Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di Macro 1:1 SP AF

Overview

Lab Test Results

Our standard lens lab tests, shot on full-frame and sub-frame bodies. Pick a focal length and aperture to see the result.

Sharpness (blur index)

Blur across the frame: lower and flatter is sharper. Change focal length and aperture to see how it improves when stopped down.

Focal length90mm

Aperturef/2.8f/4f/5.6f/8f/11f/16f/22f/32

Chromatic aberration

Colour fringing in the corners at each focal length.

Vignetting (corner shading)

How much darker the corners are than the centre, by aperture and focal length.

Geometric distortion

Barrel (positive) or pincushion (negative) distortion across the zoom range.

Sharpness (blur index)

Blur across the frame: lower and flatter is sharper. Change focal length and aperture to see how it improves when stopped down.

Focal length90mm

Aperturef/2.8f/4f/5.6f/8f/11f/16f/22f/32

Chromatic aberration

Colour fringing in the corners at each focal length.

Vignetting (corner shading)

How much darker the corners are than the centre, by aperture and focal length.

Geometric distortion

Barrel (positive) or pincushion (negative) distortion across the zoom range.

Reader Reviews

1. 5/10Not recommendedby Beaversman · March 22 2017 · paid $400

   Pros: Good image quality Lightweight Price

   Cons: Colour profile noisy poor auto focus

   I will admit this lens produces some good quality, sharp picture. Both macro and portrait. And yes, it less than half the price of the Nikon 105. However, the poor autofocus is a real disappointment. Sometimes near impossible to focus in dim lighting, and even if good sunlight it has a tendency to search though its entire range and even then still needs fine tuning. Yes it is sharp, but colours are a bit off compared to almost every other lens I own.

   Would I recommend it? No, unless your on a very tight budget and no other option. Good glass is forever, this lens is a one night stand.

2. 5/10Not recommendedby syousef · March 14 2016 · paid $389

   Pros: With AF fine tuning maxed out it is very sharp for portraits. Excellent macro results if focused manually

   Cons: Focus completely off and only corrected with maximum AF fine-tune. Not usable on my older DSLRs. Concerns dismissed by Ebay seller and Tamron support. Not economical to fix so must use as is.

   It is extremely disappointing that the AF is so badly off because if my copy wasn't so miscalculated it would be a great lens. Once AF fine tune is maxed out on my D7100, the lens is good. I initially bought the non-Di version and had a lot of trouble with it, so returned that copy. I then bought this Di lens through grey import channels at a reasonable price. That turned out to be a mistake. My communication with the seller was pointless and I was directed to email Tamron in Australia and Japan. On communicating with Tamron that I was having issues getting a sharp image especially in portraits I was told that this is not a portrait lens and that I should use it only for macro. At the time of my communication I only had Nikon D70s and D90 bodies, which do not support AF fine tune. The lens went into the cupboard for 2-3 years until I eventually bought a D7100. On fiddling with the fine tune, eventually maxing it out, I found I could reliably get sharp images at any distance. Please note that I own other f/1.8 glass (35mm and 50mm) and that I have no trouble nailing focus with those lenses wide open with a decent keeper rate. I now own three Tamron lenses and I will be very reluctant to purchase a fourth. Buying this lens is a gamble unless you know you can return it for full refund without jumping through hoops. Camera and lens service being what it is in Australia doesn't help the situation.

3. 1/10Not recommendedby Trvthseeker · September 20 2014 · paid $250

   Cons: Lerns fell apart

   Purchased the older (Non=Di) model used. Had it mounted on the camera on a tripod, with the lens pointed at the floor. The lens fell apart. The entire telescoping part fell out. I have never had a lens of any price from anyone fall apart. This has to be the ultimate in poor design. The camera store said I would have to send it to Tamron for repair, at $160.00 and up. They also offered to sell me the new Di model for $499.00. With a design flaw like this, I felt it would be sending good money after bad, and did not buy another Tamron. It won't even work as a boat anchor, it is too light. As you can tell, I am really upset.

