Tamron 90mm Macro lens
Jan 1, 2014 11:29:33 #
mikedent
Loc: Florida
I have used this lens up to 1:1 ratios for many years at work with different Canon bodies, always worked well, good clarity and sharpness with up to f/32. Metering and focusing seemed to work fine.
Jan 1, 2014 11:34:14 #
buffmaloney wrote:
If the lens is only manual focus, you cannot AF with it. Get the AF version that allows AF and MF.
Serious question: Why would anyone want or need AF on a macro lens? Don't most of us focus by moving the camera?
Jan 1, 2014 12:15:34 #
jackm1943 wrote:
Speaking from personal experience, when the camera's focusing system is superior to the photographer's eyes, A-F is a blessing.Serious question: Why would anyone want or need AF on a macro lens? Don't most of us focus by moving the camera?
Jan 1, 2014 12:15:49 #
jackm1943 wrote:
Serious question: Why would anyone want or need AF on a macro lens? Don't most of us focus by moving the camera?
I can see having AF on a stronger macro like a 200mm, but not on a 55-60mm.
Jan 1, 2014 12:17:52 #
Also, the lens can be used for non-macro work as well...portraits, etc. AF comes in handy.
Jan 1, 2014 12:35:06 #
Sreejib
Loc: Calcutta, INDIA
jlefebvre wrote:
I have a Nikon D7000 and have heard that a good "reasonably" priced macro lens is the Tamron 90mm. Has anyone ever had experience with this lens, and if so, how did you like it?
I have the same one with VC (VR) version & extremely satisfied with the result. And my personal opinion is go for the VC version, the advantage of this lens is Image stabilization & sealed construction (the size doesn't change during focusing). For better review for this lens plz click the link.
http://www.lenstip.com/index.html?test=obiektywu&test_ob=361
And also see the sample image that's taken by me.
Jan 1, 2014 12:46:22 #
h2odog wrote:
Also, the lens can be used for non-macro work as well...portraits, etc. AF comes in handy.
Good point. :-)
Jan 1, 2014 15:09:53 #
I believe that Outdoor photographer ran an article on using a Macro for scenic and stuff a few issues back. The 90 Tammy was one of the Mac's on my shopping list. I thought that there would be more on used market. I would shoot with one. A mac is a great lens of any stripe. If I had my rathers i would be using an image stabilization lens. I hope you find what you are looking for. J. R.
Jan 1, 2014 16:27:39 #
I'm a die hard Canon user, and love the 100mm macro. However, in more than one review, I've seen the Tamron placed ahead of the Canon, and often first.
Jan 1, 2014 16:50:09 #
jlefebvre wrote:
I have a Nikon D7000 and have heard that a good "reasonably" priced macro lens is the Tamron 90mm. Has anyone ever had experience with this lens, and if so, how did you like it?
I purchased this lens this past summer and I love it. It is sharp,responsive and very affordable. I can,t say enough good about it.
Jan 1, 2014 18:50:57 #
True macro range shooting is best done with manual focusing. Even the instruction sheets that come with macro lenses state that the closer you get to life sized, the less effective auto focus becomes They say they same about VR as well). While I have 6 different AF & MF macro lenses, my go-to macro lens is a mid 1980's 105mm F2.8 macro lens (a Lester Dine model made by Kino (aka Kiron)). I've got plenty of macro shots in my Flickr stream that shows the critical sharpness of the older manual focus lenses. I rarely use my AF 105 Sigma macro. That said, I've found that all true macro lenses will give you good results. Good macro images are more a result of technique than they are gear...
buffmaloney wrote:
If the lens is only manual focus, you cannot AF with it. Get the AF version that allows AF and MF.
Jan 1, 2014 18:57:42 #
There is a difference of almost $300 between the two lenses.. Now, someone told me that the D7000 has the ability to auto focus lenses without the motor built into them. Is this true or is this only true with Nikon lenses? Again, being new to this, I was not sure.
Jan 1, 2014 19:00:51 #
sbesaw
Loc: Boston
jlefebvre wrote:
There is a difference of almost $300 between the two lenses.. Now, someone told me that the D7000 has the ability to auto focus lenses without the motor built into them. Is this true or is this only true with Nikon lenses? Again, being new to this, I was not sure.
It is true if the lens is AF capable and a Nikon mount. The D7000/7100 has an auto focus motor in body
Jan 1, 2014 19:02:17 #
It has the ability to auto focus lenses that are auto focus lenses (having the electrical contacts inside the mount) but that don't have a built in auto focus motor in the lens (ie: the first auto focus lenses made). It will not auto focus lenses that do not have the electrical contacts required for auto focus function (older manual focus lenses)
jlefebvre wrote:
There is a difference of almost $300 between the two lenses.. Now, someone told me that the D7000 has the ability to auto focus lenses without the motor built into them. Is this true or is this only true with Nikon lenses? Again, being new to this, I was not sure.
Jan 1, 2014 19:04:47 #
Screamin Scott wrote:
True macro range shooting is best done with manual... (show quote)
True, but if you use a 90mm or higher for a short telephoto on a DSLR, then AF comes in handy.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.