Macro Lens

Hello all.   I need a macro lens and wonder if anyone has experience with the new Tamron 90mm f/2.8 di vc usd macro lens.  The reviews that I have read are topnotch.  Especially weather proofing, auto focus, and the image quality.  The lens will produce a 1 to 1 image at 11 inches, which for me is enough working room.

Am curious if anyone out there has a copy and wouldn't mind telling me what they think.

Thanks,
Gene.   

Check out Mike Moats tiny landscapes website. He is a professional photographer that uses that lens. I think it is tinylandscapes.com. Good luck.

Haven't owned it, but heard very good things.

I have been an avid fan of the original Tamron 90 for years - preferring kit over my nikkors. I bought it about 4 years ago - the nikkors have been in a box in a cupboard since! The older model has the very big advantage that it very easy to add diffusers directly onto the lens barrel due the scalloped front.

On full frame, I prefer 180-200mm. 1.6x crop, I feel 90mm is at the lower end of where I would want to be for field work. I only use a 90-100 full frame for copy stand work. Longer lenses are better for background control (less to deal with/taken in by longer lens) as well as working distance for insects (scare factor) or flowers (room to work with light modifiers and keeping your shadow off the subject). Longer lens also makes positioning camera easier when working with a tripod as being off 1" in 25 makes a much smaller difference in composition etc than 1" in 12.

I'm still a big fan of the Sigma 150 as it is fast at f/2.8 and provides a great compromise between working distance on either an APS-C or FF camera and optical quality is first rate. That said, the Tamron macro lenses are very popular and highly thought of.

E.J. Peiker wrote:I'm still a big fan of the Sigma 150 as it is fast at f/2.8 and provides a great compromise between working distance on either an APS-C or FF camera and optical quality is first rate.    . . . .

Plus one, this is my favorite macro lens.

gene,

keep in mind that 11 inches is probably the distance measured to the cameras focal plane ....
at 1:1 the lens to subject distance is similar to all other macro lenses in this focal range , that is probably around 6 inches or so ...

most macro lenses are all very good and will give similar results when working with close ups and macro...( in its focal length );

the tamrons are excellent .

it depends more on the equipment that stays behind the camera ...

regards
andre

Really depends on what you are using it for, if it's anything that can get up and leave if it feels threatened, 90mm is a bit short IMO, much rather a 150-180mm lens. All macro lenses are sharp just about , some are exceptionally sharp, so for me focal length is a big decider. Even for flowers the narrower angle of view of a longer lens helps with BG control.

Gene Gwin wrote:Hello all.   I need a macro lens and wonder if anyone has experience with the new Tamron 90mm f/2.8 di vc usd macro lens.  The reviews that I have read are topnotch.  Especially weather proofing, auto focus, and the image quality.  The lens will produce a 1 to 1 image at 11 inches, which for me is enough working room.

Am curious if anyone out there has a copy and wouldn't mind telling me what they think.

Thanks,
Gene.   

I went through exactly this decision making process about a year ago and bought the (at the time) brand new Tamron 90mm f/2.8 di VC macro lens. I chose it over the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 mainly because of the lower weight (about half the weight of the Sigma) since it was an extra lens in my backpack (which already had a 300mm, a 70-200 plus two bodies).  I have been very happy with the Tamron though there were times I would have preferred the 150mm but know that I would have been tempted to leave it out of my backpack on hikes in Madagascar and Borneo due to the extra weight.  I have used it solely on DX cameras (the D7100 or D7200 and more recently the D500). 

ricardo00
https://www.flickr.com/photos/60519499@ ... 4707715810

I have the Sigma 150mm, and it seems to be really good. With the longer focal length you don't frighten insects as much when trying to photograph them.

I love my Sigma 150 but it is a beast, I would think the Tamron 90 would be much more handy in the field (I know my Minolta 100 f2.8 is much better walk around).