Used Nikon 105D or New Tamron 90mm

[iflynething]

I'm not going to be able to get to sleep until I ask this question.

I came upon the older 105 macro from Nikon for $450. It's the D version I think - the one that was before the VR. I'm not looking to go the VR route becuase I'll be using a tripod (that saying never gets old) and I just don't want to spend the money for it when one of these will do it just the same.

I was very very very much set on the Tamron from BH/Adorama for $399 after a $60 mail in rebate and then I came upon this 105.

Optically I think they are the same. I have looked online here and other places and they seem very much the same, other than the focal length.

I'm going to be going to Cades Cove, Tennessee and will want to shoot macro and that's why i'm wanting to go ahead and get this 105, I just don't want to regret it.

What would you do. I'm in a position of need vs. wait. If I put an order in for the Tamron, it would probably get here Friday afternoon, I'm leaving that morning to go up there. I could get the 105 and have it for the weekend....

Oh hell, decisions, I hate stuff like this

~Michael~

 

[PatrickHMS]

Oh hell, decisions, I hate stuff like this

~Michael~

Are you anywhere near a place that you could RENT the lens you need for Cades Cove (that is a REALLY cool place to shoot), and buy what you need when you get back ???

...g'nite...

 

[iflynething]

Now there's a though, but the only places I know of a trust is a camera store up in North Carolina (Bigg's) but they don't have a 105 and www.prophotorental.com. The website out of Colorado doesn't have the 105 available for this week, plus it would take some time to get out to me anyways.

At least someone else is up with me at that time

~Michael~

 

[FrankLamont]

The 90mm Tamron is not new as such.

They have a new 60mm DI macro lens (f/2), though.

 

[Derrel]

If you buy the 105mm AF-D Micro-Nikkor lens and use it for three years, you can probably sell it for the same amount then as you would pay for it this week. With the Tamron on the other hand, the resale value will probably be about half of what you payed for it in three years. That's the way it goes with third party lenses, and especially with very popular, commonplace third party lenses.

I bought a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 AF SP macro lens a few years back for $260 used. The optical designs Tamron has been using in its 90mm macro models have been good for quite some time.

 

[iflynething]

The 90mm Tamron is not new as such.

They have a new 60mm DI macro lens (f/2), though.

What I meant by new was....buying new, right from Tamron. I should have said non used.

If you buy the 105mm AF-D Micro-Nikkor lens and use it for three years, you can probably sell it for the same amount then as you would pay for it this week. With the Tamron on the other hand, the resale value will probably be about half of what you payed for it in three years. That's the way it goes with third party lenses, and especially with very popular, commonplace third party lenses.

I bought a Tamron 90mm f/2.8 AF SP macro lens a few years back for $260 used. The optical designs Tamron has been using in its 90mm macro models have been good for quite some time.

I GOT THE 105 NIKON! Picked it up tonight. I heard wonderful things about the Tamron but I wanted and NEEDED this lens. I have a new baby I'm shooting for a friend tomorrow more and wanted to have some close shots of the feet/hands/ears. All of that stuff, plus, like I said, I wanted to have one for this weekend in Cades Cove.

This thing is sharp....at f/57. I just wanted to see how much DOF it had a f/57. How in the WORLD is the DOF STILL shallow (the bamboo i'm shooting indoors is still very much blurred from that background). It it because the DOF is shallow to begin with?

I'm going to have SOOOO much fun with this lens

~Michael~

 

[iflynething]

Here are some samples so...

~Michael~

 

[benhasajeep]

Good choice on the Nikon 105. I believe the third party lenses are decent but not as good at the branded "good" glass. I have the 105d myself and very happy with it for the last 9 years or so.

When you say you have a shallow DOF at f/57 how far back is the background?? At that small of an aperture you should have a large DOF. Is the lens actually closing down all the way? Being used I would check it.

 

[iflynething]

I was shooting a bamboo stick and the background was about 3 ft behind the bamboo tree. The DOF wasn't too much. I was at 1:1 focusing and the tree was only an inch in diameter or so and that's all that was in focus. Looking at the background, you would think I was at 2.8

~Michael~