[theunartist]

28-75/2.8
K-x

+1 Beautiful...

[Dablegs]

Tamron 17-50

[Jewelltrail]

Tamron 17-50

Love those 17-50 shots!

The 24-135 SP Tammy appears undervalued in the Pentax community--not so in the C & N camps, especially on Full Frame where it is awesome. I can't wait to get my Nikon version of this lens, so I can shoot it on my new D700. Until then, I'm happy to shoot it on my APS-c, K20d. The lens is supposed to have a weak spot, at 135mm, wide open, so I've provided 2 samples here at that exif--other two @ 1/3rd stop down from wide open, near longest end.

[pacerr]

The 24-135 SP Tammy appears undervalued in the Pentax community

I acquired/used this lens for about six months last year and I really wanted it to to "succeed" as a one-lens solution for rural, mid-distance landscape/buildings scenes but I just couldn't quite get comfortable with it. My personal critique may be useful to potential users:

- It was overwhelming in size and weight for my K200D's -- especially with a battery grip, which simply made it even more awkward to carry in the field. It may be a better fit for the K10/K20 bodies.

- The larger hood, ND and polarizer filter size was inconvenient.

- I thought that while sharp, it was a little too "contrasty" for most of my uses.

My opinion is that it's optical formula required a little too much glass to efficiently cover that FL range, speed and IQ at that point in the design process. I suspect the optical corrections to satisfactorily cover both 24- and 135mm were incompatible at that time with less bulk. Today, the Tamron 18-250/270mm zooms indicates those issues may be solved and lessens the value of the more limited zoom range. I wondered what Tamron could have produced with that package at, say, 24-105mm/f2.8 at that time had they backed off from the super-zoom marketing niche.

H2

In any case, your "2 samples" sure make it look 'good-er'.

[metalmania]

Tammy 70-300mm, K10D:

[Jewelltrail]

I acquired/used this lens for about six months last year and I really wanted it to to "succeed" as a one-lens solution for rural, mid-distance landscape/buildings scenes but I just couldn't quite get comfortable with it. My personal critique may be useful to potential users:

- It was overwhelming in size and weight for my K200D's -- especially with a battery grip, which simply made it even more awkward to carry in the field. It may be a better fit for the K10/K20 bodies.

- The larger hood, ND and polarizer filter size was inconvenient.

- I thought that while sharp, it was a little too "contrasty" for most of my uses.

My opinion is that it's optical formula required a little too much glass to efficiently cover that FL range, speed and IQ at that point in the design process. I suspect the optical corrections to satisfactorily cover both 24- and 135mm were incompatible at that time with less bulk. Today, the Tamron 18-250/270mm zooms indicates those issues may be solved and lessens the value of the more limited zoom range. I wondered what Tamron could have produced with that package at, say, 24-105mm/f2.8 at that time had they backed off from the super-zoom marketing niche.

H2

In any case, your "2 samples" sure make it look 'good-er'.

Pacerr. thank you for the input--much appreciated. I read your writeup of this lens over in our Lens reviews--here Tamron SP AF 24-135mm F/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical [IF] Lens Reviews - Pentax Third-Party Lens Review Database I agree, the lens has a little weight to it, though I love it on my k20d. Things to consider about its weight;

The build is excellent--lots of metal=more weight
It is designed for Full-Frame--means more glass=more weight
The DA 16-50 is heavier than this lens--Da is only APS-c
It weighs about the same as the Tamron 28-75 2.8

Important to bear in mind the Tamron 18-250 is an APS-c only lens.

Its hood is about the same size (bayonette) as the 28-75 hood--easy to work on and off. 72mm filter thread is excellent for a FF lens coverig this focal range. Vignetting is tough to subdue on FF.

On full frame it has a much more valuable range. It is perfect on my D700 when I only want 1 lens, acting as an APS-c lens which covers 16mm--90mm. It is very sharp from 24-40mm, and sharp @ longer lengths. It is as sharp as my 28-75 was. though it is missing f 2.8 of course. It handles distortions and CAs splendidly. It is the best AF Tamron lens I have used, really saying something too since it is missing the large aperture of the 17-50 & 28-75--accurate focus, consistently. Fantastic colors on this lens too.