4. 9/10Recommendedby robberstea · December 5 2012 · paid $400

   Pros: sharpness, smooth bokeh, bargain price, handling, focus limit switch, weight

   Cons: minimum focus distance, kit lens build quality

   I love this lens. It does everything I need it to do and never gets in my way. The lens has all the features I need and offers flawless handling. The optical performance leaves nothing to be desired. The wonderful bokeh, focal length and focus limit switch make what could be a specialized lens highly adaptable. Whether I’m doing product shoots, taking a stroll through the woods or documenting a wedding this lens is always on hand. With its small size and light weight, there is no reason not to have it in your camera bag. In the less than one year I’ve owned it, it has captured some of my favorite images. All this from one of the cheapest macro lenses available. It’s a no-brainer for me to recommend this lens.

   View my full review (including pictures) at: http://jeffreypalmerphoto.com/photoblog/?p=1041

5. 7/10Not recommendedby tclune · December 1 2010 · paid $410

   Pros: Extremely sharp, creamy bokeh

   Cons: CA, too cramped macro focal distance

   I picked up the Tamron 90mm f/2.8 1:1 macro lens while the Tamron $50 rebate is still in effect (good through the end of year). I am pretty much limited to lenses that are $500 or less, and have a Nikon D5000, so I was interested in a lens with a focusing motor. This lens, after rebate, was just over $400. One of the things that I wanted was to use the lens for indoor photos of school plays and the like, so I wanted it to be as bright as possible. I don't currently have a macro lens, so that was a plus -- although I am not really into macro photography, and have the Kenko 3 extension tubes set that has met what little need I have for such things so far.

   I am very favorably impressed with many aspects of this lens. It is sharper and brighter than the Nikon 85mm f/3.5 micro lens which was also in my price-range. This Tamron is just about as sharp as a lens can possibly be. Its color rendition, contrast, and bokeh are very pleasing. The motor is not silent, but close enough for me. The speed of focus is adequate for my purposes -- I don't do sports shooting and the like. Truth to tell, I don't have the chops for anything that won't sit still for me to figure out what I need to do.

   Two aspects of the lens were disappointing, however. First, there is a lot more chromatic aberration (CA) than I was expecting, especially given SlrGear's assessment of CA on this lens. I use the auto-lateral CA removal with Capture NX2 and I never see any CA after that on any other lens I own -- even those that are known for their tendencies in this direction (my other lenses include the Tokina 12-24 f/4 DX II and the Nikon 35mm f/1.8). This lens, however, showed very obvious CA, especially wide open, even after removing lateral CA. The good news is that I am able to fully remove the CA using Capture NX2's axial CA removal slider. I just wasn't expecting to have to.

   Second, the clearance distance between the lens and subject at 1:1 is stunningly short. Because the lens trombones and is recessed into its housing, at 1:1 the front of the lens housing is not much more than one inch from the focal point. I was expecting much better working distances from a 90mm lens. Macro isn't that important to me, so this isn't that big a deal. But, if I were actually caught up in macro (which I imagine the target market is) this lens would make me uncomfortable for that use. And it would not be possible to add one of the Kenko extenders to increase the magnification of this lens.

   Overall, I am quite happy so far with this lens. It is a very good bargain. But it is not an unalloyed blessing.

   I have a small gallery of photos that I took while evaluating this lens that shows the CA issue as well as the wonderful sharpness and creamy bokeh here: http://www.dpreview.com/galleries/6370541681/invite/77B3D176D43E47D6ADAFBF306EC04A51 In addition, the gallery may illustrate a problem that I have heard others mention -- on smooth focal regions, the focusing system does not seem to function as well as many other lenses do. But, as I comment in the gallery, I'm not absolutely sure that the back-focusing on one of the images was the fault of the lens and not "cockpit error." I don't think so, but I can't be positive.

   ETA: Having lived with this lens for a year or so now, I wouldn't buy it again. I don't use it much anymore because of the LoCA and its tendency to miss focus at mid distance. I will still use it for macro photography, although I wish it had a better working distance. And, if I am specifically shooting portraits outdoors, I will include this lens in my bag. But, for the most part, it just sits at home. So I've changed my recommendation to a "no," even though the facts about the lens haven't changed over the last year. The lens isn't awful, but it is the only lens that I own that I have such luke-warm feelings about using.

