I loved watching you guys when you were with dpreview and was sad when they decided to go a different direction. I just now stumbled on to your new location and can’t believe it’s been a year already. So happy to be able to once again follow your concise, no biased reviews with the added humor sprinkled in.
You're the best yapper. I don't even have a camera for this lens nor do I want a macro lens, but I'm watching the video anyway, because you're such good presenters. Keep it up!
As some one used and love the 90mm Tamron lenses(VC and non VC) on DSLR good to see Tamron finally releasing a macro for mirrorless. Now hopefully they will release 180mm Macro for mirrorless along with someday this macro lens making its way to RF mount.
I love their ef mount iteration (272e), it has one of my favorite design with the more subtle blue + gold accents and focus clutch. At this point I'd go for the 2x+ manual lenses for the type of subjects I shoot, but this lens certainly makes sense for some larger bugs and in-flight stuff where 1x is more or less enough and fast af is very helpful, the price is compelling vs. native af macro glasses.
Thank you for yet again another fantastic video you guys are awesome. I love the humor you put into this and would love to see a little more of that and all your videos
Good review, and you point out some downsides. But I have a question: The Nikon Z cameras have iin-body image stabilization. Wouldn't that suffice even if the lens does not?
Good to see Tamron release the latest iteration of 90mm Macro. The four previous generations I've used still don't disappoint either. Too bad the new one doesn't have VC, I guess I'll just stick with adapting my G2 version.
@MrMartinek99 it's a deal breaker when the version I already own has it XD. I have two vintage manual focus versions of Tamron 90mm as well, which obviously have no VC, and they're perfectly usable, but the addition of stabilization definitely makes a lens more versatile. Even if a body already has IBIS, adding optical stabilization still offers an additional increase in keeper rate. It's not crtitical, I wouldn't tell anyone to skip this lens if they they don't have a Macro lens yet.
Not going to lie, this makes me wanna buy this lens! Maybe I’ll grab this and a 35-150 soon. Still debating switching to Canon though which would mean no RF versions 🤔
I have excellent Tamron zoom lenses in my kit for my A1, A9III, A7RV. I was looking at adding this macro lens, but when I did a deeper dive, comparison tests have shown the Sigma Art 105mm f2.8 DG DN macro is sharper than this Tamron, and also the Sigma is sharper than the nine-year-old Sony macro, and the Sigma has an AF/MF switch plus a de-clickable aperture which I want, and this Tamron has neither, a deal-breaker for me. . With 8 stops of IBIS in my A9III and A7RV, not having OSS in either lens is not a real issue at all for me. The AF in the Sigma is plenty fast and accurate enough for my needs. Cheers, thanks and best to you.
Chris is right, I love my Sigma 105mm f2.8 OS HSM. I use it on my RP and it's the lens that has made me the most money on portrait and food sessions. This lens is a banger.
I still have my old version in Sony A mount and the image quality is excellent even on my A7RV (no autofocus with the adaptor tho). This video reminded me to get that lens back out for some closeup shots!
Same here! Using model F017 in Sony A-mount on the A7RV with the LA-EA5 adapter. Very happy with the quality, and I can use the lens on my Minolta Maxxum/Dynax 7 film cameras too. There was a question about the longevity of the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L in the last episode of the PetaPixel Podcast. Jordan quoted photographer Don Komarechka for saying that there is no particular advantage to using macro primes designed for mirrorless over DSLR designs. AFAIK, both the Canon EF and the Nikon F versions of the two last Tamron DSLR iterations (F004 and F017) had image stabilisation but sadly not the Sony A-versions. Never understood why.
It would be great to have a comparison video between between the macro lenses of different systems. The Sony 90 mm F2.8, the Nikon 105 mm F2.8, the Canon 100 mm F2.8 Macro, the Fuji 60 mm F2.4 and also the OM System 90 mm F3.5 with respect to macro photography. Things like effectiveness of IS in close range and Focus stacking without tripod setup.
@Duskbleu I thought you need focus stacking in order to combine high detail resolution with high depth of field. I can also use F18 or F22 on my old DSLR macro lenses with sometimes sufficient depth of field. But then I get soft images due diffraction. And this with an 8 MP Sensor.
@Daniel-o1l2e you can still do focus stacking with MF. Most models don't have an innate stacking feature so AF is not that important to me. The only scenario I can't manually do focus stacking is when I adapt enlarger or scanning lenses.
