Read about Nikon's current offering of flashes and accessories on Photo.net. Shun Cheung compares the SB-900, SB-800, SB-600, and SB-400, and offers detailed specs on the flashes.
The Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) is one of Tamron's new "Di"
lenses. These are lenses designed with digital SLRs in mind. This is what Tamron
says about their DI lenses:
Di: Digitally Integrated Design, is a designation Tamron puts on
lenses featuring optical systems designed to meet the performance characteristics
of Digital SLR cameras.
Tamron's new Di (Digitally Integrated design) lens series offers users of both
film and digital cameras:
Higher resolution
Control of flare and ghosting
Minimized peripheral light fall-off
Reduced chromatic aberrations
Of course it's hard to say if, or how much, "digital" lenses are better than
"non-digital" lenses since there are rarely (if ever) digital and non-digital
versions of the same lens. While it's true that there are some aspects of lens
design that could be optimized for digital use, it's hard to say just how much
better a new "digital" design would be when compared to a new "non-digital"
design. There are many lenses designed before digital SLRs became popular which
seem to work perfectly well on digital SLRs. On the other hand lens design has
always been an evolving art and science, and improved designs may give improved
performance with both digital sensors and film. It certainly never hurts for
either to improve resolution, lower chromatic aberration, minimize light fall-off
and lower flare and ghosting!
Here are the specifications of the Tamron SP AF200-500MM
F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
Specifications
Model Number
A08
Lens Construction (Groups/Elements)
10/13 (2 LD elements)
Angle of View
12°-5°
Focal Length
200mm to 500mm
Maximum Aperture
f5 to f6.3
Diaphragm Blade Number
9
Minimum Aperture
f/32
Minimum Focus
2.5m (98.4") (entire zoom range)
Macro Mag. Ratio
1:5.0 (at 500mm)
Filter Diameter
86mm
Weight
1237g (43.6oz)
Diameter x Length
3.7 x 8.9in. (200mm setting, no hood)
(93.5 x 227.0mm)
Accessories
Lens hood, Detachable Filter Effect Control, Carrying case
and strap
Mount
Canon, Minolta-D, Nikon-D
The lens appears to be well constructed and has a low reflectivity black
finish with a rubberized zoom control. It comes with the following
accessories:
Plastic "bayonet" mount lens hood with ribbed interior to minimize
reflections.
Detachable tripod mount
Soft zippered carrying case with detachable strap
Detachable filter effect control
Front and rear caps, instruction sheet, 6 year warranty
The carrying case is actually useful, unlike either the thin unpadded bags or
cylindrical hard cases supplied with some lenses. It's well padded and has a
detachable carrying strap. If I owned this lens I think I'd use this case often.
I have cases supplied with some lenses I've bought which have sat on the shelf
gathering dust since the day I bought the lens!
The Filter Effect Control is an interesting idea. One of the problems of using
a polarizer with telephoto lenses is that when you mount the long lens hood you
can't easily get to the polarizer to adjust the polarizing angle. The rotating
filter effect control is a detachable adapter that allows a polarizing filter to
be rotated by rotating the whole lens hood. The filter screws into the adapter
and the adapter screws into the lens. The hood then bayonet mounts onto the front
of the adapter which is free to rotate.
The metal tripod mount is easily detachable, yet hold the lens solidly when in
place and locked. There are no "clickstops" for horizontal and vertical
alignment, though there is an indicator mark for horizontal orrientation. It
tightens and loosens by rotating a small knob on the left side of the lens.
The zoom can be locked in the 200mm position so that the lens doesn't extend
when being carried in a downwards position. The lock is only possible at 200mm.
Focal lengths are marked at 200mm, 250mm, 300mm, 350mm, 400mm, 450mm and
500mm.
Focus can be switched between AF and MF with a small switch on the left, near
the lens mount. Manual focus is smooth, if a little fast for delicate adjustments
with about a 57 degree rotation from 2.5m to infinity. There is no depth of field
scale, and this is no surprise since DOF scales are pretty useless on telephoto
lenses and very difficult to design for zooms. There is no IR focus
identification mark.