6. 9/10Recommendedby Mac_In_FL · July 23 2010 · paid $325

   Pros: A bargain. Can serve as macro and portrait. Sharp wide open ... stop it down and it just gets better.

   Cons: Focus is slow but not unusual with macro lens. Build quailty is not top tier but good for price.

   I continue to be amazed at the quality this lens can provide. It was one of the first I picked up when migrating to Nikon system. In addition to being an excellent macro lens, I have heard the Tamron 90/2.8 called the "poor man's portrait lens" and indeed it can wear two hats.

   As a straight macro lens, it leaves little to be desired. Performance is good wide open and continues to improve until around f11 or so. I think the photographers technique will be the only limitation when using this lens.

   The Tamron can also serve as a good portrait lens, though a little long on DX sensor. The only drawback is the focus can be a little slow and noisy compared to an AF-S lens but is to be expected considering the wide focusing radius on a macro lens.

   To underscore how good this lens is, I later upgraded to the Nikon 105/2.8 AF-S VR. The Nikon is a fine lens and has its own unique advantages but I was surprised to find that the Tamron out performed the Nikon at every aperture regarding sharpness, especially wide open f2.8. I planned to sell the Tamron to cover the cost of the Nikon upgrade but after a year, I still have the Tamron. Considering how little I have in the lens, doubt that I will ever sell it. It is that good.

   Very few downsides:

   - the lens barrel extends out quite a bit when close focusing.

   - build quality is a not professional grade but it doesn't cost $$$ so a fair trade-off.

   - focusing is way under-damped. When disconnected from a camera body, the lens barrel will extend if held vertical.

   I highly recommend this lens, especially if you are starting a a new system on a budget. Great lens!

7. 8/10Recommendedby lightknight · February 5 2010 · paid $400

   Pros: very sharp, good focal length

   Cons: build quality

   This is a very sharp lens and it is highly competitive with almost any other, whether for macro or landscape: see the following landscape:

   http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightknight/670141328/sizes/o/

   Macro

   http://www.flickr.com/photos/lightknight/607325830/sizes/o/

   I would have any number of these and I know that comparing them with other lenses that I have they are around as good as one can get sharpness wise.

   The main issue with it for me is that its build quality, while smartly presented (which is why I have given it 6) , leads to it being too unreliable as a day to day lens for a semi or pro photographer. As the lens trombones out during close focusing it has twice broken its internal plastic retaining lugs allowing the object lens to literal fall out. The fist time this cost me about $250 to repair, but the second time I have given up and it now sits in my cupboard unused and unloved. This is a shame.

8. 7/10Not recommendedby yanjianh · October 7 2009 · paid $460

   Pros: Lightweight, sharp

   Cons: too easy to get sand in, very special serice

   I need a lens for portrait and macro. I narrowed down two choices: Nikon 105mm f/2.8G ED IF AF-S VR or Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di. I searched the internet. Thom Hogan says ” The big difference is this (between the Nikon and tamron): for $400 less money, you give up VR, focus speed, and a bit of build quality from the Nikon 105mm. That's about it. The Tamron 90mm is the poor man's mid-range macro.” (http://www.bythom.com/105AFSlens.htm). I learned the Nikon is bulkier, heavier and cost much more, the tamron is cheaper, optic quality if not better, at least as good as the Nikon, I also learned from somewhere Tamron’s service is good, fast, six years. I am not a professional, not going to use it a lot, so I ordered the Tamron from B&H in May15, 2009.

   I tried the lens to shoot a quarter; it IS sharper than my Nikon 28-105mm D. it is summer time, I bring my boy to North Beach in Chicago. I quickly found that the lens refuse to focus automatically without any warnings. It just won’t focus when I press the shutter bottom. But if I power the D200 off and on, or unscrew the lens off the body and put back again, the focus will be back. Tamron uses a push and pull mechanism to switch from manual focus to automatic focus, actually I like this, but the problem is the switch is not smooth. Sometimes I have to first turn the lens about 45 degree before I can pull it back.

