Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di III Macro VXD lens review

[@ItsEzlan]

i have had this lens for about 3 weeks and it hasn't been off my camera its Amazing

[@phenanrithe]

Nice to see other brands to cover the Z mount. One that seems pretty interesting is the 50-400 mm f/4.5-6.3, also available for Nikon Z.

[@wongsimstudio]

please do comparison with Sony 90 macro and Sigma 105 macro

[@dhavidcg]

What a wonderful image result coming from this lens!

[@_michaelglass]

Right on time! I just searched "Tamron 90mm III Christopher Frost" and you posted this an hour ago 😂🙏

[@classicboy97]

Thank you for the review Chris! Can we expect to see the Sony 28-70/2 GM lens review anytime? I’d love to see your assessment of it, especially in APS-C crop mode 😅

[@christopherfrost]

There will be a review of it soon and just because you asked...I'll test it on APS-C, too :-)

[@marcelo_afonso]

@@christopherfrost ahah on the a5100?

[@christopherfrost]

@@marcelo_afonso Yup. Why not? The a5100 has an excellent 24mp sensor, especially when shooting at ISO 100, and that's all we need for a resolution test.

[@Michael-fw5ef]

Those are beautiful images - that is a fantastic lens.

[@0ooTheMAXXoo0]

Much better than the SLR versions. Glad it is not just a conversion job.

[@holgerokorn3164]

Chris please buy a used OM System OM-1 mark 1 ( price is down ) and do some MFT reviews. Thanks

[@panmaew]

+1 Here. Would love to see this type of reviews of M4/3 lenses.

[@donaldbate3017]

I agree! Chris, I think you would be fascinated with Voigtlander's MFT f0.95 lens series.. or how about their 29mm f0.8!

[@stefanbadass5357]

Nice work Tamron

[@blazerbarrel2]

Nice lens ! Wonderful review as always !

[@vacciniumaugustifolium1420]

Amazing video as always! The big question for me that I've got a hard time to get an answer is ; How does it compare to the Sigma 105 DG DN in term of sharpness at F2.8 and F8.

[@panmaew]

That's a pretty unusual distortion at the corners but that wouldn't normally affect macro work where focused subject is mostly away near the center.

[@ldefranchi]

Thanks! comparison between the macro lens options for e-mount, please! :)

[@christopherfrost]

I'm thinking about it :-)

[@PhotoViking-Nordic]

I love that lens! It is excellent!

[@vankadaru]

can you please do a comparison between this lens and nikon z 105s

[@drtod]

I really wish OM System and/or Lumix would send you their MFT lenses (and cameras).

[@colinfeilen988]

Hi Christopher, My 1979 f2.5 has been my go to for many different Slr systems however the mid distance shots seem over exposed in your test shots ! 😮

[@micahaka]

Chris, would love reviews on the Voigtlander ultra wides. 10mm/12mm/15mm

[@soheilphoto]

Thanks christopher , nice review we want Comparison this lens vs Sigma 105mm DG DN

[@Hazar1905]

yes yes yes! my thoughts exactly

[@omermagen824]

Hi can you do a comparison between all the manual focus 35mm f1.4 lenses? from TTartisan, 7artisans meike, etc. They are all almost exactly the same price and are very similar in their features. It would be interesting to see their differences highlighted!

[@Иван-й4к6х]

Hi Christopher, thank you very much for your great videos !!! can compare Laowa 90mm f/2.8 2x Ultra Macro APO ("budget lens") with a new Tamron 90mm f/2.8 Di III VXD (not so budget). if you would have to choose one of them, which it would be and why ? Thank you very much in advance for your advice (or better, yet, a video).

[@nageshj-v9w]

Hello Chris, please do review of fujifilm new 16-55 mark 2 lens please. we are waiting

[@sethmoyer]

I have the super old version of this lens with the goofy clickable focus ring, and while it's not quite as good as this new one at f/2.8 and the autofocus is loud and ponderous, most of the time you won't be shooting wide open or using autofocus for macro anyway so I haven't been able to justify replacing it 😅

[@killpop8255]

Impressive. Thanks and God Bless.

[@javierRcastro]

This vs the Nikon 105 MC 2.8?