Still not convinced to drop my 1984 SP Adaptall-2 90mm f/2.5 (52BB). Shooting with it yesterday (i do have options) and it still holds up on digital for 'environmental' macro. Wonder just what you'd find if you were to compare the most recent iteration with the original models?
They need to make a new version of their 35mm f/1.4 for Mirrorless. I love that lens, but adapting it is bulky and I rather have a native option available. The f/1.8 primes were also amazing. I still use the 45mm f/1.8 and is one of my favorite lenses.
It does seem like a really nice lens. If I didn’t already own the Sigma 105mm f2.8 art macro lens, I’d probably buy it. But it doesn’t make sense to buy it already having a good macro lens. I guess the question for me is about focus breathing. Nobody seems to talk about it, but macro lenses typically have some of the most amazingly extreme focus breathing. If this lens were an improvement, I’d be seriously tempted to go buy it.
Looks like I'm gonna be getting an S5 II in the next couple of days for my very first full-frame camera as Panasonic have an offer on that makes the price just so much more aggressive than Sony. As much I was hoping to buy into the E mount system for the variety of lenses, saving £370 compared to a body only A7IV *and* getting 2 lenses included that cost just under £1000 when bought separately is a sufficiently good deal to sway me to Pana. Will still enjoy watching these reviews of the many E mount lenses out there. Interesting this new Tamron macro has no stabilisation - I can remember seeing this feature advertised as actually being useful in macro lenses: the one thing IBIS apparently can't correct for is movement along the lens axis - XY axis movement I believe it was called - which mainly has an impact on handholding a macro lens. Tamron will be one of the brands that will be disappointing not to have on L Mount though. Perhaps they will join sometime, as it is an open 'alliance' (can't help think that word in Jared Polin's voice!!).
As far as I know, back in the day, all the (D)SLR systems had 200mm macro lenses (along with shorter options) that would allow 1:1 reproduction but with a longer working distance. While I agree with the comments here that further development of 2:1 macro lenses would be super-interesting, I wonder if it would not also be worthwhile for manufacturers to look into longer focal lengths again? (BTW, I still use the Minolta AF 200 f/4 APO with an adapter on a Sony mirrorless).
Nice lens, but as a macro photographer with bracketed macro flashes attached on the camera, I don't really understand the lack of the classic 50-60mm macro lenses out there. For Nikon mirrorless the only AF option is the non-S line 50mm macro (which I own and love by the way) and not much more. Sure, you can find older ones like the brilliant AF-S 60mm or some manual ones from other brands. But I can't just stop thinking that the shorter macro focal lengths are really needed to help the work of at least a bunch of macro photographers. And I'm sure it's not just me
best place to try would be a miner's museum , low light condition a lot of natural minerals with all reflective properties i.e.: Royal Ontario Museum or your local science museums, fossils and gems
Hey guys - considering this was released on Z mount for Nikon, it puts it up against the legendary 105mm f2.8 S Nikkor macro - and if you were forced to choose, which of those two lenses would you go for to mount on an Z8..?
Nikon's 105 Macro is really super super sharp and it is slight more expensive and yes, the Sigma's 105 is equally great as well. This Tamron for the price alone is a great option
Did they need the software and custom settings for this lens? Could that not have been dropped for a lower price? Perhaps I am the only one that just wants a lens. If there is an addition then just vibration compensation.
Random question: Are there any cameras out there that can automatically step through the focus range for photo stacking? I've been doing it manually and always end up with some piece of my subject that i have no in focus image of.
I've been spoilt by the emergence of the cheaper laowa, ttartisan, 7artisan 2x macro lenses. They seem to be superior than a 1x macro unless you make them as f2 lenses.
I had their dslr model, and that thing was such a bad mechanical design that I will never buy a tamron again. The Autofocus motors die, and they don't have replacement parts anymore. If you check the used sales pages, you find plenty of them in near new condition, but most with failed AF motors
OK, I guess Sigma 105/2,8 DG DN Art Macro should be a bit worried because of AF speed of this lens. Sigma is super sharp too but much slower focusing :).
