| Author: | | Senior Member Registered: April, 2007 Location: Hamburg Posts: 116 | | Review Date: August 22, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | lightweight (for 300 mm), macro ability, sharpness, build quality | | Cons: | tripod-ring missing | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax Ds, K-7/5
| |
An SP-lens from Tamron so:
very good build quality.
As always for adaptall-lenses - with the PK/A-adaptor sometimes a bit tricky to change.
Nearly not problems with the PK-adaptor.
Compared it with
- Pentax 55-300
- Tamron 70-300 AF
- Sigma 70-300 APO
Tripod, indoor at 2-3 meter distance, only artificial (= constant!) light.
The SP was by far the sharpst of these lenses. Next was the 55-300 which only had tio be stopped down by 1 - 1.5 f-stops to give comparable results.
Tamron and Sigma 70-300 were par and needed to be stopped down by 2 f-stops to reach the SP-sharpness.
Stopped down the results became more comparable concerning sharpness.
Different colours are well known...
SP colours tend to b a bit 'neutral', not that 'popping' colours.
But good contrast .... although some other user experinces seem to show quite the opposite. But some of them were made outdoors across the water/over a valley. It's well known that you don't have constant / comparable light situations and esp. across water you have that haze or 'flimmer'.
I was surprised to use this lens outdoor for detail photos.
Good handling (smooth focussing) too.
As for the macro abilty:
this is 'enough' macro for my general use.
(Having the 90 mm macro ... and some other Tamron adaptall-lenses additionally)
I used the lens mostly for theatre photos - that means quite a long time and for this use case a tripod collar would be helpful.
But the SP is lightweight enough to be used only camera bayonet-mounted on a tripod.
Much better than any 2.8-tele-zoom lens.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2023 Posts: 4 | | Review Date: February 10, 2023 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Good "macro", focusing takes lots of turning from infinity to 1.4 meters (for a precise focusing) | | Cons: | Only few diaphragm are very good to use, focusing takes lots of turning from infinity to 1.4 meters (slow if you need less turns) | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 7
Camera Used: Pentax K-70
| |
Used only few times with my father's old camera, but wanted to take few photos to do a quality check
Macro rendering is very very good, if used at the sweet point (f/11) and the almost 450° of turning is good for a precise focusing, but fear the 1.4m of minimum focus distance
Better apertures go from 9.5 to 13, 5.6 and 8 are usable, with a sweet bokeh, but pretty soft
Not the fastest in term of light stops and focusing, but a cheap good one. Better if used with Catch-in Focus.
f/5.6
f/8
f/9.5
f/11
f/13
f/16
f/11 (sweet spot)
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2016 Posts: 3 | | Review Date: April 5, 2021 | Recommended | Price: $75.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Decent IQ, lightweight, minimum focussing distance | | Cons: | CAs until at least f10, difficult to focus | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 4
Bokeh: 7
Handling: 7
Value: 8
Camera Used: Canon eos 600d, Olympus em5
| |
I have to write a new review because my previous one was unfairly harsh on this lens, probably because my manual focussing technique was not good at the beginning. In fact, this is one of its disadvantages, in my view: it's really challenging to focus properly, not only because a 300mm manual lens has to be, but also because the focussing ring is too smooth, and the throw is very long.
I have compared it with another manual tele, a Tair 3s and two modern zooms, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6 VC and Canon 55-250 stm, on a Canon 600d aps-c, on a tripod and at infinity. Here are my samples. They are jpgs straight out of the camera, no processing, only cropping. 100% crops from the centre of the picture. I could not keep the same speed for all equivalent f numbers, because they seem to exhibit different levels of brightness, some were brighter than others. Check exifs.
You can be the judges.
TAIR F4.5
TAIR F5.6
TAIR F8
TAMRON 70-300 VC F5.6
TAMRON 70-300 F8
TAMRON 54B F5.6
TAMRON 54B F8
CANON 55-250 USM F5.6
CANON 55-250 USM F8
In my opinion, Tamron 54B does very well, acceptable wide open, and at f8 it looks better than the Tair to me. The best one seems to be the modern Tamron zoom, but not by much. The Canon has the disadvantage of the shorter focal length, but it's quite good.
The biggest downside with the Tamron 54B is the strong CAs in high contrast edges; at f8 they are improved, but still there.
The Tair seems to let in more light than the others at equivalent apertures.
Tair has only the slightest CAs wide open, and the modern zooms do not show any.
Focussing with the manual lenses is quite difficult, but for me it seems easier with the Tair.
The Tair is so heavy it needs a tripod in most situations, so its usefulness is limited.
The modern zooms are both really good, with even good close-up capabilities, but the Canon autofocus is much more reliable, the Tammy hunts and fails to lock focus correctly too often, aside from being very noisy, at least my copy.
