Nikon Macro 105 - better than Tamron ?

Hertsman

Hertsman

Messages
3,413
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
I currently have the Tamron SP AF 90mm F2.8 Di and use it a fair bit.

Am I missing anything with this lens over the 105mm Nikkor ?
 
For macro specifically? Or also for portraiture/general shooting? Which Nikon 105? the 105mm 2.8 D, there won't be much difference. But if you mean the 105 2.8 G VR, that will be a lot faster to focus than the tamron, and probably sharper in general

For actual macro work, any of these will be great. You should be manually focusing so AF speed wouldn't matter
 
•


If you're thinking long term investment, go Nikon.
If you're thinking just amateur hobby, you can compromise.
 
I've had a couple of Tamron SP90's, both different models and both before the VC version. They were excellent and I really liked the output. I also borrowed an early model Nikon 105 macro and this was just as good as the Tamron.
But, I have been without a Macro lens for about 3 years and over the last couple of weeks have been in a similar dilemma to you, buying a new Macro lens and trying to decide between the not quite current Tamron 90 (F004) and the latest Nikon 105mm VR.
I went for the Nikon. I read plenty of reviews that told me the Nikon was as good as the Tamron for Macro ( or the other way round) and maybe just a bit better for portraiture and as a general purpose 105mm prime.
Mine arrives next week, I'll see then how good it is.
 
I have had both VR versions and there is very little to choose between them.
 
Cagey75 said:
For macro specifically? Or also for portraiture/general shooting? Which Nikon 105? the 105mm 2.8 D, there won't be much difference. But if you mean the 105 2.8 G VR, that will be a lot faster to focus than the tamron, and probably sharper in general

For actual macro work, any of these will be great. You should be manually focusing so AF speed wouldn't matter
Click to expand...

Yes, I would say primarily MAcro work..
 
In a word, yes. The Nikon's better than the Tamron BUT whether it's worth the extra expense is less clear cut! I upgraded from an older Tamron to the Nikkor mainly for the VR (I use if for portraits as well).
 
Hertsman said:
Yes, I would say primarily MAcro work..
Click to expand...

If you are taking Dragonflies, Butterflies and similar - I must prefer a 300mm lens

The 105mm f2.8VR Nikon is a great lens for normal photography, that's how I use mine, as has been said, good portrait lens
 
Last edited:
The Nikon's AF is very fast for a macro which makes it a good all-rounder as well as for macro. Nikon's teleconverters also work with it.
 
BillN_33 said:
I always understood that AF did not work with Nikon teleconverters + 105mm f2.8 VR ... so only in manual mode

http://cdn-5.nikon-cdn.com/Assets/C...eleconverter-Compatibility/EN_Comp_chart.html
Click to expand...

That is what Nikon say, but I found that AF does work with the Nikon 105 f2.8 VR and TC-14E III when I tried it (on a body that supports centre point AF to F8). It also works with the TC-20E III up to a point - the main issue being when you get close to MWD the reported aperture is > F8 and AF doesn't work
 
Son_of_Thor said:
That is what Nikon say, but I found that AF does work with the Nikon 105 f2.8 VR and TC-14E III when I tried it (on a body that supports centre point AF to F8). It also works with the TC-20E III up to a point - the main issue being when you get close to MWD the reported aperture is > F8 and AF doesn't work
Click to expand...

I'll give it a go - as I must admit, I have never tried using a TC with the lens
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top