| Author: | | New Member Registered: April, 2011 Location: Dorset , UK Posts: 6 | | Review Date: March 31, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | sharpness and bokeh | | Cons: | only half life size | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: various
| |
One of the best "cheap" manual focus macro lenses ! I have the 52BB version and love the smooth focus.
++ sharpness and bokeh
++ size and weight
- only 1-2 / half life size
I`ve used it on micro four thirds, Fuji x and full frame Panasonic S5, this lens is great on all of them !!
If you`re on a limited budget you can not go wrong with this lens !!
https://flic.kr/p/2kQ7GiX
https://flic.kr/p/2ntceqd | | | | | | | New Member Registered: November, 2019 Posts: 1 | | Review Date: March 19, 2023 | Recommended | Price: $89.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | High build quality.Very sharp. Super bokeh. Adaptall mount. | | Cons: | None. | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: Pentax K-1
| |
My current Tamron 90mm f2.5 SP is the second I've owned, both the original 52B version.
The first, which I had in the late 1980's/early1990's did sterling service, first on an Olympus OM4, then on a Contax RTS.
My current example, bought two years ago and fitted with a P-KA Adaptall mount, is now my favourite portrait lens for my K-1, in preference to my m/f Samyang 85mm f1.4, and a/f Pentax DFA 100mm f2.8.
Black and white portraits shot with the 52B on my K-1 have a certain 'richness' which is difficult to describe but which is missing with my other 'full-frame' portrait lenses.
| | | | | Site Supporter Registered: November, 2017 Posts: 756 | | Review Date: July 17, 2022 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Size, weight, speed, sharpness | | Cons: | Focus can be somewhat touchy | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 9
Value: 10
Camera Used: K-1
| |
I cannot add much more to this review than others have said. I purchased it for $60 + shipping, which appears to be a relative bargain, even for "old" Adaptall-2 glass. I can already tell its excellence in portrait and macro work, and look forward to trying it for astro and other work.
 | | | | | New Member Registered: June, 2018 Posts: 6 | | Review Date: June 20, 2018 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very sharp, good bokeh, can fit very camera | | Cons: | 1:2, bulky and heavy, adaptall adapters are expensive | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 8
Handling: 7
Value: 9
Camera Used: A7, Nex 6
| |
Had two samples of this lens. The first one had been used and probably abused, it was good but with a noticeable lack of contrast. The new one is almost mint and performs much better.
Love the fact that an adaptall lens can fit every camera mount, even if the adapters are usually expensive and sometimes really difficult to find.
Sharpness is excellent even at f/2,5. It has minor chromatic aberration at full aperture but nothing to worry about. It can flare a little bit and it's better to use a lens hood. Tried the much more regarded Vivitar series 1 90mm f/2,5 "Bokina" and I sharpness seems to be on par with the Tamron, the only differences beeing weight and slightly smoother bokeh for the Viv.
Tamron's bokeh is good, I like my portrait lens 85mm f/1,8 better in this regard but it's nice. It has more aperture blades than most vintage lenses, this helps when stopped down.
The lens is only 1:2 but I'm not annoyed with that.
Handling is good, the lens is really build like a tank. I own several old lenses and most of them are all metal and durable, but the Tamron is especially heavy and feels almost indestructible.
Value is good as this Tamron 90mm f/2.5 adaptall is excellent and can be found for about 100 € in good conditions. It rises a bit but still cheaper than the later plastic version.
| | | | | | | New Member Registered: September, 2012 Location: Belo Horizonte Posts: 17 | | Review Date: March 17, 2016 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | | | Cons: | | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: 125
| |
superb lens even at 2.5 , much used for portraits.
The macro is incredibly detailed
| | | | | New Member Registered: October, 2011 Posts: 5 | | Review Date: April 18, 2015 | Recommended | Price: $25.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | Great For Macro, Amazing For Portraits | | Cons: | None | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
Camera Used: K5-IIs
| |
52B version as pictured, easily my favorite and most versatile lens. The close-focusing ability creates more opportunities for macro and portrait work.
