Thank you for the input and for the sample photos.
Notice the water droplets on the sign; see how they appear comet-shaped? That's a lens aberration called coma ... not a good thing.
Actually, from both lenses. The Tamron (assuming it is the 70-300 USM, not an older 75-300) shot at 135mm and f8 lacks corner sharpness, especially to the left, as this is an FF lens on APS-C this should be sharp across the frame.
100% crop of this photo:Ok, no brick wall but I hope that a sign with lettering and a wood fence will do.
All photos were shot on a tripod. OSS / Ibis was turned OFF. Used a wired shutter release.
300mm @ f/8
There may be several other issues at play here....one, these may not be sharp because they were not manually focused, two, a wet sign [bright white and red] that has extreme sunlight shining on the water drops can create a false refraction [especially blurred] and third, we don't know about distance and line of sight variables. Was there an adapter involved? This does look like a dodgy lens nonetheless...100% crop of this photo:Ok, no brick wall but I hope that a sign with lettering and a wood fence will do.
All photos were shot on a tripod. OSS / Ibis was turned OFF. Used a wired shutter release.
300mm @ f/8
100% crop of 300mm, f/8 photo of sign.
The fuzzy/shifted edges together with the "V" shaped coma are a very bad sign.
I just checked with my SAL70300G (poured water on a leaf to form droplets, 300mm, f/8, clear sunny day) and my copy is absolutely (100% sure, no way Jose) nothing like this.
My vote goes to returning/exchanging the lens.
--
Lance H
They were all AF shots.
Thank you for the input. I will try to do some research on this to confirm. I don't want to jump to conclusions.
Thank you for the input. Yes, the Tamron is not a particularly sharp lens (and yes, it is the 70-300 full frame VS SP lens). I will try to use the tamron on one of my Nikon bodies.
Thanks for the note.
Thanks for the note.
Unnecessary. I do my A mount lens testing with an LA-EA1. At worst a glassless adapter can add some tilt or change the back focus. It is not going to cause aberrations.Thanks for the note.
Unfortunately I don't have an A Mount camera to test on
I will stop by the used camera store and see if I can test it on one of their cameras. Don't know if they will let me though. Also don't know if they have an A Mount camera in stock.
Seeing as you have a Sony A65, why would you test A-mount lenses on an adapter? Anything between a lens and camera mount will have some effect in one way or another. In OTM's case, the adapter might be keeping his lens from producing 'sharp' images.Unnecessary. I do my A mount lens testing with an LA-EA1. At worst a glassless adapter can add some tilt or change the back focus. It is not going to cause aberrations.Thanks for the note.
Unfortunately I don't have an A Mount camera to test on
I will stop by the used camera store and see if I can test it on one of their cameras. Don't know if they will let me though. Also don't know if they have an A Mount camera in stock.
The A65 actually has something in the optical path--the SLT mirror. Sony makes their adapters quite well--as well as the mirror box/lens mount on an SLT.Seeing as you have a Sony A65, why would you test A-mount lenses on an adapter? Anything between a lens and camera mount will have some effect in one way or another. In OTM's case, the adapter might be keeping his lens from producing 'sharp' images.Unnecessary. I do my A mount lens testing with an LA-EA1. At worst a glassless adapter can add some tilt or change the back focus. It is not going to cause aberrations.Thanks for the note.
Unfortunately I don't have an A Mount camera to test on
I will stop by the used camera store and see if I can test it on one of their cameras. Don't know if they will let me though. Also don't know if they have an A Mount camera in stock.