The image below show how the lens extends on zooming. At 200mm, without the
hood, it's similar in size to an 80-200/2.8 zoom or a 300/4 prime. Add the hood
and it becomes quite a bit longer and zoom to 500mm and it becomes an impressive
sight! For scale, the camera attached to the lens in these shots is an EOS 10D.
Note the filter effect control adapter is mounted between the lens and the hood
in these images.
The lens takes an 86mm screw-in filter. 86mm filters aren't cheap and you're
unlikely to already own many since few 35mm camera lenses require such a large
filter. For example an 86mm circular polarizer (which is probably the most
commonly used filter) will cost you somewhere between $100 and $225 depending on
the manufacturer. Currently the Tiffen sells for around $120 and the Hoya sells
for around $145. Something to budget for if you're addicted to polarizers.
The lens does not change length on focusing (it's internal focus - IF) and the
front of the barrel does not rotate when the lens is zoomed or focused. However
the focus ring does spin during autofocus, so keep your hands away from it!
The lens has a close focus distance of 2.5m (98.4") at all focal lengths.
Maximum magnification is 1:5 (at 500mm).
Performance Tests
Autofocus
Autofocus on an EOS 10D was positive with no "hunting" observed at any focal
length under a variety of daylight conditions from full mid-day sun to evening
shade. Though not silent, AF noise was low and certainly acceptable. I measured
the time taken to shift focus from 2.5m to infinity (or infinity to 2.5m) at 1.1
seconds. By way of comparison, the Canon EF 300/4L USM takes 0.65 seconds to
focus from 2.5m to infinity, the Canon EF 75-300/4-5.6 IS USM takes 0.9 seconds
to focus from 1.5m to infinity and the Canon EF 500/4.5L takes 1 second to focus
from 4m to infinity. So while 1.1 seconds isn't as fast as some Canon USM lenses,
it not that much slower. All these times were measured with the lenses
mounted on a Canon EOS 10D body.
Focal Length and Aperture
The nominal focal length and aperture is 200mm f5, to 500mm f6.3. I recorded
the following EXIF data recorded when the lens was mounted on an EOS 10D and
zoomed to 500mm
The blue data is the recorded shooting data which says 500mm, but
the green data which is the lens identifier indicates a minimum focal length of
200mm and a maximum focal length of 486mm. When I compared shots taken with a
Canon EF 500/4.5L with those taken with the Tamron zoom at full extension (500mm)
I measured objects in the Tamron images to be about 3% smaller than those in the
Canon images. I've previously tested the Canon lens and found it to be very close
to 500mm in focal length, so using that as a reference the calculated Tamron
focal length would be 485mm. This is very close to the EXIF value of 486mm, so I
tend to believe that it probably does represent the actual maximum focal length.
Note that it's still well within the usual +/- 5% standard for focal length
measurement which is widely adopted (475mm to 525mm for a 500mm lens). If you
look back though Popular Photography lens tests you'll see that lenses
are rarely exactly as marked and that most telephotos are up to 5% shorter than
their nominal focal length.
When mounted on an EOS 10D or 20D the indicated aperture at 200mm
was f5, from 290mm to 450mm it was f5.6 (1/3 stop slower) and from 450mm to 500mm
it was f6.3.
Image Quality
Here comes the part you've been waiting for! Just how good is
this lens? Well, I performed a variety of tests, shooting both "regular" images
and comparing them to other lenses (Canon EF 75-300/4-5.6 IS USM, Canon EF 300/4L
USM and Canon EF 500/4.5L ISM), as well as shooting images of test targets and
doing scientific (or at least semi-scientific) quantitative analysis of the
results. I've been playing around with a lens/camera/printer testing software
suite called
Imatest,
written by Norman Koren. I'm not going to present hard data in this review since
I haven't used the software enough yet to fully evaluate it and get experience
with interpreting the results. However at some point in the future I may
incorporate such test data in reviews.