The focus throw is perfect, neither fast nor slow. Very easy to nail focus on the subject's eyes despite MF only. The ease of focus is a boon for handheld macro shots.
This one more than lives up to its name (SP-Super Performance), absolutely love it and highly recommend.
| | | | | Junior Member Registered: October, 2012 Posts: 28 | | Review Date: February 14, 2014 | Recommended | Price: $118.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Very sharp, solidly built, quality, fairly fast | | Cons: | none of consequence | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 9
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
I have, because of a curious mind, in my collection the 52B, 72B. 272E, the Samsung D-Xenon f2.8 100mm, Pentax 50mm f4 and f2.8 and all get used frequently. The 52B stands up well against the others and I do love using it with my K5. I find that having a solid, reasonably heavy lens with a good sharp glass in my hands when taking a shot steadies my hand and eye and lends a sense of confidence while doing so.. Although I have had no problems previously with lens flare I do use a lens hood as it has a secondary use of protecting the lens when I'm poking it into undergrowth to take a shot of an insect etc. I also have got into the habit of using the front and back mounts of a tube on the 52B to extend the ratio approximately from 1.2 to 1.1. which works for me. It was one of the first Tamron macro's in my collection and using it was a good learning base giving me the experience when using the other macros. It has a good bokeh, is easy to handle, and has given me some great images. I would definitely recommend it for those wanting to take macro shots with a seriously good lens. I've used it quite often at full aperture when taking shots in shadow and I find it forgiving and sharp, it's obviously sharper a couple of stops up but it delivers good sharp images at full aperture. I'm not a pixel peeper so rather than getting technical with the comparisons, vices and virtues of the different macro lens let me say that when picking up the 52B I get that sense of enjoyment and confidence knowing it's an excellently sharp, dependable lens and it's not outclassed greatly by the others. Having said that I do think the Pentax 50mm f2.8 and f4 have the edge in IQ. If you can get one for a reasonable price then get it......and you won't regret it.
| | | | | Veteran Member Registered: August, 2009 Posts: 417 | | Review Date: October 29, 2013 | Recommended | Price: $100.00
| Rating: 10 |
| Pros: | bokeh, resolution | | Cons: | long focus throw | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 10
Bokeh: 10
Handling: 10
Value: 10
| |
I realise this is probably my "best" lens, as I run through the rating toggles, on a ratings basis. Its bokeh is very pleasing, and sharpness is excellent. An additional advantage is the Adaptall mount, which means that this can be used on other camera mounts other than PK...I use this lens as a benchmark across camera systems. It even gets a special mention in Barry Thornton's book called Elements in the 35mm section at the back. Interestingly, he also used Pentax in 35mm. Some of the photographs I have produced of my toddler pick up very fine detail in his skin, when we were mucking about in the garden this summer. Looking forward to printing them soon. Whether or not this is sharper than the Pentax M 50mm f4 is open to debate, on test targets I don't think you would see a difference, and the Pentax M also has a nice bokeh.
I note someone with shots of a church in their review reports their lens is soft wide open...there must be something wrong...mine is literally at peak sharpness from wide open. Note I am using this on film, capable of 150lp/mm.
When you consider this is a 85mm portrait lens with macro capabilities, it makes the Pentax M 85mm f2 look like a waste of money.
I have owned a Kiron 105/2.8, ironically never shot with it, as I accidentally bought an OM mount version. The Kiron is substantially larger and heavier, as it can go to 1:1. I sold the Kiron for USD 300. Its basically the same as the Lester Dine and Viv S1 105mm. Its not fair to compare the Tamron with such a lens, as they are in a completely different price bracket, the Tamron changing hands for an average of GBP 80 with postage nowadays.
| | | | | Pentaxian Registered: April, 2011 Location: Lost in translation ... Posts: 18,076 | | Review Date: April 20, 2013 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | Sharp, f 2.5, build, bokeh ... | | Cons: | Only 1:2 ... | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 10
| |
Bonjour,
My copy of this lens is the later "52BB" version, pics above, which according to the Adaptall site is optically identical to the previous version, the 52B.
