Lens Speed Test

I was at a photo trade show recently looking for "deals" on cameras and lenses. I was looking for equipment to test for my web site and auctioning them afterwards. I found a Tamron 200-400mm f-5.6 in great condition for $280. I had already tested this lens before, but I purchased it anyway because the price was low and I knew it was a popular zoom and I could easily sell it for a little more than I had paid for it. When I got home, I put the lens on my desk and decided to check my e-mails and examine the lens later. As always, a lot of the e-mails I had received was about cameras and lenses. Most of you want to know how good your lenses are and if upgrading to professional fast optics would give better results. I took a look at the Tamron 200-400mm f-5.6 zoom and got an idea. I could run a test with this zoom and my 200mm f-2.8 and 300mm f-2.8 lenses to compare results. I know this is not a fair comparison. I believe lenses in the same class should be compared, for instance, Tamron 200-400mm and Sigma 135-400mm. However, since some of you had requested more reviews on more affordable lenses, I decided to run this test just to see how good a less expensive zoom can perform against two fast professional lenses. Besides, some of you had complained that a few of my reports were unfair, especially comparisons between amateur and pro lenses. I stand by all my reviews, but respect your opinions. This web site is aimed at all photographers, beginners to professionals. I realize that pro lenses are beyond the budget of many amateurs. I try to include reviews and test reports on all types of equipment, amateur and professional,  and give you my honest opinion without favoring any manufacturer. As you all know, fast lenses cost more. Tamron 200-400mm f-5.6 sells for about $600 new. A 200mm f-2.8 sells for $900 and a 300mm f-2.8 can cost up to $4500. Does the extra cost get you a better lens? Lets see.

I took the three lenses and went out on a clear day looking for whatever I could find to shoot for this test. I used two cameras: one loaded with Fujichrome Provia 100 slide and the other with Kodak Gold 200 print film. Provia is my favorite fast slide film. I regularly use it with my 200mm f-2.8 and 300mm f-2.8 lenses. I know Provia's characteristics and its speed is just perfect for a slower Tamron telephoto zoom. I used the Kodak Gold 200 because its speed makes this film a popular choice among print film users. I also wanted to scan the images later to compare results made by all three lenses. I have been experimenting with print films for scanning and had some idea how Kodak Gold 200 would perform for this task.

I used a tripod for all test shots. I shot the same subjects wide open with all three lenses as well as stopping down to f-11 and everything in between. I didn't go any slower than f-11 since telephoto lenses are rarely used at small f-stops. I was more concerned about wide f-stops than anything else. Tamron lens would definitely be used at f-5.6 maximum aperture most of the time, especially for sports and wildlife photography. My 200mm f-2.8 and 300mm f-2.8 lenses could easily be stop down to f-5.6 without loosing too much light. Stopping these faster optics down to f-5.6 makes them even sharper. Any lens closed down one or two stops becomes sharper. I used the Tamron at 200mm setting and f-5.6, f-8, and f-11. I shot the same scene with my 200mm at f-2.8, f-4, f-5.6, f-8, and f-11. I did the same thing when testing the 300mm f-2.8 and Tamron at 300mm focal length. For the fun of it, I attached a 1.4X teleconverter to my 200mm f-2.8 lens which made it into a 280mm f-4 lens. Close enough for a 300mm comparison test. To test the 400mm setting of the Tamron, I attached a 2X teleconverter to my 200mm f-2.8 (400mm f-5.6) and the 1.4X teleconverter to my 300mm f-2.8 (420mm f-4). I shot wide open and then at smaller f-stops.

When I processed the films, I examined the slides on a light box and scanned the negatives to see the results. I wanted to see how well each lens performed at maximum aperture. Since the Tamron is two stops slower than my 200mm and 300mm lenses, I didn't compare the results against the 200mm and 300mm shots taken at f-5.6. This would make the test very unfair. What I did was to test each and every shot separately to see how well each lens performed at different apertures. My 200mm performed excellent at all apertures. This lens is the sharpest lens I have ever owned. Between f-5.6 and f-11, the 200mm lens becomes so sharp that you can actually count the feathers on a bird. Tamron performed very well at 200mm. It can definitely produce professional results at 200mm setting even shot wide open.

It would have been impossible for me to tell the difference between the test shots I took with the 200mm f-2.8 and 1.4X teleconverter and those I took with the 300mm f-2.8 lens if I had not taken notes while testing the lenses. I would have never known which lens was used for which shot. Results were razor sharp at all apertures. Tamron performed great at 300mm setting producing sharp and contrasty images. Tamron's telephoto zoom can be used for serious work producing images that would satisfy any professional and their clients.





From top to bottom : Minolta Maxxum 200mm f-2.8 with 1.4 teleconverter, 300mm f-2.8, Tamron 200-400mm f-5.6 All shots taken with Minolta Maxxum 7, Fuji Provia. All shots shown here were taken at maximum aperture.

My 300mm f-2.8 and 1.4X teleconverter produced the best results for 400mm test. I was not surprised. Test shots were excellent with no loss of sharpness visible even though a teleconverter was attached. The 200mm performed very good with the 2X teleconverter with some loss of corner sharpness at f-5.6. Tamron 200-400mm also performed well at 400mm. Results were close to the 200mm and 2X teleconverter combination. At f-11 all three lenses are at their best.

This test proved to me that lens speed is not as important as it used to be. Modern lenses and current fast films are so good that professional results can be obtained with less expensive zooms that can rival top of the line professional lenses. Believe it or not, I enjoyed working with the Tamron 200-400mm more than my 200mm and 300mm lenses. This zoom is compact yet very sturdy. It was very comfortable to carry and the built-in tripod mount makes it easy to use for vertical shots. I could also go from 200mm to 400mm and everything in between without having to change lenses. My 200mm lens lacks a tripod collar. I use Bogen "L" bracket for quick vertical shots. Although it is a very sharp lens even with teleconverters attached, It is not as convenient to use as zooms. My 300mm is big and heavy. It is a lens I try "Not" to use unless I absolutely have to. I use it for larger mammals and smaller birds with teleconverters. I can tell you that I feel comfortable using all three lenses knowing I can get quality results in long focal lengths with any of them. I ran this test to see if a more affordable telephoto zoom can produce quality results for serious work, not to see if the Tamron could match the quality of the 200mm f-2.8 and 300mm f-2.8 lenses. The f-2.8 aperture of the 200mm and 300mm lenses gives brighter viewing and the extra two stops let me use faster shutter speeds in low light. However, today's ISO 100 and 200 films are so good that the maximum f-5.6 aperture of the Tamron 200-400mm and similar zooms is no longer a problem. Current ISO 100 slide films match the grain and sharpness of ISO 50 slides. I believe ISO 50 slide films will become obsolete in the near future. ISO 200 print films are excellent in terms of sharpness and grain. Even ISO 400 print films can produce great result. This makes fast aperture lenses less important than before.

I had also bought a Tokina 19-35mm f-3.5-4.5 zoom in Canon EOS mount at the trade show. I wanted to run the same test against faster wide-angle zooms, except I didn't have the faster optics. I thought about renting some but I decided not to. I don't believe faster wide-angle zooms or even fixed focal length lenses are very important unless you plan on working in low light or need the brighter viewfinder. Most of the time, wide-angle zooms are closed down for more depth-of-field which result in better sharpness. Constant fast aperture and slower variable wide-angle zooms produce great results stop down to f-8 or slower. You should still buy the best lens you can afford. Lucky for us, modern lenses are now so good that quality pictures can be taken with more affordable lenses and faster films.