Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-28-2019, 11:00 PM   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: San Diego
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 228
Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 200-500mm F5.6 (31A) giving me the Blues

I bought the lens from KEH a couple of years ago after reading a lot about the lens. When the lens arrived, I didn't even inspect it due to the reputation of KEH that I had in my head. I hadn't bought from them before. Had I bought the lens from the average seller on Ebay, I would have inspected it thoroughly. I didn't take a good look at it until the KEH's return period had expired. I saw a bubble on an element inside, and that was a bummer. I've read that a bubble isn't suppose to reduce the image quality, but still I wonder if it's making the image softer. With this being an SP lens, their premium line, I would think that quality control would be higher. Maybe I'm not using the lens correctly, but I haven't seen "9.5 Sharpness" in any of the photos. I do have a internal filter, which I've read is necessary for optimal quality.

12-29-2019, 12:08 AM - 1 Like   #2
dms
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: New York, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,192
Some bubbles are (or used to be) virtually impossible to avoid in glass optics, and it should have no impact on images.
12-29-2019, 06:34 AM - 1 Like   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,868
Post some photos. I would be interested to see. Note that this lens can produce some purple fringing in backlit situations, and also a little bit of sensor reflection dead center when stopped way down. At least that’s how my copy behaves.

I also find that the lens really needs a good tripod, and to be well balanced. I tried mine on a gimbal head (jobo jr) and had to remove the swinging arm and use only the horizontal pivot, due to weight and vibration

Last edited by Lowell Goudge; 12-29-2019 at 09:30 AM.
12-29-2019, 08:29 AM - 1 Like   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
sergysergy's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,155
I doubt a small bubble can cause quality loss but some pictures would help

12-29-2019, 08:48 AM - 3 Likes   #5
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,595
I'm not sure what "9.5 Sharpness" is, but the 31A is sharp for a telephoto zoom from the 1990's. It is not going to be as sharp as a decent prime or the DFA 150-450. I had the original Sigma 170-500, and I find the 31A to be a bit sharper.

The lens has its flaws: wide open is not that good, especially at the long end. There is CA and PF. Spherical aberration makes the lens soft, glowy, and low-contrast inside of 10 yards unless stopped down to f/8 or smaller.

When used with respect to its weaknesses, it's a good performer.










w/1.4x TC



430mm-ish, wide open


heavy crop

Last edited by luftfluss; 12-29-2019 at 09:51 AM.
12-29-2019, 09:12 AM   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
BigDave's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,626
A heavy lens, it is also built like a tank! I find it to be quite sharp (having one) and believe it or not, years ago, bubbles in the glass was a sign of a good lens! Certainly modern methods have changed this perception, but the proof will be in the pudding, as they say. Shoot some images with it and let's see the results.
regards,
12-29-2019, 09:31 AM   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,868
What TC are you using?

Edit note you can see just a little lateral ca in the swan’s tail feathers

You should cross post into the sample image archive also

12-29-2019, 09:48 AM   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,595
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
What TC are you using?

Edit note you can see just a little lateral ca in the swan’s tail feathers

You should cross post into the sample image archive also
I'm bad about correcting CA, sometimes. I'll PP the image and then look at it at a later date and realize I forgot something...

I was using the 140F, but I've since switched to the Pentax A 1.4x-S. The Pentax is at least as sharp - I think it might actually be a bit sharper - and easier to use, since I don't have to remove the P/K adapter on the lens.

I just remembered that the groundhog photo wasn't made with this lens, it was with the 360B + A 1.4x-S + 1.7x AFA. I'll have to swap in a proper photo...

I didn't realize the 31A had sample image thread!
12-29-2019, 09:58 AM   #9
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,868
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
I'm bad about correcting CA, sometimes. I'll PP the image and then look at it at a later date and realize I forgot something...

I was using the 140F, but I've since switched to the Pentax A 1.4x-S. The Pentax is at least as sharp - I think it might actually be a bit sharper - and easier to use, since I don't have to remove the P/K adapter on the lens.

I just remembered that the groundhog photo wasn't made with this lens, it was with the 360B + A 1.4x-S + 1.7x AFA. I'll have to swap in a proper photo...

I didn't realize the 31A had sample image thread!
Thanks for the info. As to the thread, I started it when I bought mine, since then I have not posted a lot with it, being tripod bound and I do most of my birding when I am walking the dog ( not a good fit).

Now that I have sorted the tripod vibration issue, my intent is to get out more with it, it also works with the sigma 1.4x EX DG converter, I tried this once and got some good shots when I cropped in. I am also waiting to try with the K5/and K1
12-29-2019, 10:28 AM   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,595
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
Thanks for the info. As to the thread, I started it when I bought mine, since then I have not posted a lot with it, being tripod bound and I do most of my birding when I am walking the dog ( not a good fit).

Now that I have sorted the tripod vibration issue, my intent is to get out more with it, it also works with the sigma 1.4x EX DG converter, I tried this once and got some good shots when I cropped in. I am also waiting to try with the K5/and K1
I revived the sample thread

Most of the time when I shoot with the 31A I use a tripod or, if I am walking around with it, I'll sit and shoot. Since most of my subjects are moving - or, if stationary, twitchy - I usually keep the shutter speed up high enough where I don't have to worry much about vibration.
12-29-2019, 11:13 AM   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 6,027
A bubble is a sign of quality from that time period -- not a bummer at all. (haze, fog, or fungus would be a bummer, but not a bubble -- not in any way).