All of the previous reviews have said enough about the good quality of this lens.
| | | | | Loyal Site Supporter Registered: February, 2011 Location: San Francisco Posts: 128 | | Review Date: July 21, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $60.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | cost, sharpness, build quality | | Cons: | weight | | Sharpness: 10
Aberrations: 7
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 8
Value: 10
| |
So this lens is incredibly sharp. I've only recently acquired it but I've used it alone (mostly), with tubes, and with the 01F 2x teleconverter (which cost another $30). I agree that it achieves optimal sharpness between f4 and f11. The build is great, but the PK/A adapter does have a bit of funk associated with it such that you have to wiggle it at times to get the aperture reading in Av mode (it's the adapter's problem; not the lens - keeping the adapter contacts clean is a big help here).
Color rendition is incredible.
The sensor reflection problem is real and is exacerbated when you point the lens into a backlit scene. This is why I give it low marks for aberrations (but it wasn't designed for use with DSLRs, so you can't fault Tamron). See below for a typical problem, as well as a serious problem caused by long exposure time. If you work around this, i.e. don't use the lens with a digital SLR for this type of photography, it's an awesome lens for the money. It's primary purpose is for macros so just use it for that! 
The lens, particularly with the 01F teleconverter, is extremely heavy. Here are some shots:
1. With extension tubes (dandelion):
Model for Death Star by zot0 (too busy), on Flickr
2. By itself:
Bugs and Buds by zot0 (too busy), on Flickr
3. With 01F Teleconverter (and flash):
Che-er-ry, Cherry Macro by zot0 (too busy), on Flickr
4. Subtle sensor reflection - note the purple in the middle of the rose (but otherwise note the beautiful color rendition):
Ramble On Rose by zot0 (too busy), on Flickr
5. Extreme sensor reflection, long exposure:
Extreme example of Tamron SP 90mm (52B) Sensor Reflection problem by zot0 (too busy), on Flickr
| | | | | New Member Registered: March, 2012 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Posts: 24 | | Review Date: April 12, 2012 | Recommended | Price: None indicated
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | sharp, fast, handy for its specifications | | Cons: | no provision on the mount for switching to manual iris | | Sharpness: 8
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 1
Handling: 8
Value: 8
| |
I have had mine for many years - bought it in film camera days to use on Pentax screwthread and Nikon F (claw) systems. I have the 2x converter but not the model-specific extension tube.
As one would expect I have Adaptall mounts for the above two systems (only). I believe all varieties of K mount Adaptalls are expensive but this is academic to me as I have not been able to find any. I have to depend on using my Pentax Screw Adaptall with a corresponding ring on my Pentax K-m which means I cannot use the lens except at full aperture which makes it quite useless for macro photos. I am quite well able to use my 300mm f/5.6 and 105 f/2.5 with my digital SLR on manual setting but the 90mm f/2.5 is the one I would most like to be able to use.
I'm not sure what "bokeh" means but as I have found this lens makes a sharp but rather harsh and unflattering portrait lens I have marked it down on bokeh but I might be barking up quite the wrong tree.
On the whole I am in agreement with all the other favourable comments on performance in the other reviews above on the basis of my experience experience with film and I hope to be able, some time, to try it on my digital SLR.