[@ArminHirmer]

nice one

[@dima1353]

I'm pretty sure this lens doesn't "show much breathing" compared to other macro lenses. Don't forget that the focusing stroke of macro lenses is very long and it's easy to be fooled by seeing a fairly large change in the angle of view when turning the ring from infinity to the minimum distance. But I think that compared to other macro lenses, the focus breathing is reduced here. (In the example of focusing from the bottle to the fence, you can see that the breathing is not that huge). Also specifications hint at this: Other 90mm macro lenses have a minimum focusing distance of about 28-30cm. This one has 23cm. So they worked on this issue here. It's unlikely that it is possible to make a macro lens with completely corrected breathing, or maybe it is just not worth it, but I think even such a small difference is worth mentioning. This is still a special and distinct feature undertaken by Tamron engineers.

[@andreasbuder4417]

Funny, I was truly wondering, how this could be a 90mm 1:1 macro with 23cm while all other 90mm macro had longer shooting distances. It never crossed my mind, that focus breathing would be the reason, but now it is obvious. Now I believe, higher focus breathing was either intentional or a welcomed flaw, because it means a more practical working distance…

[@dima1353]

@@andreasbuder4417 Traditionally, focus breathing is simply an inevitable characteristic of prime lenses. And certainly part of the design of macro lenses. They show a certain magnification at a certain distance precisely because they become much longer at the minimum focusing distance. I suspect somewhere around 170-180mm. It's only been a few years since prime lenses with corrected breathing started to appear. I mean among mainstream photographic lenses.

[@simon3461]

I asked myself why it should have such a nice bokeh ? The very small front lens element should make some clearly visible cat-eye-shape bokeh balls, which does not look very good. But overall it should be a great lens, and when you get it with discount it is really cheap.

[@HR-wd6cw]

For the Nikon shooters, if you can catch the Z 105 macro on sale, it's a better value (it has VR and I believe the overall sharpness is a bit better). But if it's not on sale, this is obviously a good alternative. (Sometimes the Z 105 goes for about $850 as it is right now for the holidays).

[@JayJayYUP]

Why would anyone get that older lens for more money? You say you believe sharpness is better, this isn't something that's left up to subjective observations at this stage of photography. There MUST be accompanied MTF/sharpness test charts if you're going to make claims like this.

[@javierRcastro]

@@JayJayYUPsome “ older “ lenses are better than new ones 🤫

[@JayJayYUP]

@@javierRcastro Yeah, but on average, they're not even in the same stratosphere when you look at sharpness for lenses in a similar price bracket or use-case. But of course you use words like "better" that are so vague and can mean anything. I was specifically referring to sharpness which is extremely important on a macro lens.

[@birbs4life174]

Get a used M43 body and try out some of the insane M43 lenses

[@courteoussammy112]

How did Sony dare not send you the 28-70mm f2.0 ???

[@DarkAvenger1234]

How is different than the last tamron 90?

[@JayJayYUP]

Sharper, and for new mirrorless systems.

[@leoncfu]

I paid $750 for Nikon Z 105mm refurbished direct from Nikon USA. Considering it has VR, it’s a better deal than this new, IMO.

[@trowawayacc]

Still no macro autofocus for fuji x

[@christopherfrost]

Yes there are, Fuji make them

[@akkarparkiamopas3401]

When are you going to review 28-70 f2 GM ?....We have been waiting for it 😂😂😂

[@christopherfrost]

Soon :-)

[@cy9nvs]

The Nikon 105 macro regularly is on sale for about the same price, at least here in Germany. I'd only get this Tamron, if it's at least 250€ cheaper, considering how ridiculously sharp the Nikon 105 is, and considering that the Nikon lens also has image stabilization.

[@hoatd1993]

Chris, I think you should use another body to test AF speed. The A7R3 is way outdated and sometimes makes the lens less responsive.

[@christopherfrost]

Nope. The a7R III has fantastically fast autofocus; to take two recent examples, look at my reviews of the Tamron 50-300 and the new Sigma 28-105, where, despite being third party lenses, they focus almost instantaneously. Where the a7R III is currently a little behind is in AF subject tracking ability although it's still quite capable of doing that.

[@Никита-у4т6я]

Too dark for prime lens

[@giklab]

It's a 1:1 macro lens, f/2.8 is normal and expected here.

[@shang-hsienyang1284]

Actually I think it's too fast for a macro lens. I'd rather have a smaller lens and f/8 maximum aperture. Who needs f/5.6 or wider at large magnification ratio of 1:1?

[@Vantrakter]

@@shang-hsienyang1284 It's a macro lens with fast AF, so it's a pretty good everything 90mm lens. In theory it can also have decent sunstars stopped down past f/8 since 12 aperture blades.

[@WMedl]

Sorry, but the DoF for so close shots is so tiny that you will never shoot at f/2.8 or f/4 and struggle nevetheless for millimeters ...