Tamron SP 90 macro or Pentax 100 WR macro


walt

Link Posted 26/07/2018 - 23:33
JAK wrote:
walt wrote:
Quote:
......

Thanks that was very helpful. One more question if I may, does the focus ring rotate during AF?

It's more of a focus barrel than a ring, and it doesn't rotate during AF.

The 100mm macro tends to left on my K-1 ready for anything unusual that turns up in the garden!

Sounds good, I'll keep my eye out for one. Thanks.
Walt
Flickr
Picasa

davidwozhere

Link Posted 27/07/2018 - 01:44
Image quality between the Pentax and Tamron versions is about the same - damned good. I don't find any problem with the Tamron auto/manual clutch. The focusing ring is gigantic and the fore and aft movement is about 1/8th inch.
Both the *istDS and the K5 are incurably addicted to old glass

My page on Photocrowd - link

walt

Link Posted 27/07/2018 - 18:19
davidwozhere wrote:
Image quality between the Pentax and Tamron versions is about the same - damned good. I don't find any problem with the Tamron auto/manual clutch. The focusing ring is gigantic and the fore and aft movement is about 1/8th inch.

I think I'd be pretty happy with the image quality of either, although re-reading a test in a close-up photography magazine the Pentax 100 WR was substandard in the image quality. However even the mag said they thought this was unusual and felt that their lens was faulty. The thing it did point out to me that I'd forgotten about is that the tamron SP 90 2.8 Di has a pretty short min working distance from the front of the lens of 9cm, whereas most macros in this range have between 11-15cm with the Pentax being 13cm. Something else for me to mull over.
Thanks to all who took the time to help me try and make my mind up. It may take a while..... or a bargain...
Walt
Flickr
Picasa
Last Edited by walt on 27/07/2018 - 18:22

davidwozhere

Link Posted 28/07/2018 - 01:07



This is a Tamron 90 shot. I was flat on the ground with the front element about 10inches away from this fellow -- who was amazingly patient with me!
It needed stopping down somewhat more but I was afraid he'd leg it so I shot with what I had. ISO200, f7.1, 1/800th
Both the *istDS and the K5 are incurably addicted to old glass

My page on Photocrowd - link
Last Edited by davidwozhere on 28/07/2018 - 01:10

richandfleur

Link Posted 28/07/2018 - 03:57
That Tamron is really good. When setting the individual lens calibration values on my cameras, this was the only lens I had that didn't require adjustment, and I was blown away with the definition when checking the focus points. Also almost complete lack of chromatic aberration also, which plagued my Tamron 70-300 zoom lens.

Would highly recommend either to be honest, you can't really go wrong and it's more down to do you need WR for example.

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 01/08/2018 - 17:06
I preferred the Tamron; the WR Pentax I had had quite a lot of purple fringing wide open (not an issue for macro but I planned on using it for portraits as well). Despite being plastic I thought the Tamron felt more solid and tightly put together as well.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

Tyr

Link Posted 01/08/2018 - 17:11
I've used both and currently have the DFA100WR. The Tamron purple fringes a lot more than the Pentax. The Pentax is smaller, lighter and WR. Pentas has quick-shift focus. The Pentax is basically a Limited in all but name, on of the best built lenses I've ever seen.

The Tamron is cheaper and has a focus limiter. The Tamron is good, but I prefer the Pentax.

walt wrote:
davidwozhere wrote:
Image quality between the Pentax and Tamron versions is about the same - damned good. I don't find any problem with the Tamron auto/manual clutch. The focusing ring is gigantic and the fore and aft movement is about 1/8th inch.

I think I'd be pretty happy with the image quality of either, although re-reading a test in a close-up photography magazine the Pentax 100 WR was substandard in the image quality. However even the mag said they thought this was unusual and felt that their lens was faulty. The thing it did point out to me that I'd forgotten about is that the tamron SP 90 2.8 Di has a pretty short min working distance from the front of the lens of 9cm, whereas most macros in this range have between 11-15cm with the Pentax being 13cm. Something else for me to mull over.
Thanks to all who took the time to help me try and make my mind up. It may take a while..... or a bargain...

Remember that focus distance is the distance to the focal plane (sensor) not the front element!
Regards,
Dan

https://www.flickr.com/photos/honourabletyr/

walt

Link Posted 01/08/2018 - 18:01
I assume there must be some lens quality control issues with the last 2 posts, where purple fringing comes up as a problem on both and neither.... Thanks for the feedback.

Just a note to say, that I did try and make it clear that the working distance was taken from the front of the lens not the sensor in my previous comments.

