Do I need a Tamron SP90 Macro Lens

N

Normster

Messages
4
Edit My Images
Yes
Hello. I have a Nikon D750 full frame camera and have been using a Nikkor 24-70 for close up shots. I now have the chance to get a good deal on a Tamron SP90 Macro lens but I am unclear what advantage that would give me over the 24-70 lens other than the fact that there is a small difference in the minimum focussing distance between the two (0.29m on the Tamron versus 0.38m on the Nikon) meaning that I can get a few millimetres closer to the subject with the Tamron. Other than that I'm not clear whether it is worth spending on the Tamron. I think I'm lacking understanding somewhere. Why should I buy the Tamron given that I have a 24-70 - what extra would it give me?

Thankyou for any advice you can give.
 
It would be sharper across the frame & its rendering would be more perfectly rectilinear. But if you're happy already (which you seem to be), why worry? No point in shopping for shopping's sake.
 
A true macro lens will allow 1:1 reproduction. Your 24-70 will not.

if your chosen subjects are not small enough to require 1:1 then there is not much to be gained by using a macro lens - except the advantages outlined by droj above.

if you want to photograph ladybirds, ants, flies etc your 24-70 will not get you close enough - you’ll have to crop significantly and you’ll lose quality/resolution.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
Have you thought about close up filters instead? cheaper than getting a new lens.
 
Last edited:
Heard good things about the Tamron - as Mike says it will give you 1:1 and sharpness across the frame (my 24-70 did not do that).
 
I've had a quick look at the spec for the Nikon 24-70 (pre VR)

It seems that the max magnification is 1:3.7. This means that you'll fill the frame with a subject that's about 13cm long. A true macro lens will fill the frame with a subject that's 3.6 cm long

HTH
 
Macro lenses are very very good at their intended job and will absolutely blow the 3x zoom lens out of the water in this. The zooms generally become very poor at extreme closeup distances.
Macro are also very useful on many many occasions even if you don't shoot proper macros. Think ebay listings, diy jobs, or general close range work and portraits.

It doesn't need to be Tamron or 90mm. More options are available. Around 100mm is arguably the most versatile, but there are use cases for 50mm or 150mm depending what you want.
 
realspeed said:
Have you thought about close up filters instead? cheaper than getting a new lens.
Click to expand...
even cheaper would be to use a macro feature on a smartphone as presumable everyone now has one
 
Thanks for all the replies, it's much appreciated. I'm interested in trying some close up work so I think I'll go for it. If I decide it's not my thing I reckon I could sell the lens and not make much of a loss, if any. Thanks again.
 
Extension tubes are probably the most cost-effective way to turn your existing lens into a Macro lens. If you wanted to see how often you'd use that functionality.

I'm all for buying new kit, but I have no real need for macro with the stuff I like to shoot, so the extension tubes allow me to get super close on the rare occasions I need/want to.

All depends on price really.

en.wikipedia.org

Extension tube - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Last edited:
I have the Tamron 90mm and the Sigma 50 and 105 macro. I mostly use the 105mm, although I dont think theres much difference quality wise, all cracking lens. Good for portraits too.
 
True macro lens offers
  • good optical performance including at the very close focus range
  • flat field correction
  • 1:1 or 1:2 minimum magnification ratio
 
Need? Probably not.
Want? Sounds like it!!!

I'd try to find one second hand then, if you don't want to keep it, you should be able to move it on with minimal loss.
 
I had one for years, not the quickest focussing lens I’ve ever had, but that’s less important for macro.

If you want to have a go at macro without spending a fortune, it’s probably the cheapest option. Close up filters, reversing rings, tubes are all cheaper, but more fuss, and genuinely you could sell the Tamron on for what you paid for it if you don’t want to keep it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nod
realspeed said:
Have you thought about close up filters instead? cheaper than getting a new lens.
Click to expand...
You will by definition certainly loose quality. A close up lens of unknown quality may well introduce aberrations and distortions into the picture. A 'possibly' better solution would be to use a short extension tube or bellows, but these also cost money and are no guarantee that getting closer that will will also not affect optical quality A true prime macro lens is the way to go if you want the best. As far as I am aware there are no true , i,e, 1-1 zoom macro lenses. In fact they are a misnomer. The word 'Macro' means 1-1 or greater, until you get into the world of really close up images and they become known as 'Micro'.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top