Tamron 90mm Macro (Nikon mount)

Hi All

I picked this up (they were completely out of Nikor micro lenses) on
the weekend. So far, I'm thoroughly enjoying it .

Anyone have pros/cons for this lens that I should know about? Foibles
and the like?

Many thanks

P.

 

it's an excellent lens, one of the sharpest macro lenses made.

<http://www.photozone.de/Reviews/46-nikon--nikkor-aps-c/283-tamron-af-90
mm-f28-di-sp-macro-nikon-mount-lab-test-report--review>

 

That was a *really* nice read (especially after forking over $550 for
the lens)

Thks
P.

 

It has a reputation for being just as good as a portrait lens as it is
as a macro lens. It's a very good all-rounder.

Way back in the 70s and early 80s, there were some extremely good
macro lenses available in the 90mm to 105mm focal length range. They
carried Kiron, Tokina, Vivitar and Tamron brand names. The Tamron is
the only one that still survives, although it has had several minor
updates.

 

Good to know.. thks

 

While it's a fine lens, $550 is a top-dollar price for a 90mm Tamron.
That said, here's potentially a little more good news for you:
http://www.adorama.com/pdfs/rebates/tamron_073108.pdf

 

Welcome to Canada... where the retailers *all* remember when the dollar
was worth 0.75 USD, and have pricing arranged accordingly

Thks for the link

P.

 

I was think along similar lines about the price, I paid AUD$400 for mine in
a Pentax mount, super lens.

 

So was I, frankly.. but it was the only one available and I've been
craving Macro for a while now.. The rebate is going to feel *really*
good

P.

 

The lens is worth every penny of $550, and then some.

 

I was willing to pay it, would pay it again, and am quite happy with the
performance.. It's going to take me a loooong while before I can use it
to it's fullest. It's by far my favourite lens.

That said, the rebate won't hurt any.

P.

 

Good rep, at least in the film version (though no reason to suspect the
digital version is bad).

It is not the sharpest*, despite what people say but it is very sharp
nonetheless and is also a very good film portrait lens (perhaps a bit
flat rendering on a cropped sensor).

Ya done good.

Cheers,
Alan

*The Minolta 100 f/2.8 and the Nikkor 105 Micro are a bit sharper.

 

Then there was this. Whatever it is. I don't remember ever using it; it
was for my Pentax Spotmatic; I got it used. There's not much glass in
there, as the third image shows.

http://blinkynet.net/blinkyshots/isconar100aa.jpg
http://blinkynet.net/blinkyshots/isconar100bb.jpg
http://blinkynet.net/blinkyshots/isconar100cc.jpg

 

Well, it looks nice. ;-)

How did it perform?

 

It's got its share of minor dings.

See "I don't remember ever using it", above.

Googling provided lots of mentions of f4 Isconar 100's, but only a couple
for this 4.5. Perhaps it will turn out to be able to fund my retirement.
Yeah, right.

 

Apologies. Must learn to read, and only then reply. ;-)

A frugal retirement?

Did you find this link?
http://m42.artlimited.net/lens_detail.php?lid=313

 

No problem.

Without doubt.

<clickety>

Aye. I also saw one listed on an auction site, but I don't think there
were any bids. This bodes ill for my retirement.

 

Perhaps potential bidders were deterred from bidding in the knowledge
that they could never afford the final price?

Or perhaps not. ;-)

 

That's it!

That's even more it!