I think it is very smart of Tamron to focus on zooms. They make so many good zooms and odd-range zooms. The prime market is becoming a difficult to compete in as new comers like Meike, TTartisans 7Artisans, YongNuo along with more established brands like Samyang and Viltrox all now make very good and affordable primes that punch way above their asking price. So I am all for Tamron and Sigma to focus more on spectacular and affordable zoom lenses.
please to a comparison to the 90mm macro g oss! the af speed vs the sony 90mm slooow focus can be a real compelling reason for people to go for it if they do some research, only problem being the sony is at sub $700 new and has stabilization, which can be a game changer on older bodies when handheld stacking or non-flash macro fotography... will have to see the image quality differences though
Tamron made some great DSLR primes and would be a pitty of they stop making them. Their 35mm was excellent. But being owned by Sony, I understand that they want us to buy Sony primes and not Tamron.
Generally speaking, most macro lenses will "breathe" in or out when they're focused really close. So they aren't actually 90mm or 100mm at the minimum focus. I have a little 65mm F2.8 Macro that starts off at 65mm when focused at infinity then, as you focus closer, the focal length shifts higher and higher. When you get to minimum focus, it's actually at around 140mm which gives you the maximum 2:1 reproduction ratio
@@harryvlogs7833 Yeah it sounds like like a lot (because it is) but it doesn't really breathe much at normal shooting distances. Only when you get further into the macro realm where it's most beneficial and less noticeable
I don't know what Tamron is thinking, capping the minimum aperture at f16. That makes it unusable for certain types of professional macro work. Maybe it's the 13-bladed aperture being unable to close down further. In clinical and dental photography we shut it down to f22 or smaller just to get an entire single tooth in complete focus (we always use flashes), and we shoot clinical portrait photos at f11, not f1.4 or 2.8. Meanwhile focus stacking is not an option in photographing anything that's still alive or moves. And to add insult, they omitted VC which was present in the previous two iterations for DSLRs, probably because they want to sell you a mark ii 3 years later. VC is crucial for macro work. Maybe Tamron isn't interested in catering to professionals with this lens and are trying to appeal to hobbyists only, but this is already one of the worst modern macro lenses out there going by the missing features crucial to a macro lens. Go and get a nikon S line or Sony GM. Really.
I currently have the F017, and have previously owned the F004, both in Sony A-mount. Neither have VC, whereas I believe that the Nikon F and Canon EF versions do.
I want a macro lens with small aperture, 2:1 magnification ratio, and light weight. f/2.8 for macro is just wrong. If I want a portrait lens, I have already too many of them.
Jordan said he hated them and that they were stupid birds (of which the opposite is true) and then publicly declared it on the show and it is now the hill he will die on.
This is for people who want an auto focus macro for Z mount. Paying more for an auto focus third party lens than the OE Sony doesn't make sense. Especially since this lens has (at least until Tamron update it) issues with the focus stacking feature on the 7RV and alike. The Sony 90G has more functionality, is just as good optically and works better with Sony cameras than this Tamron. So it may as well only be a Z mount option, but some morons will buy this instead.
I realy dont unerstand who this lens is for since anybody can buy used laowa 90mm f/2.8 that focuses fron infinity to 2x magnification under 400 USD ( yeah its MF only but bayicaly anyone realises sooner or later that autofocus in macrophotography SUCKS ,and this lens is build like a tank and will be in same condition in 50 years as the one you buy it today )
I agree that is probably a great lens. Personally if I were going for Macro only I would choose the Bokina (look it up it’s a legend). I think most people though want AF to get the dual use for portraits… that’s why I have the Sony 90mm F2.8.
I dare to disagree. I own Lumix S 100mm macro and autofocus is pretty good on it. Sure to shoot eyes of spider you need 2x macro lens or slap Raynox on standard macro, but for everyday use Lumix S is sufficient.
@@POVwithRC a) new one in 500 USD b) ability to focus at 2X without the need for extencion tubes easily beats autofocus just ask any serious macro photographer like Micael Widell here on youtube
I loved watching you guys when you were with dpreview and was sad when they decided to go a different direction. I just now stumbled on to your new location and can’t believe it’s been a year already. So happy to be able to once again follow your concise, no biased reviews with the added humor sprinkled in.
Lots of fun goofiness with the framing. Stash and the hat and then bokeh with the round? I like it. Fun silliness.
You're the best yapper. I don't even have a camera for this lens nor do I want a macro lens, but I'm watching the video anyway, because you're such good presenters. Keep it up!
As some one used and love the 90mm Tamron lenses(VC and non VC) on DSLR good to see Tamron finally releasing a macro for mirrorless. Now hopefully they will release 180mm Macro for mirrorless along with someday this macro lens making its way to RF mount.
