Tamron 90mm or Nikon 105mm ?

[RonFrank]

I don't have a TC yet, but am looking at the 1.4 very seriously for my 70-200mm (topside glass). From my understanding the E-II series from Nikon are fully compatible with the VR lenses, you just don't get the AF.

From Nikons website:

No AF, well that sucks. I'm not sure, but I *think* I'd rather have AF then VR. But BOTH is REALLY desirable. What is nikon thinking! And those Nikon TC's are NOT cheap. I have the Kenko 1.4x if you want to play around with it with your 70-200mm. It works great with my 300mm, and is good with my with my 80~200mm. It may work even better with the newer design as I've seen some rather impressive results with both the Kenko 1.4x, and the 2x with the 70~200mm.

Yeah put the 70-200mm in my face! :1poke: You really one upped me there with my 20 year old 80~200f2.8. I've been wanting that 70~200 since it was announced. I almost bought one the other day on ebay. $1200, almost new (July 2006), USA, and not one bid. I was not at home to bid but expected to be. I got home just a few minutes too late. I contacted the dude, but he had sold it to a friend by then... ohh well there will be others.

Bring it with the next time you are at the hole. I want to steal it, or umm I mean try it out, as I've really not done more than just play with them in the store. I'm curious how well the VR works compared to the VRII. Boy that 18-200mm VRII works wonders. Shot at 1/125 with it a LOT at the 200mm setting for a shoot last weekend, and most every shot is razor sharp. Impressive.

 

[dbh]

Thanks guys for the information. Is this only with manual focus then, or will autofocus work as well with the Kenko?

It will AF w/ the Nikkor 60mm. The one time that I used on my 105mm (non-VR), I shot in manual....so I am not sure. I can test it tonight.

Since I just got home from a dive trip, it will be a few months before I go on another...therefore if you want to borrow my 2X Kenko....let me know.


Dave

 

[aboalreem]

I was comparing topside Macro photos (bugs and flowers) it looks that the Tamron 90mm has more crisp and detailed photos than the Nikon 105mm!!

 

[RonFrank]

I was comparing topside Macro photos (bugs and flowers) it looks that the Tamron 90mm has more crisp and detailed photos than the Nikon 105mm!!

The Tamron 90mm is a very good lens from an optics standpoint. Photodo MTF rates it at 4.3 which is outstanding. The NIKON 105mm Macro (old version) rates out at 4.1.

To give some perspective the best glass that Nikon makes rates out at 4.4. Most consumer grade lenses rate between 2.6~3. The high end fixed aperture zooms made by Nikon generally rate at between 3.7~4.3. Tamrons SP 70-210f2.8 lens rates at 3.4 compared to Nikons 80~200f2.8 AFS ED-IF lens rates at 4.1.

What I'm getting at is that once you hit about 3.7, the difference between results is so slight that it's generally not visable to the naked eye even in very large prints. The MTF also takes into account edge to edge sharpness, and lenses that are made for a full frame sensor when used on a DSLR crop sensor are going to be even better.

Unfortunately they have not rated the 105mm F2.8 AF-S ED-IF Macro Nikon. However IF lenses tend to be a tad bit sharp than non-IF lenses as the elements do not result in the lens growing, and protruding front optics that run into things when you try and focus close.

I'd go with the Nikon VR version because of build quality, IF, AF-S and VR. However the Tamron is certainly a great lens even if it lacks those features.

Looking forward to some results when you finally make a decision.

 

[ABQdiver]

No AF, well that sucks. I'm not sure, but I *think* I'd rather have AF then VR. But BOTH is REALLY desirable. What is nikon thinking! And those Nikon TC's are NOT cheap. I have the Kenko 1.4x if you want to play around with it with your 70-200mm. It works great with my 300mm, and is good with my with my 80~200mm. It may work even better with the newer design as I've seen some rather impressive results with both the Kenko 1.4x, and the 2x with the 70~200mm.

Yeah put the 70-200mm in my face! :1poke: You really one upped me there with my 20 year old 80~200f2.8. I've been wanting that 70~200 since it was announced. I almost bought one the other day on ebay. $1200, almost new (July 2006), USA, and not one bid. I was not at home to bid but expected to be. I got home just a few minutes too late. I contacted the dude, but he had sold it to a friend by then... ohh well there will be others.

Bring it with the next time you are at the hole. I want to steal it, or umm I mean try it out, as I've really not done more than just play with them in the store. I'm curious how well the VR works compared to the VRII. Boy that 18-200mm VRII works wonders. Shot at 1/125 with it a LOT at the 200mm setting for a shoot last weekend, and most every shot is razor sharp. Impressive.

I'll let you play with my 70-200 if you let me play with your TC!!!!

I found one at considerable savings, be patient it will come.

 

[ABQdiver]

No AF, well that sucks. I'm not sure, but I *think* I'd rather have AF then VR. But BOTH is REALLY desirable. What is nikon thinking! And those Nikon TC's are NOT cheap. I have the Kenko 1.4x if you want to play around with it with your 70-200mm. It works great with my 300mm, and is good with my with my 80~200mm. It may work even better with the newer design as I've seen some rather impressive results with both the Kenko 1.4x, and the 2x with the 70~200mm.

I did a bit more checking/research from the comment before and found this on B&W site on the Nikon TC;

The new TC-14E II has now been updated to match with the new AF-S lenses, and will maintain full metering and focusing with compatible cameras and lenses. This converter will increase the focal length of the lens by 1.4x, and reduces the lens aperture by one f/stop.
NOTE: Due to the high-quality design of this converter (5 elements/5 groups), the teleconverter will only fit and work with a select range of lenses. Only the following lenses are compatible:

• AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF VR
• AF-S 80-200mm f/2.8D ED-IF
• AF-S 200-400mm f/4G ED-IF VR
• AF-S 200mm f/2G ED-IF VR
• AF-S 300mm f/2.8D ED-IF (II)
• AF-S 300mm f/4D ED-IF
• AF-S 400mm f/2.8D ED-IF (II)
• AF-S 500mm f/4D ED-IF (II)*
• AF-S 600mm f/4D ED-IF (II)*

NOTE: Autofocusing only possible when used with D1, D1X, D1H, D100, F5, F100, N90s, N80, N75, N65 AF SLR cameras, or any newer models.

The trick here is the compatible lenses......

 

[f3nikon]

I am trying to get either Tamron 90mm f/2.8 or Nikon 105mm f/2.8D Nikkor would like to know pros and cons for both lenses..any advice to which one is better...I have Nikon D200 and would like to get a great macro lens

I have the Nikon 105mm macro an U/W standard like the Nikon 60mm macro, stick with the Nikons. The new VR 105 is a big waste of time and money for U/W use...too big due to the gyros. And the water dampens the camera from shake anyway, plus the strobe's flash duration is fast enough to stop any action U/W.

Nikon 105 macro f/2.8 and a 60mm, 28mm macro from ebay is my vote, as for me I stick to the prime lens...no zooms, the less glass to shoot through the better the image quality.