I'm still unsure on what to do as none of the Pentax fit macros meet all my requirements. I'll keep my eye out but I don't think I've ruled out anything yet. Yesterday I went out with the FA 100 F3.5 on the KP, today I went out with the Sigma 180 F3.5 macro on the KP and my Olympus macro setup. There is no doubt about it the Olympus suits me very well, I just wish there was something in Pentax land that matched it's features as I'm really enjoying the KP, much more than any other Pentax I've owned.
richandfleur wrote:
That Tamron is really good. When setting the individual lens calibration values on my cameras, this was the only lens I had that didn't require adjustment, and I was blown away with the definition when checking the focus points. Also almost complete lack of chromatic aberration also, which plagued my Tamron 70-300 zoom lens.

Would highly recommend either to be honest, you can't really go wrong and it's more down to do you need WR for example.

Thanks for that. I had 2 copies of the Tamron 70-300 one suffered purple fringing a lot more than the other, but I'd wish not to have any purple fringing to deal with on macros.
Walt
Flickr
Picasa

Tyr

Link Posted 02/08/2018 - 17:01
walt wrote:
I assume there must be some lens quality control issues with the last 2 posts, where purple fringing comes up as a problem on both and neither.... Thanks for the feedback.

Older film designs, especially telephotos do tend to have some PF in my experience. I remember that PF on the Tamron was only an issue wide open but was pretty much gone by f/4. Even then it is very minor and only on specular highlights that were overexposed (on metal, glass, water, those sorts of things). The Pentax has a tiny bit of blue haloing (not quite PF) wide open in the same circumstances. Both are great lenses though.

Here are some of the few photos I took with the Tamron 90mm Macro. I happened to be testing the lens so took a series of shots at different f-stops.

There is a bit of PF at 100% on the specular highlight on the 'nose' in this f/2.8 shot. It is a non-issue though as you can't even see it in this screen version. Resolution was amazing on the K10D. There is moire even at f/2.8!

004 by Daniel Perlak, on Flickr

Resulution peaks at f/5.6.

006 by Daniel Perlak, on Flickr

Still more than adequate at at f/13. f/16 is where the quality noticeably drops off.

012 by Daniel Perlak, on Flickr

Here are some with the Pentax 100mm WR Macro:

This one is only of the few at f/2.8 I could find with blue fringing. Bear in mind that this is a vertical crop of a landscape photo so less than 1/2 of the frame. That means any imperfections will be amplified. I've also noticed the bokeh is a bit nervous in this shot.

005 by Daniel Perlak, on Flickr

Resolution peaks at f/5.6:

012 by Daniel Perlak, on Flickr

I haven't tended to push the Pentax past f/11.

098 by Daniel Perlak, on Flickr

Here is one at f/32. You'll notice it is much softer/less detailed but you get the extra DoF.

097 by Daniel Perlak, on Flickr

I think the Tamron out resolves the Pentax a bit. The Pentax is smaller, lighter and WR.

Hope this helps.
Regards,
Dan

https://www.flickr.com/photos/honourabletyr/
Last Edited by Tyr on 02/08/2018 - 17:04

walt

Link Posted 03/08/2018 - 09:24
Dan, thanks very much for taking the time to do this. I think I can say based on the largest sizes on flickr I'd be happy with the fringing on either lens wide open, and as you say closing down removes any traces. I just don't think I shoot any of my macros wide open, I usually stop down at least one stop if stacking and a couple of stops just to balance resolution with depth of field.
Your model for the tamron is beautiful, I'm not familiar with it but looking through my books if it was taken in Europe or North Africa I think it might be a Red-Veined Dropwing (Trithemas arteriosa). I'd love to see such a beauty. Also that sunflower from the Pentax is wonderful, great resolution and a repeating pattern.
Thanks again, I appreciate you clarifying how much (or in this case, little) these lens suffer from fringing/halo effects.
Walt
Flickr
Picasa

Tyr

Link Posted 03/08/2018 - 10:24
walt wrote:
Dan, thanks very much for taking the time to do this. I think I can say based on the largest sizes on flickr I'd be happy with the fringing on either lens wide open, and as you say closing down removes any traces. I just don't think I shoot any of my macros wide open, I usually stop down at least one stop if stacking and a couple of stops just to balance resolution with depth of field.
Your model for the tamron is beautiful, I'm not familiar with it but looking through my books if it was taken in Europe or North Africa I think it might be a Red-Veined Dropwing (Trithemas arteriosa). I'd love to see such a beauty. Also that sunflower from the Pentax is wonderful, great resolution and a repeating pattern.
Thanks again, I appreciate you clarifying how much (or in this case, little) these lens suffer from fringing/halo effects.

No problem, this thread made me go through my older photos and find those of that dragonfly that I'd forgotten about in my search for Tamron macro photos.

Yeah, it is rare that I shoot a macro shot wider than f/5.6. DoF is just too shallow, but it works in some rare instances.