I love their ef mount iteration (272e), it has one of my favorite design with the more subtle blue + gold accents and focus clutch. At this point I'd go for the 2x+ manual lenses for the type of subjects I shoot, but this lens certainly makes sense for some larger bugs and in-flight stuff where 1x is more or less enough and fast af is very helpful, the price is compelling vs. native af macro glasses.
Thank you for yet again another fantastic video you guys are awesome. I love the humor you put into this and would love to see a little more of that and all your videos
Tamron Adaptall-2 52B 90/2.5 is still my favorite
@D1N02 It's great, but I like the Adaptall-2 72b 1:1 90/2.8 a little better myself
"You're giving me undercover cop" LOL
Good review, and you point out some downsides. But I have a question: The Nikon Z cameras have iin-body image stabilization. Wouldn't that suffice even if the lens does not?
For most uses, yes it does a great job for sure
Welcome back, PetaPixelians!
Tamron 90 macro vc is my all time fav go to portrait lens
Thia is awesome. Another reason why Sony is my preferred system. They don’t mind direct competition.
Excellent review Chris. Thanks for sharing.
😂😂@Stash..... Keep up the great work guys 👍
Chris, I agree with your comment at the end. Please more primes from Tamron like a mirrorless version of the 35mm! ;-)
I always enjoy your videos, thank you, another excellent one :) Great lens, but missing stabilistaion is quite disadvantage here
Good to see Tamron release the latest iteration of 90mm Macro. The four previous generations I've used still don't disappoint either. Too bad the new one doesn't have VC, I guess I'll just stick with adapting my G2 version.
Is absence of VC really a dealbreaker? 90mm is not so long FL, IBIS should cover it pretty well.
@MrMartinek99 it's a deal breaker when the version I already own has it XD. I have two vintage manual focus versions of Tamron 90mm as well, which obviously have no VC, and they're perfectly usable, but the addition of stabilization definitely makes a lens more versatile. Even if a body already has IBIS, adding optical stabilization still offers an additional increase in keeper rate.
It's not crtitical, I wouldn't tell anyone to skip this lens if they they don't have a Macro lens yet.
Not going to lie, this makes me wanna buy this lens! Maybe I’ll grab this and a 35-150 soon. Still debating switching to Canon though which would mean no RF versions 🤔
I have excellent Tamron zoom lenses in my kit for my A1, A9III, A7RV. I was looking at adding this macro lens, but when I did a deeper dive, comparison tests have shown the Sigma Art 105mm f2.8 DG DN macro is sharper than this Tamron, and also the Sigma is sharper than the nine-year-old Sony macro, and the Sigma has an AF/MF switch plus a de-clickable aperture which I want, and this Tamron has neither, a deal-breaker for me. . With 8 stops of IBIS in my A9III and A7RV, not having OSS in either lens is not a real issue at all for me. The AF in the Sigma is plenty fast and accurate enough for my needs. Cheers, thanks and best to you.
Can you elaborate more? I'm curious why dedicated AF/MF switch and non-clicky aperture ring is a must for you. Preference or specific usecase?
Chris is right, I love my Sigma 105mm f2.8 OS HSM. I use it on my RP and it's the lens that has made me the most money on portrait and food sessions. This lens is a banger.
I still have my old version in Sony A mount and the image quality is excellent even on my A7RV (no autofocus with the adaptor tho). This video reminded me to get that lens back out for some closeup shots!
Same here! Using model F017 in Sony A-mount on the A7RV with the LA-EA5 adapter. Very happy with the quality, and I can use the lens on my Minolta Maxxum/Dynax 7 film cameras too.
There was a question about the longevity of the Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L in the last episode of the PetaPixel Podcast. Jordan quoted photographer Don Komarechka for saying that there is no particular advantage to using macro primes designed for mirrorless over DSLR designs.
AFAIK, both the Canon EF and the Nikon F versions of the two last Tamron DSLR iterations (F004 and F017) had image stabilisation but sadly not the Sony A-versions. Never understood why.
It would be great to have a comparison video between between the macro lenses of different systems. The Sony 90 mm F2.8, the Nikon 105 mm F2.8, the Canon 100 mm F2.8 Macro, the Fuji 60 mm F2.4 and also the OM System 90 mm F3.5 with respect to macro photography. Things like effectiveness of IS in close range and Focus stacking without tripod setup.
Or the Laowa 100 2.8 on any system. Macro shooters don't really need AF anyway, but lightning and tripod is required
@Duskbleu I thought you need focus stacking in order to combine high detail resolution with high depth of field.