In the edge of the images (I'm too lazy to post images) all are quite acceptable even wide open, the Tamron 54b is slightly softer than the others at 5.6, but by f8 all of them are almost perfect.
They all seem interesting choices. The prices I got them for (all second hand): Tair: 150 euros (with Photosniper full kit). Tamron 54B: 80 eur. Tamron 70-300: 175 eur. Canon 55-250 stm: 140 eur.
All in all, I would choose the Canon for its incredible light weight/price/quality ratio. It might also arguably be the best for birding.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: January, 2013 Location: Texas Posts: 32 | | Review Date: May 8, 2020 | Recommended | Price: $80.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Short minimum focus distance, Light, Well Built | | Cons: | Average sharpness, C.A. | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: Olympus Pen-F, Fuji X-T3
| |
This lens is superbly built (essentially metal), it has a very convenient short minimum focus distance, it is 'sharp enough', and it is light and thin.
Its two weaknesses are the physical length, not very convenient, and the chromatic aberration ('purple fringing') when the subject has high contrast, and the light source is behind. The branches of a tree, for example, with the sun behind. Or a roof top.
| | | | | | | Site Supporter Registered: February, 2017 Posts: 2,032 | | Review Date: September 2, 2017 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | value for money | | Cons: | needs tripod collar for best handling | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
Camera Used: K3
| |
I've had this lens a few months now, paying £60 complete with PK adaptor. Its typically well built, as many lenses were of this era, with good balance and smooth focusing and aperture ring. It has a built-in hood.
I bought it because of its close focus abilities so that I could capture images of insects at a comfortable distance.Its proved its worth in this respect over the summer with many fine pictures of bees, hover flies, damsel flies and butterflies. Using the manual setting on the K3, I limit the iso to 800 max and set the aperture to f8, and get excellent results.
It really needs a tripod collar and be used with a monopod or tripod for best quality. Fortunately I already had a Tamron collar that fitted. These are very rare. But you can get a slightly over-sized Canon compatible one and add a sleeve of old bike inner tube between the collar and lens barrel for the same result.
As to image quality I think its excellent. I have a 12mp crop of a damsel fly blown up to 16" X 12 " enlargement and its still dead sharp with beautiful colours and out of focus blur at f8.
In short excellent value for money, good build quality, excellent image quality. Highly recommended.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2012 Location: North Wales Posts: 2,868 | | Review Date: April 1, 2016 | Recommended | Price: $90.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | All round quality, compact size, close focus | | Cons: | Sharpness maybe a tad shy of "SP", fringing. | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 6
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 8
Camera Used: K5, NX20, lumix G1
| |
The Adaptall f5.6 300's have a particular USP for pentax users: there is no direct equivalent in the Pentax legacy lens lineup. The SMC-M and SMC-A 300*'s are much higher end high spec beasts: f4, larger, ~ twice the weight and several times the price on the occasions they crop up. The closest equivalents in price are the M42 takumars, again f4 (the 300mm f5.6 tak is the ultra rare "ultra achromat"). The SP 54B superceded the adaptall-1 CT300, which superceded the very first version which was derived directly from the earlier adaptamatic mount 300mm f5.6 lens. 54B is readily distinguishable from the CT300 by its lined as opposed to crinkled rubber grip and "beercan" profile, the adaptamatic derived version 1 is significantly larger and has a built in tripod mount.
My first 54B was, and is, a bit of an old beater. However in spite of its dings and scratches, and slightly rattly focus, it performs just about as well as a LNIB one I acquired subsequently.
In my opinion it is one of the best vintage non-OEM 300mm f5.6 available, and I have tried quite a few. It's sharper, especially at f5.6, contrastier and warmer OtC than the adaptamatic and the earlier CT300. Stopped down though those two lenses catch up in terms of resolution. It's particular USP is its close focus, a point on which it leaves all those old generic preset/t-mount 300's for dead, and I have taken for example nice flower pics with this lens.
I do have a bit of critique of the 54B. For me the ~180deg focus throw is just a tad short (I particularly like the adaptamatic/adaptall version 1's handling and ~270deg throw) More significantly the 54B definitely has a propensity to strong purple fringing in certain circumstances. I could also remark on the lack of a tripod mount but that is easily remedied with a cheap 66mm TM from China (usually described as for Canon), used with a bit of packing or modded to fit. And finally I have to say that although its good, it's not in truth the sharpest, this is shown up by use with the 01F 2x TC, results from which for me are persistently disappointing, and also when I obtained a preset t-mount tamron 250mm f4.5 that was slightly, but definitively sharper, especially through f5.6, and had less fringing to boot!
One other question you might ask is: how does the 60-300mm 23A compare with this? I haven't done a definitive comparison, but I can suggest that overall it has similar resolution but a different character/rendering. 23A isn't in fact 300mm though - more like 285mm!