   I remembered I read somewhere some one is saying it has the same problem. I want the lens, don’t want to return it. Summer is good, I used it for about three to five times on the beach, but the problems are getting worse. So I decided to send it back to Tamron for a check.

   Tamron mailed back. Saying it needs 160.0$ to repair and it is not under warranty. The repair listed is

   “ SK Evidence of shock damage

   F Focus defect or poor image quality

   Z Zoom defect

   1 General check, clean, and adjust

   2 ETA:10, Business days depending on volume”

   This morning (Oct 6, 2009) I called 1-800-827 8880. A gentleman answered. I said I just used the lens four to five times, and I never dropped or bumped the lens, how could it be shock damage” He asked me to wait him to get the lens. He came back saying the lens has sand in it, it is the sand causing the problems, so not covered by warranty. I said I did use it on beach, sand could be there, but it might not be the cause of the problems. He then said, actually the lens needs a “major repair”, they are doing me a favor, price it for a “minor” repair. I asked him if he really believes it is the sand that causes the problems, he confirmed and told me to think about it, and I don’t need to make a decision at the moment( to pay the 160.0$).

   I hang up, not happy, the estimate did not say anything about sands, instead “shock damage”. So I called again. This time a lady answered. I told Her in a very calm voice” I might not be in a good mood, so I am sorry”. The lady said “I am not in good mood too”. So I tried to tell the story. Not long into it, she interrupted me, saying I can keep going on and on, but it will not change the conclusion, sand causes the problems and not covered by warranty, and she has that lens too, it is the best lens Tamron ever produced, no problems at all. Then I asked if I paid the money, you fix it, and when it gets back, the sand is no more there, but the problems come back, will tamron refund the money because that approves it is not the sand that causes the problems. The lady said no, if the problem comes back, they can repair it again. I said, then it approves it is not the sand causing the problems. She said they could be caused by something else, but they can’t refund you. I asked, why not, and then she said “hold on”. I waited, waited about five minutes, then another voice said hello. I said I was talking to a lady, the lady wanted me to hold, I don’t know how the phone got it to you. Then I was transferred to the lady in the service dept again.

   The lady said “sorry, I have another call”. She said she talked to the manager, the highest person in charge of the repairs. The manager said they made a mistake, it is a major repairs, needs to charge more than 300.0$. The lady then said, at least it needs 240.0$ instead of the 160.0 to repair it, but it is their mistake, so they will honor the 160.0$. I began to feel guilty if i don't accept the kind 160.0$ offer, but I stupidly repeated the same question if she really believes it is the sand or the sand particle is coincidental there. She told me to hold again.

   I waited this time much longer; the phone went back to the operator again in about 8 to 10 minutes. I asked the lady in the service dept if you asked me to “hold”, will the phone go back to the operator. The lady said” yes, it loops”.

   I asked the lady if there is Tamron authorized service agents in Chicao, The lady said”no, there is only one in California, they will charge you three times more”.

   I gave them my credit card number, 160.0$, a lifelong big lesson.

   Here are a few things I learned:

   1.The repairs stated on the Repair Acknowledgement/Estimate” might not be the real cause, as “shock damage” to “sand” in my case.

   2. They will make mistakes in estmate, from “major repair” to “minor repair”. They should charge from more than 300 to 240 to 160, they are doing me great favors.

   3. Their phone loops. They will ask you to hold, the time during “hold”, the phone will loop from the service department to the operator of the company. However, the operator is nice enough to transfer you back to the service agent you were talking with, and the line was not cut.

   4. No Tamron authorized service agent in Chicago, only one in California, it might charge three times more.

   5. Sand will easily get into the lens (my years old Nikon 28-105mm is not, taking so many pictures on the beach). Sand particles at least will stop the auto focus that can be saved by power off the body and void the warranty.

Reader reviews were submitted by Imaging Resource readers and are shown as written.