I can also use F18 or F22 on my old DSLR macro lenses with sometimes sufficient depth of field. But then I get soft images due diffraction. And this with an 8 MP Sensor.
@Daniel-o1l2e you can still do focus stacking with MF. Most models don't have an innate stacking feature so AF is not that important to me. The only scenario I can't manually do focus stacking is when I adapt enlarger or scanning lenses.
Shame about them abandoning the market, their 90mm was basically a no-brainer.
Chris, Nice video! Does this macro out resolve the SONY FE90/2.8 Macro?
Thanks for the review. I will buy it if OIS was available.
Still not convinced to drop my 1984 SP Adaptall-2 90mm f/2.5 (52BB). Shooting with it yesterday (i do have options) and it still holds up on digital for 'environmental' macro. Wonder just what you'd find if you were to compare the most recent iteration with the original models?
'undercover narc cop' 😂
They need to make a new version of their 35mm f/1.4 for Mirrorless. I love that lens, but adapting it is bulky and I rather have a native option available. The f/1.8 primes were also amazing. I still use the 45mm f/1.8 and is one of my favorite lenses.
It does seem like a really nice lens. If I didn’t already own the Sigma 105mm f2.8 art macro lens, I’d probably buy it. But it doesn’t make sense to buy it already having a good macro lens. I guess the question for me is about focus breathing. Nobody seems to talk about it, but macro lenses typically have some of the most amazingly extreme focus breathing. If this lens were an improvement, I’d be seriously tempted to go buy it.
90mm is my favorite headshot focal lenght, this Tamron sounds like good reason to jump from Fuji to some FF camera and get this lens for the work.
Chris would be an average Canadian model winner
He'd do ok in the Men's category too.
I’ll take it!
Looks like I'm gonna be getting an S5 II in the next couple of days for my very first full-frame camera as Panasonic have an offer on that makes the price just so much more aggressive than Sony. As much I was hoping to buy into the E mount system for the variety of lenses, saving £370 compared to a body only A7IV *and* getting 2 lenses included that cost just under £1000 when bought separately is a sufficiently good deal to sway me to Pana.
Will still enjoy watching these reviews of the many E mount lenses out there. Interesting this new Tamron macro has no stabilisation - I can remember seeing this feature advertised as actually being useful in macro lenses: the one thing IBIS apparently can't correct for is movement along the lens axis - XY axis movement I believe it was called - which mainly has an impact on handholding a macro lens.
Tamron will be one of the brands that will be disappointing not to have on L Mount though. Perhaps they will join sometime, as it is an open 'alliance' (can't help think that word in Jared Polin's voice!!).
As far as I know, back in the day, all the (D)SLR systems had 200mm macro lenses (along with shorter options) that would allow 1:1 reproduction but with a longer working distance. While I agree with the comments here that further development of 2:1 macro lenses would be super-interesting, I wonder if it would not also be worthwhile for manufacturers to look into longer focal lengths again? (BTW, I still use the Minolta AF 200 f/4 APO with an adapter on a Sony mirrorless).
OM System do their 90mm (180mm FF equivalent) macro lens.
Right! Absolutely true. Completely forgot about that. Apparently a fantastic lens?
@ I haven’t used one, but from everything I’ve seen about it, it looks like it’s very good.
It's like you guys forgot about the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 DG DN Macro Art :(
Nice lens, but as a macro photographer with bracketed macro flashes attached on the camera, I don't really understand the lack of the classic 50-60mm macro lenses out there. For Nikon mirrorless the only AF option is the non-S line 50mm macro (which I own and love by the way) and not much more. Sure, you can find older ones like the brilliant AF-S 60mm or some manual ones from other brands. But I can't just stop thinking that the shorter macro focal lengths are really needed to help the work of at least a bunch of macro photographers. And I'm sure it's not just me
best place to try would be a miner's museum , low light condition a lot of natural minerals with all reflective properties
i.e.: Royal Ontario Museum
or your local science museums, fossils and gems
I still use the old manual focus version of this lens, lol.
I loved the part where there was a hat on the building.
Jordan reminds me of “Goose” from Top Gun 1, but 20 years later, with a cuter mustache and more alive :)
ruclips.net/video/nUyOdYawZPU/видео.htmlfeature=shared
Would like to see a comparison with the Sony G OSS 90 and Sigma 105
Missed opportunity to macro the mustache
There’s still nearly three weeks
Nooo. I loved their 35 F1.4 on DSLR, and their other primes with VC were great, too. Sad they won’t make more primes.
