please help me evaluate a lens --> compare photos

If anybody on this newsgroup would be willing I would appreciate it if
you would help me see if I should keep a lens I just purchased, by
comparing it with my standard Canon EOS AF lens. The link below shows
comparison photos from each lens at 3 different zoom focal lengths. To
keep the "study" unbiased I am simply calling the two lenses X and Y.
Then lets see how many people here on this newsgroup pick out the Tamron
lens (Is it X or Y?)-- the allegedly 'crappy' lens according to some,
but also given good reviews by a recent magazine and other users. Any
help, input, feedback appreciated! Thank you.

http://artbox.stormpages.com/lenscompare

 

Were these hand-held?
They both look rather blurry to me.
If so, your comparison is unusable.
Clearly the shots are not framed identically.

 

lens y is the canon right?

 

My eyes and my monitor, Y seems better but very hard to tell from small
pics.

Jean

 

I prefer the results from lens Y. Neither set of images
looks very sharp though.Is lens Y the Tamron lens?
If so, then it is not so bad for a lens with over a
10:1 zoom ratio. Someone else mentioned that the Canon
35-80 is one of the lower quality Canon lenses. It would be
better if images of a few different subjects were shown,
and in higher resolution.Why did you do the comparison
at ISO 800, and not ISO 100? A comparison at ISO 100,
especially with a few different subjects would have been
much more revealing.

 

Not really. None of the images look very sharp. Especially for the purposes
of comparing the shapness of lenses, a steady tripod should be used.
The images also show that your hands aren't as steady as you might wish,
and that you should try to shoot at 1/125th of a second or faster when
hand holding a camera using these lenses.

 

The lens on the left seems to offer better highlight separation and
sharpness, but using 800 speed film is not the best way to run a test.

 

1. Use a tripod
2. Use 100 speed film
3. Lens x looks a little better to me, but neither is impressive

 

I would prefer the Y

 

yes, Y is the Tamron.

yes I will try and do a better test in the coming days. Hey I need some
slack because it is hot and humid here in the midwest and tough to get
motivated to do photography in a hot human environment-- but a cold front
just moved in so I should have better energy for running some more tests.

ISO 800 gave more flexibility for fstop and shutter (I normally do lots
of photography as ISO 3200 with Ilford Delta 3200 Professional b&w film).
But I will try a retesting at ISO 100 or nor more than 400 with lots of
light and a tripod.

 

I just do not want the images to get too big for download since some
might just have 56k modems, not broadband. Also computer screen
resolution is only 100dpi, far below what an actual print could look
like. But at least we can compare apples to apples, in spite of
limitations of screen res.

I thought the lenses that come with EOS Rebel film cameras *are* canon
lenses, at least they have the Canon brand on them. Are you saying they
are not Canon lenses, or that Canon is bundling crappy lenses with their
cameras at a risk of losing their brandname reputation?

 

Y is the Tamron 10x zoom lens.

 

If you post crops, you don't have that problem.
Post, say, 800 pixel wide crops from the full resolution images. That
way we see the full resolution of the lenses.

 

I tried to reply to the e-mail that you sent, but it was returned. I
currently own
a Tamron 28-200mm AF Super LD lens that I have been very
happy with. You can see some photo's taken with this lens at the link
below. Sure, it's not "Pro" quality, but it has gotten me many compliments.
Most of the photos on photo.net are handheld.Also note that most of
close-ups
are taken with a super cheap (under
$200) Vivitar Macro lens; again I have been very happy with it.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/user?user_id=391298

 

But some of the user reviews of the alleged "crappy" Tamron lens said that the image was soft or out of
focus on the edges, which would be lost with a crop, unless i just post a
crop that is on the edge.

 

Your photos look nice to me. I suppose some supercritical photographers
can find things to criticize about the sharpness and such (I am not
talking composition now, just picture technical quality)-- but I am
beginning to think that some people are just a bit overly anal retentive
in analyzing lenses. I think more of a photo has to do with the subject,
composition, lighting, adjustments in brightness and contrast. I forget
his name (he is legendary), but there is this really old photographer who
has been doing photos for LIFE magazine since forever, and he still uses
his cheapo manual camera that is about 50 years old-- no fancy autofocus,
no partial metering settings, no aspherical lenses, etc. etc. The point
is his photos stand on their own because of subject, composition,
lighting. Perhaps we would all do better worrying less about lenses and
getting on with composing good photos?

 

Try taping a newspaper to a wall, the put the camera on a steady tripod
and set it to the 100 ISO mode. That should be very revealing about
lens sharpness.

 

On Fri, 22 Aug 2003 16:58:46 -0500, JK wrote:

...

Good idea, I will try that!

 

Of course you post crops of the areas described in your evaluation.
Most reviews include the center and edges.

 

PS

You also have to have detail to be recorded in all parts of the images.
The best way to do this is to use resolution test targets.
Porters Camera usually has them. Someone also has said that Edmonds
Scientific has them.