From: Mulperi on
Which one is better. Yes I know that Tamron AF 200-500 F5-6,3 Di LD IF is a
zoom lens and SONY 500/8 REFLEX is not but which one gives better photos.

--
Juha Heinonen
Seilimaki 17 B 8
02180 ESPOO
FINLAND
E-mail: juha.heinonen(a)pp2REMOVE.inet.fi
URL: http://personal.inet.fi/koti/juha.heinonen


From: nospam on
In article <zC1ok.275$T16.103(a)read4.inet.fi>, Mulperi
<juha.heinonen(a)pp2.inet.fi> wrote:

> Which one is better. Yes I know that Tamron AF 200-500 F5-6,3 Di LD IF is a
> zoom lens and SONY 500/8 REFLEX is not but which one gives better photos.

the tamron is a decent lens and will probably produce much better
images than a reflex lens.

although i haven't used the sony lens, mirror lenses as a rule don't
tend to be all that great (especially the cheap ones), with low
contrast images and donut shaped bokeh. it's also a fixed f/8 while
the tamron is a little faster at 500mm (f/6.3) and can stop down
further if necessary. on the other hand, the mirror lens is lighter in
weight and not as huge.
From: John Sheehy on
"Mulperi" <juha.heinonen(a)pp2.inet.fi> wrote in
news:zC1ok.275$T16.103(a)read4.inet.fi:

> Which one is better. Yes I know that Tamron AF 200-500 F5-6,3 Di LD IF
> is a zoom lens and SONY 500/8 REFLEX is not but which one gives
> better photos.

Mirror lenses (I am assuming that the Sony is one) have "donut" bokeh, IOW,
any point light source that is out of focus will be shaped like a donut.
Therefore, they only work well when most everything in the frame is at
about the same distance from the camera. "About" allows that infinity and
hundreds of feet are about the same, but not, say, 20 feet and 80 feet.



--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS(a)no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
From: Alan Browne on
Mulperi wrote:
> Which one is better. Yes I know that Tamron AF 200-500 F5-6,3 Di LD IF is a
> zoom lens and SONY 500/8 REFLEX is not but which one gives better photos.

I've seen some great reflex shots. You're giving up versatility for low
cost at 500mm.

Since variable speed zooms like the Tamrom you cite are typically
softest at the long I will go out on a limb here and bet that the Sony
lens is sharper at f/8 than the Tamron at 500mm and f/8.

Whether that means "better" depends on what you need from a lens.

As John Sheehy points out, OOF specular highlights (aka bokeh) will
render doughnut shaped highlights: you have to accept, compose in
consequence or avoid those situations. (There may be some compositions
where it is not seriously objectionable).

http://www.pbase.com/image/93687490
http://www.pbase.com/image/89173997
http://www.pbase.com/image/78100564

Personally, I would not buy a reflex ... but I'd like to try one some day.

I do suggest you look at these photos:

http://photo.net/equipment/tamron/200_500_Di/size2.jpg and read this
article:

http://photo.net/equipment/tamron/200_500_Di/size2.jpg and read the
conclusions.

Before considering the Tamron.

Perhaps neither lens is right for you ...

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
From: Richard on

"Mulperi" <juha.heinonen(a)pp2.inet.fi> wrote in message
news:zC1ok.275$T16.103(a)read4.inet.fi...
> Which one is better. Yes I know that Tamron AF 200-500 F5-6,3 Di LD IF is
> a zoom lens and SONY 500/8 REFLEX is not but which one gives better
> photos.

I've rarely seen a zoom in that range that is any good, outside of Nikon's
200-400 $5000+ monster. If the Sony is a good mirror lens, it can produce
excellent images, often completely free of colour aberration that effects
all but the most apochromatic of the refractive lenses.
I shot this with a Tamron 350mm mirror lens, it's a 50% reduction from
actual size.

http://www.pbase.com/andersonrm/image/99552245


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: Pricey little Nikon lens...
Next: 12mp vs 24mp - so what?