Discussion in 'Nikon' started by david_achille, Jan 30, 2009.

  1. Hi All,
    I am wondering if it was worth changing from the Tamron 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro to the Tokina 100mm F/2.8 used on the D300.
    On the durability side the Tokina may win as I already have a 12-24mm model but on the IQ side I am a bit undecided.
    Your comment would be much appreciated.
    Beau Bassin, Mauritius
  2. What is your budget?
    If you can afford it, I believe the Sigma 150mm f/2.8 is better that either.
  3. David, I use the Tamron with the D300 and absolutely love it. It was a tough call when I was searching for a macro but the Nikkor 60mm was too short for me, the 105VR too long. I considered the Sigma 150mm macro (also very highly rated) and will definitely get it if I ever switch to FX but it was too long for me with the D300. YMMV of course.
    Photozone gave the 90mm macro a Highly Recommended rating so I went with it and never looked back. I like the 90mm range with the D300 and it is also an outstanding head-and-shoulders portrait lens to me.
    BTW, I also have the Tokina 12/24 and absolutely love it but would I switch to the Tokina 100mm? Not a chance.
  4. I have read a lot of praises for the Tamron 90 mm SP f2.8 macro. I bought a used copy for myself and I must say it is a very nice lens. I also have the Nikon 105 VR and Sigma 150 mm f2.8. The Tamron 90 mm compares very favorably with the Nikon 105 VR.
  5. Selling (and loosing money) a near perfect lens to get another one that might me a bit more durable? Interesting idea.
    Then why not get the 105AF Micro Nikkor or a used 30 year old Kiron. These are even better built. I guess the Kiron may well be the only one still proper in 30 years from now^^. Stay away from the Nikkor 105VR - because of VR.
    Of course if you chase insects near a pond and fall into the water all these lenses are drowned :)
  6. I vote for Tamron, but whatever lens you chose, try'it before ...The quality control is'nt nowadays , what it use to be.
  7. I've used both. For me it's a wash considering images. The exterior of the Tokina is rugged, but I can't see the Tamron's build being an issue.
    I'd stick with the Tamron.
  8. The Sigma 70mm Macro is reported to have outstanding optics.
  9. I have the Tokina. I use it on a D200 and D700. It is well built, sharp across the full frame, relatively low CA's, low vignetting especially on the D200. It is sharp at f/2.8, but the sweet spot for the lens is f/5.6 to f/8. It takes great pictures. One drawback is the switch from auto to manual focus. The focusing ring has to be adjusted in a push-pull manner. You can't shift from auto to manual by just using the focusing ring. Overall, I like it. A good review of the lens is at.
  10. My 90mm f/2.8 Tamron macro is, IMHO, unbeatable optically. Its resolution is practically diffraction limited, and you can't get better than that! It's perfectly usable wide open, and only needs stopping down to f/4 to become excellent across the whole full-frame format, and there aren't many lenses you could say that about.
    I have every respect for Tokina lenses, especially their build quality, but I doubt that you'll better the Tamron optically. Why not wait until you actually need to replace the lens (for example if it becomes worn out) before you think about swapping?
  11. I have the Tokina 100mm f2.8 macro. I use it for everything from a bit of macro to a lot of product shoots and portraits. I've had it 3 months and it's paid for itself several times over.
    Going from A/F to M/F or back is about as easy as it gets. Just click the focus ring back and manual, click it forward and let it do it's thing. All my tight shots of small products are shot AF as it does a very accurate job.
    Mine is used on both a D1X and D700 and it does a great job on both.

Share This Page