need for that. I don't think there would be any chance that this lens would be in the top 50, or even the top 80%, of lenses for sharpness. It's got to be a lot less sharp then the kit lens, for example. But you should be able to see that for yourself; not sure why you'd need someone else's opinion on that.