SONY 500/8 REFLEX or Tamron AF 200-500 F5-6,3 Di LD IF

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:
URL: http://personal.inet.fi/koti/juha.heinonen

In article , 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.

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.

"Mulperi" wrote in
:

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

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.

Alan Browne wrote:

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:


CORRECTION:

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

Richard wrote:
"Mulperi" wrote in message
...
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



I've owned three examples of the 50mm AF mirror over the years -
Minolta, but these are exactly what Sony is now rebranding - and while
they are a convenient lens, I've never found the sharpness all that
stunning compared to the earlier non-AF mirror lens from Minolta. I
guess the compromise of putting in some more glass elements, to enable
the AF and closer focusing, takes the edge off a pure mirror design.

I still have one but it is lens for special purposes, while the Tamron
200-500mm is a fairly versatile all round sports and wildlife lens and
will (at f9, which closer to the true T-stop of the mirror lens) produce
better results most of the time.

David

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 11 Aug 2008 20:50:39 GMT, in rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
"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.

First question. Will your body even AF an f/8 max aperture lens, if that
is
at all important to you?

Yes they do - unique selling point of the lens.

"Mulperi" wrote in message
...
Which one is better. Yes I know that Tamron AF 200-500 F5-6,3 Di LD IF is
a zoom lens

This does not appear to be a full frome lens - this means it won't work on a
35mm film back or Sony's up and coming full frame digital. OTOH this will
make the lens lighter - under normal circumstances this would be a very
heavy lens.

The AF may be poor at 300+ on the zoom.

and SONY 500/8 REFLEX is not but which one gives better photos.

This is Minolta's 500mm reflex with a Sony badge. It is designed to work
with the Minolta / Sony cameras and will AF properly - useful because things
out of focus in a reflex lens appear torroidal. Image quality should be
good, since as a mirror lens there are only reflections, so chromatic
abberation will not occur.

Should work well with a doubler (giving f16 at 1000mm)

The lens is light weight.

So I would recommend a Tamron 28 - 200 or 28 - 300 plus a new or second hand
500mm reflex.



PS back in the manual days Minolta did a 250mm reflex. Scarcely any bigger
than standard prime lens and very light. Lovely if one didn't want to take
a full kit.


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

In article , David Kilpatrick
wrote:

I've owned three examples of the 50mm AF mirror over the years -

that's a tiny mirror lens

In article , R. Mark Clayton
wrote:

"Mulperi" wrote in message
...
Which one is better. Yes I know that Tamron AF 200-500 F5-6,3 Di LD IF is
a zoom lens

This does not appear to be a full frome lens - this means it won't work on a
35mm film back or Sony's up and coming full frame digital. OTOH this will
make the lens lighter - under normal circumstances this would be a very
heavy lens.

i don't know where you got the idea that it's not a full frame lens.
it most definitely is. also, full frame lenses that long won't be any
lighter than a dx version. it's at the shorter focal lengths where
cropped image circles make a difference.

The AF may be poor at 300+ on the zoom.

and SONY 500/8 REFLEX is not but which one gives better photos.

This is Minolta's 500mm reflex with a Sony badge. It is designed to work
with the Minolta / Sony cameras and will AF properly - useful because things
out of focus in a reflex lens appear torroidal. Image quality should be
good, since as a mirror lens there are only reflections, so chromatic
abberation will not occur.

Should work well with a doubler (giving f16 at 1000mm)

ugh.

PS back in the manual days Minolta did a 250mm reflex. Scarcely any bigger
than standard prime lens and very light. Lovely if one didn't want to take
a full kit.

actually a number of companies made 300mm f/5.6 mirror lenses. they're
*really* small considering they're 300mm, and f/5.6 isn't that slow
(most consumer zooms are f/5.6 at the long end).