All testing was done using an EOS 10D DSLR with an APS-C sized
sensor (approx 15.1 x 22.7mm).
Tests for vignetting showed none at any focal length or aperture.
Illumination was very uniform across the frame. Of course this would be expected
since the lens is designed with full frame 35mm coverage and was tested on a
camera with an APS-C sensor which crops the center 15x22mm region from the 43mm
image circle. Vignetting on a full frame camera was not tested. It's not unusual
to see some degree of vignetting in the corners of a full 35mm frame with
any lens when used wide open.
The above sequence shows the effect of zooming from 200mm to
500mm. Of course you can't really tell much about image quality from such small
images, so the following sequence of images show 100% crops from the center of
each image.
Here are some comparison images shot with Canon lenses as
indicated.
You'll probably see that there's not a whole lot of difference
between any of the lenses! This is due to several factors. First the subject is
low contrast and doesn't have a lot of fine detail. Second the images are all
shot with an EOS 10D, which has a resolution limit of 65 lp/mm. Third all these
crops are from the very center of the image, where aberrations in all lenses are
at a minimum. There are differences, but they are small in this particular image
sequence.
So does that mean that the Tamron 200-500 is just as good as a
Canon EF 300/4L or Canon EF500/4.5L? Well, not really as you can see from the
following images. These are shots of a white bar against a dark background at the
edge of an image. First a sequence shot at 300mm and f11. Note that chromatic
aberration isn't a function of aperture, so the color fringing will be
essentially the same wide open and stopped down. These are 200% enlargements of a
crop from the test images.
As you can see, the Tamron 200-500 at 300mm falls somewhere
between the Canon EF 75-300 IS and the Canon EF 300/4L. The use of LD (low
dispersion) elements in the lens is clearly suppressing some of the chromatic
aberration, though not quite as effectively as the UD elements of the Canon
prime. Below are the results at 500mm. These are also 200% enlargements of a crop
from the test images.
Clearly the Tamron 200-500 at 500mm is showing some edge
chromatic aberration. The Canon EF 500/4.5L is extremely clean with no visible
color fringing at all. Obviously the use of fluorite and UD elements in this lens
is highly effective at eliminating chromatic aberration. However the Canon lens
costs around $5000, so you pay dearly for the improvement. Comparing an $875 lens
with a $5000 is, of course, not really fair, however a good reason to do this
comparison with the much more expensive lens is to show that chromatic aberration
is not being caused by the digital sensor in the camera. It has been suggested in
some publications that color fringing can be caused by sensor aberrations.
Whether or not this is ever true, it appears not the case in these tests.
Here's a shot of a high contrast test target with lots of fine
detail. All the images were shot at 500mm and f6.3, this time taking crops from
the center of the image and a point 40% of the distance to the edge.:
This time, even in the center of the image, the Tamron 200-500
shows lower contrast (lower MTF) than the Canon lens (again though, remember
you're paying around $5000 for the Canon lens!). Note however that the resolution
in the top images (taken from the center of the frame) is very similar. Both are
probably limited by the resolution of the sensor in the 10D.
At 40% of the distance from the center, the Tamron lens has lost
some sharpness and is starting to show some chromatic aberration. This is
probably less of a problem in telephoto lens than in a wideangle lens, since
telephoto lenses are usually used with the subject in the central region of the
frame and limited DOF tends to render the background out of focus.
Here's another image set shot at 500mm. The upper image is the
full frame shot and the lower image is a 100% crop. Again, comparision with a
$5000 prime lens isn't "fair", but it does give a reference standard. The
performance of the Tamron 200-500 is certainly acceptable for a 200-500 zoom
costing under $1000. Remember that the 100% crop represents what a very large
print would look like. The crop is 268 pixels wide, so the full image, if
displayed at the same scale, would be 11.5x larger. On my monitor (17" screen,
1280 pixels wide), this would mean a full frame display which was 20"
x30".