I had one, also had a bubble or two (might be the same copy I had for all I know -- sold it on ebay long time ago) and it was quite sharp. The bigger issues with that lens are handling and balance (I used a very long arca plate along with a brace in the middle on the part that doesn't move so I could balance it and prevent wobble). Optically you'll get some purple fringing and some green/magenta bokeh fringing (basically the "Adaptall look" many of them seem to have). It's a handful, but a good lens.


I do not believe you need the drop-in filter on the lens full-time -- try without it. Also, I mentioned a brace -- mine would get a little front wobble in it from the weight, i.e. the front and back had a little play in relation to each other, if you can get that locked down probably get best results.
12-30-2019, 09:18 AM   #12
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
BigDave's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Hudson Valley, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,626
QuoteOriginally posted by vonBaloney Quote
It's a handful, but a good lens.
Once I switched fro a tripod to a gimbal mount, it became MUCH easier to work with. I did have to add an extension bar to the tripod mount on the lens to help it balance better though!
12-30-2019, 09:24 AM   #13
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,868
QuoteOriginally posted by vonBaloney Quote
snip.....


I do not believe you need the drop-in filter on the lens full-time -- try without it. Also, I mentioned a brace -- mine would get a little front wobble in it from the weight, i.e. the front and back had a little play in relation to each other, if you can get that locked down probably get best results.
The drop in filter is essential, as it is in the optical path. There is a historical comment somewhere aBout the 300/2,8

The first cpversion was rushed to market and they for got about the drop in filter, it is reported to be sharper without it. The later 2 versions had the drop in filter considered in the design and are not as sharp without it.

I would question the front filter differently. I have the OEM filter but I am Not sure of its value optically
12-30-2019, 09:44 AM   #14
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,124
QuoteOriginally posted by Tighelander Quote
I bought the lens from KEH a couple of years ago after reading a lot about the lens. When the lens arrived, I didn't even inspect it due to the reputation of KEH that I had in my head. I hadn't bought from them before. Had I bought the lens from the average seller on Ebay, I would have inspected it thoroughly. I didn't take a good look at it until the KEH's return period had expired. I saw a bubble on an element inside, and that was a bummer. I've read that a bubble isn't suppose to reduce the image quality, but still I wonder if it's making the image softer. With this being an SP lens, their premium line, I would think that quality control would be higher. Maybe I'm not using the lens correctly, but I haven't seen "9.5 Sharpness" in any of the photos. I do have a internal filter, which I've read is necessary for optimal quality.
You need to understand that "premium" had a different meaning thirty years ago than it does now. Frankly, I prefer the old meaning. I also have a "Tamron SP" telephoto zoom lens - mine is the #23A, a 60-300mm f/3.8-5.4 lens. It uses a 62mm filter - but today a "premium" lens would be much wider, perhaps 200mm. This lens is plenty heavy as it is. A modern "perfect" lens would be too heavy to be useable. When used with a #01F, a doubler that fits between the lens and the K-mount adapter, it definitely shows a lot of PF, but I haven't used the lens enough under varying circumstances to say exactly how bad it is.
12-30-2019, 09:54 AM   #15
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 6,027
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
The drop in filter is essential, as it is in the optical path. There is a historical comment somewhere aBout the 300/2,8

The first cpversion was rushed to market and they for got about the drop in filter, it is reported to be sharper without it. The later 2 versions had the drop in filter considered in the design and are not as sharp without it.

I would question the front filter differently. I have the OEM filter but I am Not sure of its value optically
Yes, that's true (from what I hear) about the white version of the 300/2.8 (107B) -- you can find a note about what you are referring to here: Tamron SP Adaptall-2 300mm F/2.8 LD Model 107B. But I don't think it is true of the 200-500mm being discussed here, and it is not true of lenses with drop-in filters in general. (For instance, I've had a few of the A* series Pentax telephotos with drop-in filter holders -- they are not required and may in-fact degrade the optics somewhat as any filter might.) It will possibly change the focus and infinity distances slightly, but in most cases it is not critical. When I owned the 31A, I'm pretty sure I used it plenty without a filter with no trouble. Anyway, if you have the lens, easy enough to experiment with that.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
adaptall-2 sp 200-500mm, bubble, image, k-mount, keh, lens, pentax lens, quality, slr lens, sp, sp 200-500mm f5.6, tamron adaptall-2 sp
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tamron Adaptall SP 200-500mm F5.6 Lowell Goudge Lens Sample Photo Archive 25 03-20-2024 10:31 AM
Tamron Adaptall-2 SP 200-500mm F5.6 (31A) on A7 Sliver-Surfer Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 16 09-28-2017 11:19 AM
For Sale - Sold: Tamron SP 200-500mm f5.6 lens with Tamron PK/A Adapter and a SP 01F 2x TC ChipB Sold Items 7 11-17-2014 11:31 AM
Views on Tamron 200-500mm f5.6 model 31A Snaffles Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 1 07-07-2009 04:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:13 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top