Tamron AF 70-210mm F 3.5-4.5 A-mount lens reviews

reviews found: 6   
reviewer#34765 date: Jan-31-2017
sharpness: 3
color: 3
build: 1
distortion: 3
flare control: 3
overall: 2.6
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:minolta beercan
price paid:
missing
positive:rare (so people don't waste their money often)
looks nice as a decoration piece? ha ha ha
negative:rare
most seem to have internal issues
comment:i write this review simply to serve as a warning to potential buyers. i have held three copies of this lens in my hands. all three had visible haze on an element deep inside the lens. that is why i score the build only a 1. aside from that, the build is typical old school metal and would score high for build. i had one that was absolutely immaculate. a really beautiful vintage lens. it obviously had not been used much if ever. but it still had a hazy element like the other two i had. because of this problem, none of the three copies i tried were capable of proper AF.

i am in love with its little brother, the even more rare 35-135mm. i have one i use and one that is still new in the box! that is what prompted me to give this lens a shot. but after three failed attempts to procure a good copy, i have lost all interest in ever laying eyes on one again. clearly this model has an internal shortcoming when it comes to longevity. you've been warned.

confirm operation before purchase! and for God's sake don't pay much for this lens.
reviewer#12155 date: Mar-4-2015
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 5
flare control: 4
overall: 4.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 70-210s (all versions)
Minolta 75-300 f4.5-5.6 Big Beercan
Minolta 75-300 f4.5-5.6 'New'
price paid:52 GBP
positive:Sharp when stopped down a touch
Colour and contrast
Quality Build
negative:Needs hood to combat flare
Purple fringing at larger apertures
Rare; hood difficult to source
comment:Very good lens; PF slightly worse than other lenses compared to; very sharp f6.3 and above.
reviewer#9381 date: Sep-3-2011
sharpness: 4.5
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 5
flare control: 5
overall: 4.7
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Minolta 100-200
Tamron 18-250
Tamron 17-50
price paid:
missing
positive:Build Quality
Sharpness
Bokeh
Relatively fast indoors for this price
Quick focusing
negative:Purple Fringing
Hard to find
comment:This is a gem of a lens for the money. In my view, it gives the Beercan a run for the money and really is a great value. I had this lens in the late 1980's and used it on a Minolta Maxxum 3000i and decided I would get one for the heck of it. I am pleasantly surprised that this lens works so well and costs so little.

If you can find a good copy (mine is mint) you will not be disappointed.
reviewer#6930 date: Feb-19-2010
sharpness: 3.5
color: 4
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.1
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Beercan
MinO 100-200mm f4.5
price paid:Free
positive:Free from my father
Built like a tank
Nice images
negative:Heavy
Infinity focus issue
comment:My father gave up on SLRs and gave me his kit, which included this lens.

It is noticeably heavier than the Beercan, and I dare say better built. It produces nice images, but my copy does not focus to infinity, hence the sharpness score.

I have not noticed any distortion. Flare is typical for this vintage of lens, that is to say significant, but no worse than the Beercan. Color is just a little cooler than the Beercan, but still a little warm.

It's a mice lens, but the Beercan and 100-200mm are better.
reviewer#6307 date: Nov-1-2009
sharpness: 4.5
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 5
flare control: 5
overall: 4.9
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I used to own this lens
compared to:-Minolta AF 70-210 f4
-Tokina SD AF 70-210 f4-5.6
-Quantaray AF 70-210 f4-5.6
price paid:90 usd (ex) with sh
positive:-Metal build
-Compact compared to beer can
-Hood

negative:-could be faster

-hard to find
comment:My lens at the beginning had an AF issue. when i turned on the camera the AF didn't wanted to start working. After turning zoom in and out it somehow started to work.
Also didn't liked the big label on it.
On A300 it seemed to working better than mine A100 without AF issue.
reviewer#2339 date: May-22-2007
sharpness: 4
color: 5
build: 5
distortion: 4
flare control: 4
overall: 4.4
tested on:
  • film camera:Film camera
  • APS-C: 6MP6 MP; 10MP10 MP; 12MP12 MP; 14MP14 MP; 16MP16 MP; 20MP20 MP; 24MP24 MP
  • full frame: 12MP12 MP; 24MP24 MP; 36MP36 MP; 42MP42 MP; 61MP61 MP
ownership:I own this lens
compared to:Tam 17-50
Vivitar 100mm macro
Sigma 70-300 apo macro (not DG)
price paid:USD 75 (used)
positive:All metal build / good feel / compact
Good colour and contrast
negative:Heavy-ish
hard to find
comment:Overall, this is a good lens with no major faults. I'm especially pleased with the contrast and colour.

Its sharpness is optimal about f8-f11 but it is perfectly usable wide open imo. Not as good as the 17-50 or 100mm but better than my Sigma, which I sold because it seems too soft/flat/washed out to me.

The tele end has slight CA but again it's minor and unless I want to heavily crop I don't feel the need to correct it. There is a slight brown-purple on high contrast edges which is visible at 100% crop.

Flare control is good but it's not a 'digital' lens so it's possible to get ghosting.

The bokeh for distant points of light is good - they go creamier from the centre out just as they should with no funny halos or other distracting effects but it's not as progressive as the Vivitar. Sharp background lines are a little busier but still good. Not as good as the Vivitar but much better than the Sigma.

Macro is fine at 1.3.8 / 1.1m.

It doesn't hunt except for v low light and usually snaps into focus pretty fast. With the lens cap on, it takes about 1.5 seconds to zoom all the way through it's range and back again. Not that speedy but okay. Focusing is a little bit noisier than the Tam 17-50 but not much .

My example is not perfect and needs servicing (zoom sticks at the tele end, some dust on the rear element) but even with this in mind I can say my example is a reasonably good lens and better than the Sigma, which was mint.
reviews found: 6   

rating summary

lens image
  • total reviews: 6
  • sharpness: 4.00
  • color: 4.33
  • build: 4.33
  • distortion: 4.33
  • flare control: 4.17
  • overall: 4.23

to add your review
you need to login

Dyxum.com - Home of the alpha system photographer
In memory of Cameron Hill - brettania