My rating of value for money must be taken with a pinch of salt as I bought the lens decades, rather than years, ago and paid a price of quite a different order as compared with prices at which the lens seems to be changing hands now, which seem to be quite reasonable for one in good condition.
| | | | | New Member Registered: December, 2011 Location: West Sumatra, Indonesia Posts: 22 | | Review Date: April 3, 2012 | Recommended | Price: $150.00
| Rating: 9 |
| Pros: | build to quality, hood | | Cons: | size | | Sharpness: 9
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 9
Value: 9
| |
this is also my first adaptall lens, after i had this lens i got the 1:1 macro and yes, it might delivered a good macro magnifying and portrait. Its great using with DSLR rather than mirrorless because of the size. The color, sharp, bokeh is great. And macro using this lens can be very fun since the distance from object relatively better.
Now i wait for the tele con to had 180mm, and yes this one might be your considered to had a budget macro lens within range 80-105mm FL with value for money and of course the result
| | | | | Inactive Account Registered: November, 2008 Location: Trabzon/Turkey Posts: 1,010 | | Review Date: August 29, 2011 | Not Recommended | Price: $175.00
| Rating: 7 |
| Pros: | Size, True Colors, Bokeh | | Cons: | Heavy, Flares a lot, Not Sharp enough for a macro | | Sharpness: 5
Aberrations: 8
Bokeh: 9
Handling: 3
Value: 5
| |
After I've managed the install adaptall-2 mount (quite a task for novice) for 1x1 macros, removing 1x1 adapter for 1x2 photos, reinstalling adaptall adapter was easier. Most important property of this lens is it's getting sharper beyond f/11 despite adaptall-2 official site says.
http://www.adaptall-2.com/lenses/52B.html
This lens has great saturated colors, in fact I've never able to get nice true purplish color in thorny plant with any other lens picture below. You need to get a hood as big as possible because it flares a lot. Bokeh is good. But sharpness is an issue with this lens, it's not sharp below f/11 and gets sharper with f/16 and f/32, it's not a hand shake issue because I've tried that with tripod and mirror lock. For a macro lens this lens deserves only a mediocre lens title, I've never tried but I am sure it would make a great soft portrait lens wide open. Don't get confused with the sharpness of the samples I've given below, because these are the best of bests, maybe only 1 out of 10 pictures comes out that sharp, that I would call just luck. So, this lens deserves 6.6/10 (2/3) just for the colors and bokeh other than that, I do not recommend this lens as a macro lens.
Since I can't find a way attaching new pictures in this review section I am giving you best samples of original jpeg's links I've mentioned for you consideration , remember they are 4-4.5 MB in size.
Worry Beads.
Cactus
My Own Tomatoes, Grown by Mysef :)
Thorn (Beautiful Purple)
Houses | | | | | Junior Member Registered: May, 2010 Posts: 48 | | Review Date: July 14, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $130.00
| Rating: 8 |
| Pros: | Sharp, nice bokeh | | Cons: | Soft open wide | |
I've the later 52BB version.
Very nice lens for shooting plants and people. It's a bit soft open wide, and I have to stop down 1 or 2 steps to get a sharp photo. But when it's sharp, it's sharp!
I have the 2x TC to make it a 1:1 macro, but have hardly used it because it adds a lot weight to the lens. Shooting portrait with 2x TC is not a good idea as it loses contrast and sharpness. But for close-ups, it seems to do well.
I've taken a liking in it so much that I upgraded the lens to the 72BB version, which is 1:1 macro. The 72BB is even sharper and more contrasty, so I sold off my 52BB. Though I really like the 52BB design better. But the 72BB is a bit more expensive, so if you are on a budget, the 52BB will serve you well!
Here's one of my favorite shots with the lens.
 | | | | | Veteran Member Registered: September, 2009 Location: Langley, BC Posts: 550 | | Review Date: May 20, 2011 | Recommended | Price: $120.00
| Rating: 10 |
|
I have the early version, and I've used it on various film bodies and the K10D. It's a fantastic lens, with or without the matched 2x doubler. Sharp, excellent build quality, and not too expensive. Who needs AF for macro anyway?  | | |
;)
;)
;)
