Tamron AF 19-35mm F3.5-4.5 A-mount lens reviews
reviews found: 12
 marco_palomar#45807 date: Jan-1-2022 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 3 build: 3 distortion: 3 flare control: 2 overall: 2.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | other wide lenses |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | light and small, enough sharp if stopped-down, useful for interiors photography, price. Fast AF. |
| negative: | lack of sharpness on borders until f/8, colors, distortion, flare control. Very cheap assambly. |
| comment: | I've this lens with its real constructor brand (Cosina). It gives a lot for its price and has more than enough quality to get good photos even at 42mpx, but don't ask for super-sharpness at the edges, nice colors, flare control and little distortion. Very cheap construction. |
; 61MP| MarcoZ#25506 date: Feb-27-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Non ho altre ottiche simili. |
| price paid: | €90 |
| positive: | Nitidezza centro immagine elevata con un contrasto più che buono. Gradevole resa cromatica per tutti i colori e le loro sfumature. Costruzione con buoni materiali che si presta anche ad un uso continuo e gravoso. Ghiere gommate ampie molto pratiche e resistenti. Con l'utilizzo di un adeguato paraluce non si hanno problemi di Clare, neanche in riprese controluce. |
| negative: | Leggero calo di nitidezza ai bordi estremi. Lievissime aberrazioni cromatiche percepibili soltanto a forti ingrandimenti |
| comment: | Obiettivo dall'ottimo rapporto qualità \prezzo. Consigliato per foto di paesaggio |
| chrishoek#10503 date: Sep-11-2012 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | tokina 20-35 sony 18-55 |
| price paid: | 99 euros new |
| positive: | sharp well built cheap |
| negative: | Large filter size |
| comment: | Nice lens, very underrated on this site. On my a35 it gives sharp pictures with nice colors. The built quality is quite well for a consumer lens and much better than the sony 18-55. |
| Vancouver#6787 date: Jan-20-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 3.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Many minolta + Sony lens |
| price paid: | 49 CAD$ new |
| positive: | Cheap work on FF |
| negative: | Sharpness 77 mm filter Built Short and less useful range on APSC |
| comment: | This lens is cheap. The big problem with it is the lack of sharpness. I shoot on APSC so the range is really uncomfortable. I agree with previous comments. It s no better than 18-70 kitty lens. I kept asking myself if 77mm filter is really necessary for this lens since the widest is only 19mm. Highly NOT-Recommended at any price point! |
| teemuy#6741 date: Jan-14-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 3 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL 1870 SAL 18200 Minolta 17-35 F2.8-4 D |
| price paid: | 100e |
| positive: | Solid feel, sharper than the kit lenses. |
| negative: | Distortion, flare. |
| comment: | No frills lens, cheap but solid. Mine reports as 18 mm in the wide end. Works with full frame/film although haven't tried with either. Got this as a replacement for the kit lenses and used fairly extensively at that time. Barrel distortion at the wide end is significant and color reproduction is not very impressive, but my copy is pleasingly sharp throughout the aperture range. |
| shendra#5381 date: May-14-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 3 overall: 3.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL 18-70mm |
| price paid: | 60 USD (used) |
| positive: | Nice for scenery Quick focusing affordable |
| negative: | Flare is rather disturbing Good only at F 7,1 and above |
| comment: | I am happy with the lens, although it is a bit tricky sometimes that we have to use the lens at F 7,1 and above, however it is in accordance to my type of picture where I always need a good depth of field. Indeed the quality of the picture is very sharp when we use F, 7,1 and above, NOT dissapointing at all! It is worth to be owned! |
| dca1213#4810 date: Feb-5-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 3.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | 18-70mm Kit Lens 35-70mm f4 Minolta 35-105mm Minolta Beercan |
| price paid: | 75 USD |
| positive: | Weight Build Wide end non rotating front element |
| negative: | Soft wide even stopped down. 77mm filters $$$. |
| comment: | After shooting more extensivly with this lens I felt that I should revise my review. I got this lens on ebay for $75 needing something on the wide end after I basically threw out my kit lens (garbage). This lens is no better then the kit 18-70mm plastic fantastic POS, it's not even close to the Minolta 35-70, 35-105 or the beercan in terms of IQ. My biggest disappointment with this lens is it's performance in the wide angle range (the wide range is the reason I bought it), at 19mm I need to be stopped down to f8 to get only fair results but overall it remains soft through f16. On the long end (long? 35mm?) it's pretty sharp wide open and much better after f5.6. Edge sharpness is poor at wide end, even on the subframe A200. The color and contrast are fairly good overall and for the price I paid it's pretty good performace in those areas. It's probably a mistake to compare it to the legacy Minolta glass but it is no better then the kit lens in sharpness, color and contrast. Mine also reports 18mm on exif. Printing at 8"x10" results are not real good. As others have noted the hood is a bit tricky to mount in reverse, and the red dot index mark for mounting can be difficult for my 56 year old eyes to find at times. All in all it's not a horrible lens if you are on a budget and need a wide. I seldom use it, my standard is the 35-70 Minolta f4 which is a sweet piece of glass. I will probably try to sell it and look for something better. Of course I may have a bad sample of this lens, but I would not recommend this lens for anything more than casual snapshots. |