Agree
Finally, thank goodness, I can finally sell my Sony FE 90 mm F2.8 Macro G OSS. No more focus hunting during macro! Huzaahhh!!
The only lens I've used for decades.
Jordan Drake (the video whiz)
Gordon Drake (the cool bad boy)
Morgan Drake (moustache extraordinaire)
Hey guys - considering this was released on Z mount for Nikon, it puts it up against the legendary 105mm f2.8 S Nikkor macro - and if you were forced to choose, which of those two lenses would you go for to mount on an Z8..?
are they the same price?
Nikon's 105 Macro is really super super sharp and it is slight more expensive and yes, the Sigma's 105 is equally great as well. This Tamron for the price alone is a great option
If price isn't an issue then Nikon is a pretty obvious choice?
Modern Sony bodies have IBIS so lack of VC is a non issue.
Unless it is synched and therefor adds to the total number of stops - as in the Oly setup.
Great job with the portraits on this one Chris.
Glad Jordan kept the moustache. Looks real nice.
Looks hairy
Did they need the software and custom settings for this lens? Could that not have been dropped for a lower price? Perhaps I am the only one that just wants a lens. If there is an addition then just vibration compensation.
Random question: Are there any cameras out there that can automatically step through the focus range for photo stacking? I've been doing it manually and always end up with some piece of my subject that i have no in focus image of.
Jordan now going after more colourful Magpies XD
I've been spoilt by the emergence of the cheaper laowa, ttartisan, 7artisan 2x macro lenses. They seem to be superior than a 1x macro unless you make them as f2 lenses.
yeah laowa 90mm f/2.8 is GOAT
@@carbonium1264 precisely.
Ois is in the camera bodies now
And in the lenses too, which with appropriate synch, increases the total number of IS stops.
@luzr6613 just in the body is gud enough
Manny Ortiz beautydish is heavy and unwielding for wedding day job , Westcott bring back the Joel Grimes beautydish.
I had their dslr model, and that thing was such a bad mechanical design that I will never buy a tamron again. The Autofocus motors die, and they don't have replacement parts anymore. If you check the used sales pages, you find plenty of them in near new condition, but most with failed AF motors
OK, I guess Sigma 105/2,8 DG DN Art Macro should be a bit worried because of AF speed of this lens. Sigma is super sharp too but much slower focusing :).
S5II + Olympus 45 1.8 + m42 to L mount adapter= no AF but DOPE MACRO lens.
Where I live there is just a 100 dollar difference in the price between Sony and Tamron versions.
Love the haukland clothing! Their jackets are the photographers dream!
1. Jordan resembles Relic from beachcombers.
2. Smithbuilt are best in the business
There’s one single question:
Is it better than the Laowa 90mm 2.8?
I think it is very smart of Tamron to focus on zooms. They make so many good zooms and odd-range zooms. The prime market is becoming a difficult to compete in as new comers like Meike, TTartisans 7Artisans, YongNuo along with more established brands like Samyang and Viltrox all now make very good and affordable primes that punch way above their asking price.
So I am all for Tamron and Sigma to focus more on spectacular and affordable zoom lenses.
Love my canon macro
please to a comparison to the 90mm macro g oss!
the af speed vs the sony 90mm slooow focus can be a real compelling reason for people to go for it if they do some research, only problem being the sony is at sub $700 new and has stabilization, which can be a game changer on older bodies when handheld stacking or non-flash macro fotography...
will have to see the image quality differences though
The Sony OSS doesn't do shift stabilization so it's mostly irrelevant for macro use.
This would be a good comparison for sure.
Beanie? That’s a toque. Time to revoke your passport
That was shocking, wasn't it? Final written warning or i'm revoking my subscription.
I’ll never do it again. I even hated myself when the word came out of my mouth.
Tamron made some great DSLR primes and would be a pitty of they stop making them. Their 35mm was excellent. But being owned by Sony, I understand that they want us to buy Sony primes and not Tamron.
How can a 90mm whith focus of 22cm be 1.1 reproduction when lumix 100mm which 20.04cm is 1.1?
Generally speaking, most macro lenses will "breathe" in or out when they're focused really close. So they aren't actually 90mm or 100mm at the minimum focus.
