09-02-2015, 08:27 PM
(This post was last modified: 09-02-2015, 08:28 PM by popo.)
I suspect the separated designed/made designations is in case they move production later on. Like many things, Apple may not be the first but they were the ones to make things stick, and they were the first I noticed using Designed in California, made in (somewhere else). I believe for a product only the "made in" part is required. The "designed in" part is just marketing.
The 45 might have been interesting if I didn't already get the Sigma Art. Not sure I use 35mm enough to upgrade to any from the old 35/2, but I do welcome this model. Now, if they did a 135/1.8 VC, then we're really talking.
<a class="bbc_url" href="http://snowporing.deviantart.com/">dA</a> Canon 7D2, 7D, 5D2, 600D, 450D, 300D IR modified, 1D, EF-S 10-18, 15-85, EF 35/2, 85/1.8, 135/2, 70-300L, 100-400L, MP-E65, Zeiss 2/50, Sigma 150 macro, 120-300/2.8, Samyang 8mm fisheye, Olympus E-P1, Panasonic 20/1.7, Sony HX9V, Fuji X100.
Quote:Be sure to get a Micro-Nikkor 55mm f2.8. Light, well built, well sharp with nice bokeh, very nice MF feel and 1:2 macro or 1:1 with its PK-13 extension tube.
Brightcolours,
I can't believe the coincidence of your comment, "I bought one today" and am still suffering from "multi exstaticism" at an extraordinary level from it's sharpness! I was going to buy a AF-D 50mm F1.4 but the 55mm macro came up on "le bon coin" and unbelievably at Montpellier fifty clicks up the road from me for 180 euros. I even took the laptop to check it was well centered.
I had already read Ken Rockwell's review of it and he says it's the sharpest lens Nikon have ever made, that was enough for me! There's a lot of AF-Ds coming up on the bon coin site so I have studied the Nikon gospel according to Ken Rockwell, it's been very useful especially with regard to multiple models of zooms where the reviews have otherwise disappeared off the map.
I haven't checked the lens out in macro yet other than a quick shot, just took a few pics around the town. Ken didn't mention the adapter for 1:1, I'll have to check it out. At closest focus, the end of the extended barrel is 2 .125 inches from the subject, difficult to imagine getting closer, FF is not ideal for macro anyway. Last thing is the friction setting "A-dot" doesn't seem to turn, at least I daren't try to turn it with anymore force.
After carrying around the D750 with Sigma 28-70 I realized I don't want heavy lenses for walking around any more (other than the Tamron tele for birding)
The great thing is you can buy a "whole kit" of reliable AF-D compact lenses for less than the price of AF-S 24-70!
The AF-D 24mm F2.8 should be here at the weekend.
Thanks!
Amendment: The AF friction does turn, but it's a little stiff!
Quote:Aren't these a little ... ah ... large for f/1.8 ?
While 'Art'-like, still no statement about improved QC (and yes, Tamron, you could also do some homework on this ...).
It was also about time that they improved their rather crappy finish honestly speaking.
The 45mm f1.8 indeed is pretty large.
But the 35mm f1,8 is not especially large, when you see that they went for recessing the front element a bit (which naturally makes it a bit longer and wider than the Canon 35mm f2 IS USM and Nikkor 35mm f1.8. It is not unusually or shockingly larger.
09-03-2015, 06:32 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-03-2015, 08:25 AM by Brightcolours.)
Dave, I was actually talking about the manual focus predecessor of the lens you bought  .... That AF Micro-Nikkor 55mm f2.8 you found/bought was the short lived AF version of that lens (the friction thing gave that away). It is a very good lens optically, and pretty rare as it was not a big seller in its time, due to the quality of the 1st Nikkor AF SLRs (which were not selling in huge numbers yet) and the unusual design of the lens with a small focus ring.
Differences with the MF version: The MF version has greet MF action with a well designed focus ring, the AF one you have goes to 1:1 all by itself as it extends more with a double tube (which is why you have not read about the PK-13 extension ring).
You bought yourself a rare gem there! I had the MF version for a short while, but gave it to a friend because she might use it more than me, as I also have a dear to me micro-Nikkor 55mm f3.5 from the 60'-70's. Enjoy your nice little macro, it has lovely optics.
On second thought I think the Tamron's designers are a bit very close to Sigma's design rules, even the shiny plate indicating Art, Contemporary and Sports had to be imitated. On a shop shelf at remote distance and not seing the ring at the mount, both manufacturer's products could get confused. I wonder why Tamron didn't do more to make their's different?
What I like is the close minimum distance. Even if the lenses would not perform top peak at close distance, it's sometimes good to have a "nearly macro" aboard.
Brightcolours,
Ah right yes this is the;
Nikon 55mm f/2.8
AF MICRO-NIKKOR (1987-1989)
Ken Rockwell says they are rare, but there are still 49,999 others that were made, so there's still a bunch out there somewhere!
BTW. The sellers eye[ATTACHMENT NOT FOUND]
The Tamron SP 35mm f1.8 USD VC appears to be a little gem. I already pointed out the smooth bokeh for a 35mm lens, but it appears that it is sharper wide open than the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art and Canon EF 35mm f2 IS USM, and it has better coatings/veil-/flare control than the Sigma. And yes, the Tamron design is very Sigma like, a tad more polished. Kind of like how the new Alfa Giulia is very half BMW3 and half Audi A4, and the new Renault Talisman is very Volkswagen Passat like.
The size difference with the Canon is largely (no pun intended) explained by the more recessed front element, which becomes quite evident when you see them side by side.
http://blog.krolop-gerst.com/technik/tam...vc-usd-sp/
So, I guess that when I have the money in future to get a new 35mm, I might be getting a 3rd SP, from yet another era (I have the Tamron SP 500mm f8 from the 1980's, the Tamron SP 90mm f2.8 Di Macro from 1997/2000 (update)). For the bokeh .
There's also a fluorine coating involved which helps to clean the front element. Don't think I'd sell the Sigma for it but I'm looking forward to Tamron's efforts in the future. And from now on I'll be careful to recommend Sigma
Still, in Switzerland there's no Tamron service repairing the lenses. Last time, 6 years ago I had to send in a faulty lens bought in England with international warranty to Germany which was quite expensive. There's a dealer/representative closeby, who also represents Leica and Gitzo, so you can imagine how much a service would cost. To be honest, that's as well the same with the Sigma rep, as they demand fantasy prices when buying directly at them.
Quote:The Tamron SP 35mm f1.8 USD VC appears to be a little gem. I already pointed out the smooth bokeh for a 35mm lens, but it appears that it is sharper wide open than the Sigma 35mm f1.4 Art and Canon EF 35mm f2 IS USM, and it has better coatings/veil-/flare control than the Sigma. And yes, the Tamron design is very Sigma like, a tad more polished. Kind of like how the new Alfa Giulia is very half BMW3 and half Audi A4, and the new Renault Talisman is very Volkswagen Passat like.
The size difference with the Canon is largely (no pun intended) explained by the more recessed front element, which becomes quite evident when you see them side by side.
http://blog.krolop-gerst.com/technik/tam...vc-usd-sp/
So, I guess that when I have the money in future to get a new 35mm, I might be getting a 3rd SP, from yet another era (I have the Tamron SP 500mm f8 from the 1980's, the Tamron SP 90mm f2.8 Di Macro from 1997/2000 (update)). For the bokeh .
Love the vehicle/ lens correlation, I guess I fit in the MKI Ford Mexico conversion (crossflow downdraft Weber from the scrapyard) in the standard Ford escort body "with spats" scenario..... :o :lol: I always was a cheapskate  old habits die hard! Eh?
|