| gtfourdreams#4782 date: Feb-1-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 3 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sony 18-70mm kit lens minolta 70-210mm beer can vivitar 19-35mm 3.5-4.5 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | - decent build in my opinion - nice wide angles - works with film/full frame |
| negative: | - mine was a little bit soft - colors are generally washed out, photoshop fixes it easily - expensive filters |
| comment: | Overall this lens is great for the price I paid. (Under $100 used with hood and original box, glass in great condition.) However, I may have a bad copy as the colors are bad and the sharpness could be better. Compared to the vivitar, this particular unit seemed to be a bit softer in the middle but sharper at the edges. The petal hood is huge and works pretty well. The front element is fixed during focus so it would work with different linear type filters. the build is pretty good, at least as good as the kit lens if not better. the focus is much quieter than the vivitar's. CA control was a bit better on this Tamron than the vivitar, and noticeably better than the kit lens. i bought both this tamron and the vivitar at the same time (for the same price) and returned the vivitar. I gave it a low color rating, because the pictures I get are usually flat, washed out, and boring. It's nothing Photoshop or Adobe's Raw editor can't fix. If you're used to the beer can's saturated colors, this lens is the opposite. |
| fenderpilot#4259 date: Oct-19-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 3 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 28mm f2.8 Minolta 28-85mm f3.5-4.5 Minolta 35-105mm f3.5-4.5 Sony DT 18-70mm f3.5-5.6 Minolta 50mm f1.7 and 70-210mm f4 for color comparison. |
| price paid: | 99 USD (new) |
| positive: | Price The wide angle, especially on my Minolta 7000 but nice on my a350. Sharpnes Color |
| negative: | Hood it a bit cumbersome, especially when not in use. mounting - a little hard due to location of the red dot. Flare, but only when shooting directly towards the sun. |
| comment: | I bought this lens because I wasn't all that happy with the 18-70mm kit lens that came with the camera. Reading the reviews here I wasn't too sure about it but for $99 on eBay I figured I could sell it and recoup the price. The range works well with the other lenses I own. The sharpness is better than I expected. Shooting matching scenes with this lens and my 35-105mm/28mm/28-85mm, the sharpness is very close. It actually seems sharper than my Minolta 28mm f2.8. This lens outshines the kit lens for both sharpness and color. As for color, if I stop this lens down -.33 to -.66 EV the color is an exact match with my other Minolta lenses, all original Maxxum lenses. The color this lens produces is actually better than my 28-85mm lens. I've only had problems with flare on one shoot due to having to shoot almost directly into the sun. In this case, the hood was no help because of the angle, but in all my other outdoor shots I've had no problems. I almost didn't buy this lens because it was rated at 3.87 overall at the time and only 4.0 for sharpness but I'm glad I did. I would buy it again, especially for the price. |
| Tritone#3872 date: Jul-21-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 3 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | KM 50/1.7 KM 28/2.8 KM Beercan KM 28-85 |
| price paid: | 200 CDN (NIB) |
| positive: | Nice focusing mechanism. Sharp, esp stopped down.No sign of vignetting on A700.BEautiful colours. A nice usable range for street photog. CHEAP |
| negative: | Wide distortion. Cheap plastic feel. |
| comment: | My A700 came as body only and my lens lineup lacked the wide end. Fulfills a need on my end for a wide angle lens -normal. It has lovely colours and creates a nice pleasant wide view. Don't use it for shooting brickwalls. I often use it for walkaround. I give it a 3 on build. main body of the lens is solid and the hood is great and effective. Problem is there is a light, cheap plastic feel to the bayonette for the hood and the front body of the lens. Not quite as sharp as my 28/2.8 but more flexible |
| marshall#2272 date: May-7-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | $180 (usd) new |
| positive: | Great for the price. |
| negative: | Wish it was wider. |
| comment: | You can see shots of my first outing with this lens @ http://www.flickr.com/photos/marshall_keith/sets/72157600186976694/detail/ |
| craigchinohills#1088 date: Aug-13-2006 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta AF 28-105 3.5-4.5 Minoklta 28-70/2.8 G |
| price paid: | $139.95 US (after re |
| positive: | Inexpensive - a viable alternative to the "kit' lens and 18-xxx zooms for a simple wide angle |
| negative: | Inexpensive - light construction (however, not bought to be brutalized) |
| comment: | Updated ratings. Preliminary assessment is that it performs better than the 28-105, seems sharper and to be more contrasty. I'm not sure if it is or isn't the same design as several others, seems to be some differences in weigfht and pictures. This was my first outing with it and not a valid testing session, mostly checking for function or obvious problems. After more outings I've had more time with it, no surprises and no obvious shortcomings. Hard to tell on flare control as I haven't really tried it under flare inducing conditions but have had some more or less towards the sun with no problems or obvious loss of contrast either. Haven't really pixel peeped but in a subjective sense, happer with this one that I was with the "kit" which it was competing with for moderate and cheap wide angle range extension. Reports 18mm in exif data. |
reviews found: 12
rating summary
- total reviews: 12
- sharpness: 3.96
- color: 4.25
- build: 3.58
- distortion: 3.67
- flare control: 3.50
- overall: 3.79
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login