Price cited is typical auction (but can go up to ~ $150). At that price you should be happy, however much more than that and you should probably be considering a s/h DA/DAL 55-300mm, which is probably about as sharp and has AF of course. Overall 8 - 8.5/10.
1:1 pixel peep test crops of the castle (again), K5, f5.6, f8, f11 jpg from RAW default settings only LR3.
Note PF on the contrast boundary betwen the guys white t-shirt and jacket. Typical 54B! However it's only fair to point out this lens is in other respects good for control of CA - there is no purpling on the edges of the tower on the pics from which these crops have been taken, test pics of a sign with dark writing on a white background are true in colour not purpled, I don't tend to see fringing on eg horizon lines either. But I do see quite strong longitudinal CA off eg sunlit subjects like this.
Sample pics, developed from RAW in LR3, cropped:
Lumix G1.
Pentax K5
Samsung NX20
Crop (not quite full sized ~ 90%). F8
More pics:
300mm lens club #20600
300mm lens club #17252 | | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2012 Posts: 13 | | Review Date: September 1, 2013 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | lightweight, close focus, interchangeable mount | | Cons: | | |
The only disadvantage is that the PK A adapter won't read correctly on a lens slower than f4.5. You can use it with the PK A adapter but in the viewfinder it will read as if the aperture is faster than it really is. I just keep a regular PK adapter on it that came with another adaptall lens I bought and stop it down to take a reading. It is lightweight and hand holdable but my copy came with a nice removable tripod mount that will also fit the 200mm adaptall f3.5. It focuses rather close for a 300mm and also works well with the 58mm Canon 500D achromatic closeup lens for macro type of shots. To me it is quite sharp and the colors are nice. Like all adaptall lenses it also works well with my Nikon using a N/ai adapter (minus image stabilization of course). I don't use it as much since I bought the Pentax DA 55-300mm zoom but the Pentax zoom won't focus as close. A faster 300mm prime would be heavier and a lot more expensive. The speed is not too bad with the K5 sensor. The adaptall 135mm, 200mm and 300mm primes all have the same look and diameter and all take 58mm filters. I have all three and I plan to keep them. They are all pretty decent and inexpensive. The other two work fine with PK A adapters. If you like the older manual focus primes I would recommend you look for a copy.
| | | | | New Member Registered: February, 2013 Posts: 2 | | Review Date: February 17, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $79.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharp, light weight, very good bok | | Cons: | purple fringe in high contract | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 9
| |
It is one of the best lens I own(20 of them). It has very good IQ and light weight, so I can take to to wild places and shoot all day and will not hurt my arms. See pic.
    | | | | | Pentaxian Registered: June, 2010 Location: North Zealand, Denmark Posts: 1,516 | | Review Date: March 9, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $110.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Close Focusing Capability, sharp, good habdling, low weight | | Cons: | Some CA wide open, not too fast | |
When I (finally) got my 54B at a reasonable price after several lost biddings, I got myself a lens that has been very much used, or should I say: Worn. This also implies focus creep and some loosenening of the rubber on the focus and aperture grips. The upside of this is that the original owner has obviously found it useful - and used it a lot. I have not let the state of wear of my particular copy degrade my rating of the lens as such.
Because it is an excellent lens in most respects. It isn't that fast, but on the other hand you get a very compact (for a 300mm lens) and easily portable lens. Handling and focusing is superb and Catch-in-Focus works very well with this lens.
It also works very well with Tamron teleconverters, and the lens' close focus capabilty is a real plus.
On the downside, I do see some chromatic abberations and a bit of softness when I use the lens at full aperture. As said, my lens is rather worn, but cosidering its general very good sharpness, I don't think my copy is in much need for collimation.
Overall a very good buy.
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: April, 2008 Location: USA Posts: 1,901 | | Review Date: October 19, 2010 | Recommended | Price: $125.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Lightweight, close- focus ability, interchangeable mount | | Cons: | Slow f-stop | |
This was one of the first Tamron Adaptall lenses I tried out. The first thing I thought when I saw it was "Wow, this thing is light for a 300mm lens".
The next thing I checked out was its close-focus abilitly. " Cool, not bad. "
I don't have any photos to put up that I took with this lens but what I remember was it not a bad little preformer for its price range. It's actually pretty decent. The build is nice and comes with the built in hood. For a con I put a slow f-stop but with todays cameras and high ISO ablities it doesn't really matter much like it use to.
So, for someone that doesn't have a pocket full of money and looking for a len in the 300mm range I would definately recommend trying this one out. Especially if you already have the Adaptall P/KA adapter.  It doubles as a 300mm close-focus lens and that is  | | |
;)
;)