I have a little 65mm F2.8 Macro that starts off at 65mm when focused at infinity then, as you focus closer, the focal length shifts higher and higher. When you get to minimum focus, it's actually at around 140mm which gives you the maximum 2:1 reproduction ratio
@that_mash my goodness your lense has a horrible amount of focus breathing lumix 100mm has hardly any and is small
@@harryvlogs7833 Yeah it sounds like like a lot (because it is) but it doesn't really breathe much at normal shooting distances. Only when you get further into the macro realm where it's most beneficial and less noticeable
@that_mash actually much more noticeable in macro realme because if you do focus stacking your subject will constantly change size
I don't know what Tamron is thinking, capping the minimum aperture at f16. That makes it unusable for certain types of professional macro work. Maybe it's the 13-bladed aperture being unable to close down further.
In clinical and dental photography we shut it down to f22 or smaller just to get an entire single tooth in complete focus (we always use flashes), and we shoot clinical portrait photos at f11, not f1.4 or 2.8. Meanwhile focus stacking is not an option in photographing anything that's still alive or moves.
And to add insult, they omitted VC which was present in the previous two iterations for DSLRs, probably because they want to sell you a mark ii 3 years later. VC is crucial for macro work.
Maybe Tamron isn't interested in catering to professionals with this lens and are trying to appeal to hobbyists only, but this is already one of the worst modern macro lenses out there going by the missing features crucial to a macro lens. Go and get a nikon S line or Sony GM. Really.
I currently have the F017, and have previously owned the F004, both in Sony A-mount. Neither have VC, whereas I believe that the Nikon F and Canon EF versions do.
but is it better than the Bokina?
STASH---the look couldn't get any more Canadian
I want a macro lens with small aperture, 2:1 magnification ratio, and light weight. f/2.8 for macro is just wrong. If I want a portrait lens, I have already too many of them.
Lacks comparison to Sigma & Sony.
I don't get the purpose of a dedicated macro lens. With extension tubes you get the same results at a fraction of the cost.
Yall got any of that free candy?
Tokina 100mm is still macro king tho
Compelling option.
7:33 okay I’ve gotta know: what’s the corvid problem
Jordan said he hated them and that they were stupid birds (of which the opposite is true) and then publicly declared it on the show and it is now the hill he will die on.
@@niccollsvideo booooo Jordan!
They are not aesthetically pleasing birds.
- Jordan
(shakes head)
This versus Lumix S 100mm.
“Hybredating” congrats you made up a new word! I think you meant to say hibernating.
Dude. Jordan is keeping those poor corvids down!
No RF or even EF mount version?! 😢
Nikon 105mm discounted to $850 right now. I'd love to see a comparison between these.
This is for people who want an auto focus macro for Z mount.
Paying more for an auto focus third party lens than the OE Sony doesn't make sense. Especially since this lens has (at least until Tamron update it) issues with the focus stacking feature on the 7RV and alike.
The Sony 90G has more functionality, is just as good optically and works better with Sony cameras than this Tamron.
So it may as well only be a Z mount option, but some morons will buy this instead.
dark light...lolololol
1:53 👨🙋🏻♂🇩🇪
The only problem is that in Northern Europe at least it is a paper release. These things are akin to rocking horse poop in rarity
blablablabla.. :)
No comparsion to SIGMA 105mm macro LOL xD FRACK OFF
I realy dont unerstand who this lens is for since anybody can buy used laowa 90mm f/2.8 that focuses fron infinity to 2x magnification under 400 USD ( yeah its MF only but bayicaly anyone realises sooner or later that autofocus in macrophotography SUCKS ,and this lens is build like a tank and will be in same condition in 50 years as the one you buy it today )
People who don't want a used manual laowa. Glad I could help.
I have that laowa. I rather have the Sony 90 G. Need AF
I agree that is probably a great lens. Personally if I were going for Macro only I would choose the Bokina (look it up it’s a legend). I think most people though want AF to get the dual use for portraits… that’s why I have the Sony 90mm F2.8.
I dare to disagree. I own Lumix S 100mm macro and autofocus is pretty good on it. Sure to shoot eyes of spider you need 2x macro lens or slap Raynox on standard macro, but for everyday use Lumix S is sufficient.
@@POVwithRC a) new one in 500 USD
b) ability to focus at 2X without the need for extencion tubes easily beats autofocus just ask any serious macro photographer like Micael Widell here on youtube
Ich würde niemals eine Glasscherbe von Tamron oder Sigma zulegen!