Thanks for the ID on the dragonfly. It was taken in Turkey outside a town called Gumusluck near Bodrum, ancient Halicarnasus. Worst thing about the trip was not finding out that Bodrum is modern Halicarnasus until the last day. I went to the ruins of the Mausoleum of Mausolus but it was closed because it was a Monday .
Regards,
Dan

https://www.flickr.com/photos/honourabletyr/

walt

Link Posted 06/08/2018 - 14:41
Hi, just thought I'd update this thread for anyone going through the same decisions. I went for the Tamron SP 90 F2.8 Di, however I bought new but without seeing one first. That was a mistake on my behalf. The problem for me is that the tamron is a 2 stage process to convert from af to manual. First you have to pull the focus ring back from the AF setting to MF. An easy process, but then you must also set the body switch from AF to MF. This is just to much for the way I work so back it went. Sorry SRS.....
Also this tamron had an issue in liveview where the aperture would randomly keep closing down, you could hear it and see it happen as I also had focus peaking set. Suddenly, you'd have a deep depth of field, then click a tiny depth of field. The lighting hadn't changed, nothing had changed. The reported aperture on the screen stayed unchanged, it was just that the lens had stopped down, if you looked thru the front of the lens you could see a stopped down aperture, then click wide open again. No photos taken, no changes to the camera setting, no af changes. I didn't bother to try and see where the problem lay as I wasn't keeping the lens and didn't want to do anything to it. My Sigma and Pentax macros don't do this.
Also the af in liveview was slower than my pentax macro, probably similar to my sigma.
So I'm back with my olympus as my go to short macro setup and my pentax with sigma 180 macro for my distant stuff. Looks like I will need to take a trip down to srs to see how the Pentax 100 WR works on my kit and decide if it's worth it. I'm not buying one until I can see how it works for me, specifically hunting is my concern on this one without a focus limiter.
Walt
Flickr
Picasa

walt

Link Posted 08/08/2018 - 12:15
Abe_Normal wrote:
I was thinking of going to Olympus to use the 60mm Macro and focus bracketing function (available on eg. E-M5II).

I upgraded from the E-M10 to the E-M10 ii for this feature earlier this year (along with electronic shutter). It's a great feature, it's not perfect on the M10 as there is a slight delay for initial focus in this mode compared to not using it. I assume it's because it needs to do some computational work before starting the bracketing. Of course the critters I photo still move and that can be troublesome, just a little wiggle of an antennae causes me headaches in photoshop...
Abe_Normal wrote:

I have used a manual focus Tamron Adaptall-2 52BB 90mm F/2.5 for a handful of years now. I spotted a Pentax DFA 100mm WR at a good price at the start of the year and thought it would be an obvious upgrade. It wasn't the revelation I was hoping for.

Sure the Pentax is nice and compact, manual focus is smooth and the colours it renders are pleasingly fresh. However, allowing for the difference in focal length, there was no improvement in resolution. At first I was full of wonder at the close minimum focusing distance, but focus breathing became an issue: the changing angle of view was a impediment to focus stacking.

I only use stacking occasionally and I tend to stack a very low number of images, i.e. maybe 2-7 normally, I think I've stacked upto 11 but nothing like you see from some users, i.e. 10's to 100's of images, so I just don't know I've seen a problem with focus breathing on my 60, or even when I've used my Pentax FA100 3.5 macro. I just don't think I'm qualified to pass any comments either way though.

Abe_Normal wrote:
Tyr wrote:
The Pentax has a tiny bit of blue haloing (not quite PF) wide open in the same circumstances.

The DFA 100WR certainly has some effect that shows up wide open under extreme circumstances (cropped 1:1 from centre of frame)

That's not a nice look....!
Abe_Normal wrote:
If Pentax had a focus bracketing function, I probably would have kept the DFA 100WR and got the 1.4TC to go with it, even though it has no focus limiter and uses the noisy, slow screw drive.

I used to use the tamron sp 90 F2.5 adaptall ii that you mention with the Pentax 1.7 auto focus adapter, I thought it worked pretty good.

Abe_Normal wrote:
Have you considered the Sigma EX DG 105mm? I have no experience with it but it's supposed to have a focus limiter of sorts and an AF/MF switch.

Yes I considered it, I have the Sigma 180 F3.5 macro of the same era, but it also has the 2 step change from AF to MF, pull back the clutch then switch the camera from af to mf, so at the moment I've ruled it out, but I was watching a cheap non DG version, however thought better of it as I've had problems with non DG version of sigma before.
Yesterday I put the Olympus kit on the scales at just under 600 grams body and lens I figure it's just as easy to carry with my Pentax kit as an extra Pentax fit macro lens. I took it out with my KP, Sigma 180 and Pentax DA*300 and was constantly changing between the Pentax and the Olympus. It's probably going to be the way I go forward for now.
Now perhaps a FA*200 macro would.......
Walt
Flickr
Picasa
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.