Below are the same crops, but this time at 50% and with a little
unsharp mask sharpening. It's now starting to get harder to see the
difference!
I also compared the Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) to
the Tamron SP 500/8 mirror lens. The 200-500 at 500mm was slightly sharper in the
center of the image than the mirror lens, but showed more chromatic aberration at
the edges of the frame. Of course the mirror lens is a stop slower, manual focus,
isn't a zoom and has donut shaped out of focus highlights (poor "bokeh"). On the
whole, the Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) is a much better choice for
most users.
Earlier in this review I mentioned that I'd been using the
Imatest program to obtain quantitative data on image quality. Actually I measured
something called the system response function which is a measure of overall image
quality (or system MTF if you prefer). These quantitative results ageed well with
the purely visual estimates of image quality, both in terms of image sharpness
and chromatic aberration. They also show that the Tamron 200-500 does sharpen up
a little when stopped down and this applies at all focal lengths. The difference
isn't huge, but stopping down to f8 when convenient will give slightly sharer
images. At 500mm stopping down to f11 gives a little more sharpness still.
Multipliers
You might think it would be asking for trouble to use a multipler
on a 200-500mm zoom, and often you'd be right. Multipliers work best on high
quality (read "very expensive") prime lenses, but since I had a few multipliers
around I thought it would be interesting to test them with the zoom. I found that
the Canon EF 1.4x TC would fit the Tamron 200-500 as long as the lens was zoomed
out. At 200mm the rear element of the zoom comes into contact with the front
element of the TC. I also used a Tamron 1.4x TC, though possibly not the current
version since I bought it about 10 years ago. The designation on this multiplier
is "Tamron-F AF tele-converter 1.4x C-AF MC4".
My first surprise was that the Tamron TC outperformed the Canon
TC, even though it cost about $200 less. I repeated the tests and got the same
results. The images taken with the Tamron TC were sharper. Neither TC gave very
good AF. With the Tamron AF was possible and focus lock was obtained on some
subjects, but it wasn't reliable. With the Canon TC there was a tendancy to
oscillate about a focus point. Of course you wouldn't expect AF. Canon AF is
specified to work only at f5.6 or faster. With a 1.4x TC on the Tamron lens at
500mm the effective aperture is f9. Manual focus was fine, but as I commented
earlier, with a 57 degree rotation from 2.5m to infinity, small focus adjustments
were tricky - but possible.
Let me apologize in advance for the artistic quality of the test
image below, but my "model" wasn't being very cooperative on the day of the test
and insisted on hiding in the bushes! The upper image is the full frame shot,
taken with the Tamron 200-500 lens at 500mm with the Tamron 1.4x TC added. Manual
focus of course, and a focal length of 800mm at f9 (equivalent to 1280 mm on a
full frame 35mm body).
Below is a 100% crop from the center of this image. This is only
456 pixels wide, so the full image would be 6.7 times wider. As you can see
quality isn't awful. It's decent considering the circumstances and, in fact,
better than I would have expected.. You can see the eyelashes on the deer! I'd
estimate the deer was at a distance of about 50m (165ft). Again, with the 1.4x
TC, remember that this is equivalent to using a 1280mm lens on a full frame 35mm
camera
What about use on a full frame film or DSLR?
Well, the general conclusions will still apply. The center of the
image will be the same, but the edges will be a little softer on a full frame
camera and the extent of chromatic aberration will be a little greater.
Conclusions
The Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) is a pretty decent
telephoto zoom for the price (around $875 discount). It's well made, feels
sturdy, the tripod mount is stable and focus is accurate. The hood is deep and
effective and the supplied filter effect control adapter is a neat idea. The
supplied soft case is useful and protects the lens well. The 6 year warranty is
also a plus. Most lenses only come with a 12 month warranty.
