A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Modern Film Cameras > Tamron Adaptall 24mm f2.5

Featured Equipment Deals

Creating Digital Frames and Borders Read More

Creating Digital Frames and Borders

Learn from a photo.net expert how to create digital frames and borders for your digital photography. Includes example images and illustrations.

Latest Equipment Articles

The Week in Photography News Read More

The Week in Photography News

November 15-21, 2014: Hear the latest goings-on in the photography world, from product releases to event and campaign announcements and more.

Latest Learning Articles

Introduction to Creating an Album in Lightroom - Part I (Video Tutorial) Read More

Introduction to Creating an Album in Lightroom - Part I (Video Tutorial)

Learn to create an album in the Book Tab of Lightroom that you can publish and present to clients.


Tamron Adaptall 24mm f2.5

Mike Gammill , Sep 10, 2011; 02:31 p.m.

This lens could go in either the CMC or MFC forum, but since I took the photos posted with the lens attached to my Pentax ZX-5 I will post here. Tamron apparently didn't sell as many of these lenses as they hoped since even after more than a decade this lens can be bought as NOS from several vendors. Another reason for using the lens with the ZX-5 was I wanted to see how the KA adaptall mount would work with the ZX-5. With the camera set at A and the lens at minimum aperture (f22) the camera provides program autoexposure. Like my 50mm f2 SMC A, it displays aperture and shutter info in the finder. Film was Kodak Gold 200 (found it 4 rolls for $6 at CVS).

Responses


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Mike Gammill , Sep 10, 2011; 02:33 p.m.

Here is a photo of the ZX-5 with the Tamron Adaptall 24mm f2.5 attached. Charge was down on my digital camera so I used my Blackberry to take a photo for the expected camera porn.


So-so quality Blackberry image of ZX-5 and 24mm Tamron

Mike Gammill , Sep 10, 2011; 02:35 p.m.

Now for some results. I found the lens to be quite sharp, but more tendency to flare than my Sigma 24mm f2.8, but I do not have the hood for the Tamron.


Playground, program auto set for center weighted metering

Mike Gammill , Sep 10, 2011; 02:37 p.m.

More shots, to show the wide FOV.


Take me home, country roads, mid afternoon

Mike Gammill , Sep 10, 2011; 02:39 p.m.

This is the two lane road that the Christian school I teach at is located. Nice, relaxing drive each day.


The "Silver Fox" nickname for my '86 Chevy

Mike Gammill , Sep 10, 2011; 02:43 p.m.

The above photo is the typical foreground emphasizing effect the wide angle lenses are famous (or infamous) for. All photos, BTW, were in center weighted mode, which I think the camera probably defaults to when used with manual focus lenses. I know the early Maxxums would switch from matrix to CW when MF was used.


Back home showing another painted wall

Mike Gammill , Sep 10, 2011; 02:45 p.m.

Above photo shows that the lens does have some barrel distortion at close range.


Showing off flare

Mike Gammill , Sep 10, 2011; 02:48 p.m.

I would say this lens is about "middle of the pack" on flare. Better control of flare than my Kiron 24mm f2, but not as good as my Sigma 24mm f2.8. Definitely a keeper and I can use it on any of my SLRs since I have Adaptall mounts to fit all.

Craig Dickson , Sep 10, 2011; 05:25 p.m.

That Tamron shows an impressive lack of geometric distortion for so wide an angle. Flare, as you say, could be better, but I've seen worse.

Lex Jenkins , Sep 13, 2011; 03:38 a.m.

I've had that Tamron Adaptall 24/2.5 for several years. It was a beater when I bought it, a rental from an Austin camera shop. I think I paid $25. At that price it's an outstanding value. In absolute terms, it's still a very good lens, sharp and contrasty even wide open. I've used it on my Nikon film and digital cameras, and on my former Olympus OM gear.

It is vulnerable to ghosting flare, but no worse than any other 20mm-28mm prime of that era. It's remarkably resistant to veiling flare, even aimed directly into the setting sun. (Note the bottom photo in the attachment - I only repositioned the camera very slightly to block the sun. Veiling flare isn't too bad for that situation.) My much more expensive 28/3.5 PC-Nikkor is more prone to veiling flare, tho' less prone to ghosting.

I actually like the distinct shapes of the flare with this lens, especially the piston or hourglass shapes, that I've used the flare artifacts produced with this lens to copy onto other photos where I didn't want to use generic "lens flare" from my digital editing software. Most fake lens flare options in photo editing software lack the variety of shapes usually seen in true lens flare.

It's a difficult lens to fit with a non-OEM lens shade. The focus ring is a little too far forward on the barrel, and tends to interfere with the generic third party hoods I've tried, hindering infinity focus. Same problem with some filters - I have only one red filter that doesn't hinder infinity focus on this lens.

The Tamron Adaptall 17/3.5 with built in filters is another excellent value in a third party manual focus lens. Kinda wish I'd kept that one - it was much better corrected for barrel distortion at 17mm on my DX format dSLR than the popular 18-70 DX Nikkor at 18mm. Looking back at my b&w street photos from years ago, I got a lot of good use from the 17/3.5 Tamron on my FM2N and OM-1. It was a real mistake to sell it.



Top photo at f/3.8; bottom at f/5.6. Each taken about one minute apart, with only slight shift in position to use a branch to block the sun.


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses