photo sharing and upload picture albums photo forums search pictures popular photos photography help login
Stephen Nickles | profile | all galleries >> Lens Evaluations >> Tamron 135/2.5 Adaptall MF tree view | thumbnails | slideshow

Tamron 135/2.5 Adaptall MF

TAM135_f2.8
TAM135_f2.8		 TAM135_f4.0
TAM135_f4.0		 TAM135_f5.6
TAM135_f5.6		 TAM135_f8.0
TAM135_f8.0
TAM135_f11
TAM135_f11		 TAM135_f16
TAM135_f16		 TAM135_f22
TAM135_f22		 tamron135_2.5.JPG
tamron135_2.5.JPG

comment | share
Dekie 23-Dec-2006 00:56
The 135 2.5 is sharper with better contrast and less flare ( better coatings ).
At 5.6 as sharp as my Min 85 1.4.
Guest 11-Mar-2006 01:30
Hi Stephen,
Just an observation, but may I suggest that you change the heading for this lens? The lens you have evaluated is the Tamron 135/2.8 not the 135/2.5. Other than that, my compliments on your work.

Regards,
Hakan
Stephen Nickles15-Nov-2005 11:28
Paul:

Thanks for your insight on this series. I will reshoot this series...when time permits...and attempt to duplicate the framing of the Zeiss 135 series...to permit a better comparison. Unfortunately my set up is not the most scientific...it started as a whim and grew somewhat...time of day and cloud cover is a definite problem.

Thanks.....ken
Paul 14-Nov-2005 04:47
I think you need to reshoot this series. The F/2.8 shot looks like its front focused. Just as important there is too much bright glaring light on the tree to the left. That light reduces the exposure for the test subjects and gives the impression of very poor bokeh. Your Zeiss 135 shot doesn't have the brightness in the background (and the tree is farther to the left). The background in those shots have less brightness than the test subjects.
click on thumbnails for full image