Optically the lens isn't a match for a prime apochromatic
telephoto lens, but that's not a fair comparison. It's less than 1/5th the price
of a 500mm f4 lens and less than a third of the size and weight, plus it zooms
from 200-500mm. Zoom lenses are usually a compromise, particularly long telephoto
zooms and for most users the compromises are quite acceptable. You get somewhat
lower, but still accetable, image quality, but a much lower price and a lot more
convenience. The "street" price on the Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF)
is around $875 from reputable discount retailers.
I could certainly recommend that those who want a fairly
inexpensive telephoto zoom should look at this lens. If you're intending to make
your living by selling poster size fine art prints of your work you probably need
a more expensive prime lens, but if you're shooting for fun and not intending to
make huge prints, the Tamron SP AF200-500MM F/5-6.3 Di LD (IF) is certainly a
lens worth considering..
Where to Buy?
The following retailers are photo.net affiliates. Please consider
purchasing from them if you're interested in this lens. Doing so will help
support this website.
Very nice review of a lens I hadn't heard of until now. It certainly seems like a terrific value, considering its reach and relatively low price.
Several times in the review you mentioned that (obviously) the 200-500/5-6.3 matches up somewhat poorly with long primes, like Canon's 500/4. So why not test this new lens against other telephoto zooms, like the Canon 100-400L, and Sigma's 50-500? I'm wondering how it stacks up against those excellent lenses.
I'd love to test a set of similar lenses, however I don't own either the Canon 100-400 or the Sigma 50-500 and getting simultaneous loans of several lenses from several manufacturers is very, very difficult, if not impossible!
I hope in the future to be able to present tests of Canon and Sigma lenses as well as Tamron - and Tokina too. Right now Tamron seem most open to working with Photo.net and so you can (I hope) expect to see a few more Tamron lens tests in the following weeks and months. If we can get a positive response from other manufacturers, you can expect to see reviews of their lenses too.
I'm also starting to work on a more quantitative scheme to measure lens quality and if that shows promise it might be easier to compare lenses tested at different times. However I don't like tests that are just numbers or plots of MTF. I don't think they really tell a users what to expect, so I'll also continue to compare lenses with whatever else I have available that's most similar to them, whether that's a $5000 Canon prime or a $100 consumer zoom!
I guess it took maybe 10 seconds to switch lenses. Since the deer was resting and there was nothing to disturb it, I guess it didn't feel the need to move...
Bob, A great review. I will also love to know how this lens stacks up against the Sigma 170-500 f5-6.3 lens. These two lenses (Sigma 170-500 and Tamron 200-500) sounds similar in focal length, speed and price ($650 and $880) - I will love to see the performance comparison. I know that a lot of people bought the Sigma as it is a great value for money - I am wondering whether this Tamron lens will be considerably better for another $200 or so. As you said, it is not fair to compare these lenses with prime lenses which cost 10 times more! So I will love to see comparison between similar lenses so that it will help people to choose between them. Personally, I plan to buy a lens in that focal length range in near future and do not plan to spend $5000 - so I have a special interest here too!
Very nice review! The correct term for "edge chromatic aberration" really is "lateral color". Amazingly the Tamron outperformed the Canon zoom in this regard. Looking at your test shots, it appears that the Tamron's lateral color correction approches the fixed focus Canon 300mm.
A note about Tamron lenses: Tamron has a long history of designing the light transmission to be very neutral (some would call it slightly cool rather than warm). This design history goes back to the days of film because Tamron wanted to be sure that even deep blue colors would be accurately reproduced. Not only that, Fuji film (warmer than Kodak) is/was much more popular in Japan. Competing lens manufactures generally designed the light transmission to be slightly warm and even blocked extremely deep blue transmission to make their lenses contrastier and appear to be sharper in lens tests.
Performance Enhancement Tip For All Lenses: To get the best performance from any lens, the owner should purchase a protective skylight 1A filter which also includes UV blocking. If your lens is already slightly "warm", get just a UV blocking filter. Spherical aberration (which causes softness) is strongest in the UV with any lens. Both film and most CCDs are sensitive in UV unless the digital camera manufacturer has incorporated UV blocking over the CCD. Anyway, doubling up on the UV blocking never hurts and can only improve sharpness and contrast.
