Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Sony Alpha dSLR / Konica Minolta dSLR, Sony SLT

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 20, 2006, 12:06 AM   #61
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

You're right both with the D50 which means both Tamron. Plus focal length is 110mm or 165mm 35mm eqiv. Some of the shots that are called 300mm shots are actually 200mm before the crop factor. rduve, I wouldn't put too much into those pics. Test your own lens and let us know how you like it
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2006, 12:36 AM   #62
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Thanks Nooner, I think you are right. It doesn't make any sense that the same lens would produce such dramatically different results if focused accurately. Tomorrow is judgement day.

:G
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2006, 3:15 AM   #63
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 448
Default

Because both lenses yield poor results with one exception, I simply believe that there is something wrong with MT's camera. No wonder that she switched to the D50. Thus let's just hope that our 28-300mm lenses will yield the same quality results, which she obtained with the D50. The Di coating shouldn't make a measurable difference.

@Rambler358:
Thanks for the fine pictures. They certainly confirm my hypothesis.
kassandro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2006, 11:09 AM   #64
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Rainer-

You may be correct that there is something wrong with my KM 5D. Here are the last two shots made with the KM 5D yesterday (04/19). One is at 28mm, the second at 300mm. They were handheld at ISO 100.

MT




mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2006, 11:43 AM   #65
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

I sure hope you are right, Rainer. That shot at 300 is unusable. Somebody else did warn me before saying that the pictures get attrociously soft in that range, but then I saw very good looking samples as well.

Well, I think I'll leave work early today to do my own test shots....will let you guys know my findings.
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2006, 3:03 PM   #66
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

Let's hope your results are better rduve. I wonder if there is a lot of variation between samples of that lens. Quality control:?
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2006, 4:30 PM   #67
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

You seem to live in a gorgeous area, mtclimber. Where is that lake or ocean?
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2006, 7:34 PM   #68
Senior Member
 
mtclimber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 18,143
Default

Rainer-

Its the Pacific.

MT
mtclimber is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 20, 2006, 10:39 PM   #69
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

mtclimber: Pacific Northwest/Washington State? I live by the Pacific, too, but it looks a lot different in Malibu.

In any case, I got the lens, and did a few test shots. The sun started to set, so I did not get any outdoor shots that would be a fair comparison. I tooka couple and they were decent. Will take actual comparison shots tomorrow when the sun is out.

When I went inside I took a shot of my baby son, Tate at 85mm and f5.0. Looks a lot better than mtclimber's husband (the picture, not the person)






Attached Images
 
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 21, 2006, 12:57 AM   #70
Senior Member
 
rduve's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,504
Default

Then I did some comparisons, just taking the same shots with identical setting, but with different lenses (I got several since I am buying old cameras and lenses up and reselling them). I found something very interesting. I have good news and bad news. the good news first: This lens can compete in sharpness and clarity with any of the other lens I tested. The bad news: The lens is not even close to going up to 300mm. In fact, it's pretty much identical at its maximum focus to the 70-210 lenses I tested. Here are some samples:

Tamron 28-300 XR @ 300mm f11


Attached Images
 
rduve is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 3:54 AM.