This lens is the highest rated Tamron zoom, by C & N folk, over @ the Fred Miranda site, beating even the venerable 28-75, easily. FM Reviews -'

EDIT: change 28-40mm to 24-40mm

[shiner]

Pacerr. thank you for the input--much appreciated. I read your writeup of this lens over in our Lens reviews--here Tamron SP AF 24-135mm F/3.5-5.6 AD Aspherical [IF] Lens Reviews - Pentax Third-Party Lens Review Database I agree, the lens has a little weight to it, though I love it on my k20d. Things to consider about its weight;

The build is excellent--lots of metal=more weight
It is designed for Full-Frame--means more glass=more weight
The DA 16-50 is heavier than this lens--Da is only APS-c
It weighs about the same as the Tamron 28-75 2.8

Important to bear in mind the Tamron 18-250 is an APS-c only lens.

Its hood is about the same size (bayonette) as the 28-75 hood--easy to work on and off. 72mm filter thread is excellent for a FF lens coverig this focal range. Vignetting is tough to subdue on FF.

On full frame it has a much more valuable range. It is perfect on my D700 when I only want 1 lens, acting as an APS-c lens which covers 16mm--90mm. It is very sharp from 28-40mm, and sharp @ longer lengths. It is as sharp as my 28-75 was. though it is missing f 2.8 of course. It handles distortions and CAs splendidly. It is the best AF Tamron lens I have used, really saying something too since it is missing the large aperture of the 17-50 & 28-75--accurate focus, consistently. Fantastic colors on this lens too.

This lens is the highest rated Tamron zoom, by C & N folk, over @ the Fred Miranda site, beating even the venerable 28-75, easily. FM Reviews -

So you have two of these lenses, or some type of adapter for Nikon?

[Jewelltrail]

So you have two of these lenses, or some type of adapter for Nikon?

Dave, I bought one for Nikon mount, one for Pentax mount. This is not an Adaptall lens, though I wish all lenses were--would save consmers lots of money with a unified system geared towards the Adaptall's philosophy.

[Madhatter_]

Such a smashing lense for the price, never regretted buying a 28-75.



The light in the afternoon was just perfect, made me want to rush home and grab a tripod.

[cardinal43]

Spring in the mountains of NH, which means, less than a mile upstream, snow melts and runoff makes for ice-cold water.

Tri-pod--F5-21.87-1/40th--iso 100

Great shot! Self pic?

[BlackRockBacon]

Tammy 17-50
K-x
bracketed 3 (+2 0 -2) exposures for HDR mounted on a tripod
merged in Photomatix 4
edited in Photoshop CS5.

[Coeurdechene]

Beautifull shot.
Certainly good usage of HDR.

[cardinal43]

K20D, Tamron 28-75mm, f/13, 1/180, ISO 200




K20D, Tamron 28-75mm, f/13, 1/90, ISO200

[Jewelltrail]

Great shot! Self pic?

Thanks--yes, that be me.

BlackRockBacon Tammy 17-50
K-x
bracketed 3 (+2 0 -2) exposures for HDR mounted on a tripod
merged in Photomatix 4
edited in Photoshop CS5.

Excellent work.

cardinal43 K20D, Tamron 28-75mm, f/13, 1/180, ISO 200
K20D, Tamron 28-75mm, f/13, 1/90, ISO200

Excellent--the first I've seen in the thread of the 28-75 @ these smaller apertures.

[Mike Cash]

A recent shot from a party at a friend's place. A dance shot, and the only light in the room was the one you see in the photo. All others got turned off so the rest of the room would be in darkness, to provide an atmosphere of auditorium seating, I suppose. I immediately noticed the only source of light was not only to the side of the dancer, but behind her as well and I scrambled to turn on one small incandescent bulb at the far end of the room. Unfortunately the host shouted for it to be turned off again, and my shout that her front side was going to be in shadow for the entire performance must not have made it through. I was bummed out by the results, all the more since I do enjoy some small reputation for shooting dance, whether I deserve it or not. Practically every shot was ruined and this was about as close to a usable photo as I got.

Pentax K-5
Tamron 17-50/2.8