I was just wondering if any one has tested this lens on film cameras? I am considering to buy it but would do it only if I am sure that it works fine on both film an digital SLRs. ANy suggestion is appreciated. /Miklos
Hey,
I make Miklos words mine... has anyone used this lens at all for film SLR? I am considering purchasing this lens for my Nikon F100, and was wondering if any of you has any experience with using this lens on a film camera. All the reviews I could find online on this lens were using digital cameras? Thanks,
Luis
Thankyou for the information on this lens. All I have read is good comments about it. Your article covered alot more of the tech aspects which is good.Thanks again.
Bob
I was under the impression that the Di designation was for Digital APS-C sized sensors only, making it unusable on Film cameras. If true, it would back up why you've only seen reviews of it on Digital SLRs.
I have the Tamron 18-250 Di II lens on my 20d and it is for APS-C sized sensors only.
I have a Nikon D40X and I am interested in this lens for wildlife and nature photography. In the D40X autofocus is supported with AF-S and AF-I lenses. Anyone know if this lens (Tamron SP AF200-500 F/5-6.3) would work with the aforementioned digital camera?
used this lens for the first time to day,with a Nikon D200 body.most of the focusing was done manually,as the subject a little egret,is very white.both the zoom and the focus,were very positive,and easy to use,and after a bit more use,i am sure my photos will improve.
Good News for those of us with film cameras and FX sensors! This lens works fine on 35mm and full frame digital Cameras.
To quote Tamron; Di (Digitally Integrated) "Lenses designed for superior use with digital SLR cameras and conventional cameras."
The dI II series is only for the APS sized digital sensors.
ps,i printed of an A3 enlargement from one of the photos,the D was set to 800asa the shutter speed was 1/800 f/16 fl 750mm because of cropped sensor.and boy was i surprise,it is a real cracker.the detail is so good, i can`t wait to get it framed.
I have shot this lens hand held, and using a tripod/monopod support.
IN USE:
I can definitely say, with the lens hood, it is a bit daunting to hand hold. Once the psychological issue of its size is overcome, it really is no real different to holding my EF 400mm f/5.6L USM.
The downside in using this great-ranged zoom lens is that the focus ring is in a damned awkward place. Right up near the camera body mount, behind the zoom ring (which is huge and well thought out).
Manual focussing is difficult when hand-held, due to the small rings position. I found that I had to use my pinky finger and thumb, whilst supporting the zoom ring with the other three fingers outstretched.
Minimum focus distance is amazing. At around 6ft, butterflies are easy to capture with the surrounding shrubbery. At 500mm and f/11 allows for smoothing of the background and enhancing the subject. My prime 400mm has a MFD of about 13ft by comparison. This is ghastly.
There is no zoom creep after around 6 months of weekend use. Everything is very tight and structurally sound, including the tripod mount.
OPTICS:
I found this lens to have an acceptable quality at f/9, stopping down to f/11 can produce some very sharp results (conditions permitting). This goes for 350mm and above. I have processed a 500mm f/8 shot of a sparrow hawk, and managed an equivalent A3 print. It did take some hours, and many layers to clean up the 800 ISO image after repainting the lenses detail. The better option would have been to shoot at ISO 1600 @ f/11. This would have halved the processing, needing only a little noise reduction (camera dependant), contrast boost and sharpening.
The AF performance using an EOS 30D is one of my reasons for my bias toward f/11. It's a bit hit/miss with shallower depth of field. AF behaves fairly similarly to the EF 400mm f/5.6L USM with Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4x Teleplus converter. In bright sunlight reflecting off of bird box roofs, or from lake water, AF can be fooled, and focus can be off by about 3-5% of the distance...enough to not produce one sharp image. The EF prime can be fixed by removing the converter, the Tamron unfortunately, must be used in full manual.
Out-of-Focos ("Bokeh", "depth-of-field blur" etc) is a bit off putting, unless the background is far enough away. Unlike the EF 400mm f/5.6L, or 70-200mm f/2.8L lenses I own, which produce fading focus, the Tamron produces an almost shifted effect, whereby the out-of-focus objects tend to have a secondary edge. Stopping down to f/11 does increase dpeth of field, but also, tends to avoid this strange occurrence.
CA and flare are surprisingly well controlled. I have shot almost into the setting sun and have shot through tree cover, and there isn't really all that much of a problem. Yes there is a little of the Canon type (red/cyan) fringes, but not all that much, and easily correctable in PP.
TELECONVERTER:
Using the above Kenko Pro 300 DG 1.4x teleplus converter, there were no signs of extra image degradation. When a taped-pin converter was used at f/11 (f/16 equivalent), results were just the same as the were without the converter, only 140% larger. At 700mm f/16, it is a big problem for camera shake, but, on a sturdy tripod or monopod on a reasonably light day, the distance shots are fantastic!
FILTERS:
The 86mm thread is quite an expensive size to try and find (if you can) filters for. The lens was purchased with a Hoya UV filter (free bundle deal). I have proved to myself the Hoya Pro1 Digital UV filters are awful on my 70-200mm and 400mm lenses. I have switched to B+W filters for those lenses, and, in the case of the 400mm, I shot at f/7.1 to get consistent sharpness (Hoya installed), I can now shoot wide open consistently, just as if there was no filter present.
I have tested this lens both with and without the Standard Hoya filter. This filter does not exhibit the same image easily noticeable degredation that I experienced with other lenses. I have shot multiple test shots, and I would weight is 55:45 in favour of a naked lens, for focus accuracy. This maybe just this copy of lens. I have decided to recommend removing filters. - Which goes entirely against what Michael Marcus says:
"Performance Enhancement Tip For All Lenses:
To get the best performance from any lens, the owner should purchase a protective skylight 1A filter which also includes UV blocking. If your lens is already slightly "warm", get just a UV blocking filter. Spherical aberration (which causes softness) is strongest in the UV with any lens. Both film and most CCDs are sensitive in UV unless the digital camera manufacturer has incorporated UV blocking over the CCD. Anyway, doubling up on the UV blocking never hurts and can only improve sharpness and contrast.
- A UV filter really can hurt. OnIy use a filter if you feel you need the protection. If you are one of those people (like me) who does like to use a filter, make sure it is a good one, and TEST, TEST, and re-TEST to see if it is hurting your images.
Incidentally, this lens had been sent back to Intro2020 (Tamron, Kenko, Hoya importers). Initially it was dreadfully unusable at any focal length. It was calibrated, and returned quite promptly. They suggested using a polariser to help increase contrast. Now, seeing that a 77mm B+W CPL Kaeseman was over £100, I am not in a rush to kill even more light entering the lens. I cannot comment on the use of a polariser on this lens, except to say that you will loose another 1-2 stops, resulting in a usable f/13-18...hardly action stopping.
VERDICT:
I'd say this a strong performer for those who are on a budget and want something with a lot of power. You can get around the weaknesses in use, and are more than likely going to be tripod supported. With newer camera's supporting higher ISO's with less noise, this lens becomes even more usable. The optical performance is plenty capable of A3 prints when stopped down to f/11 or more, asking for only a little processing to really make wonderful photos.
Purchased this lens for use with my Nikon D80 & D90 it works beautifully with both - fast auto focus & pin point sharpness until extreme 500mm where I switch over to manual & anywhere around F8 to F11 & upwards will give as sharp an image as you would expect for a lens of this caliber & price range. For anyone on a budget & thinking about purchasing this lens DO IT! You won't be disappointed this is a wonderful lens & the lens lock switch at 200mm is a bonus. Tripod is a MUST folks!
.jpg)
