12-20-2016, 08:14 AM
Welcome on board
There are two reasons why your assumptions will not lead to a valid result. First of all, a comparison across several test systems is an invalid approach in itself. It's tempting to 'normalize' the results, but bound to fail because so many factors influence a test system's maximum resolution, among those the sensor characteristics and the raw converter used in the analysis workflow. Short summary: the MTF results are not comparable across different systems (where every test camera we use is a 'system' in this context).
In addition, you're comparing apples and oranges anyway
The AF-S 20/1.8 was tested on the D3x, so a full frame camera. The Tamron review is fairly dated and based on the D200, a DX camera with a smaller sensor. So border and corner values in those reviews refer to very different spots in the image circle of the lenses.
I can tell you, however, that the Nikkor does provide better sharpness (and way less CAs), and in addition opens up a few additional creative options with its fast f/1.8 aperture and the corresponding shallow depth of field. On the other hand, you lose the flexibility of the zoom.
Give me a little time, and I may be able to provide a few numbers so you can compare yourself
-- Markus

In addition, you're comparing apples and oranges anyway

I can tell you, however, that the Nikkor does provide better sharpness (and way less CAs), and in addition opens up a few additional creative options with its fast f/1.8 aperture and the corresponding shallow depth of field. On the other hand, you lose the flexibility of the zoom.
Give me a little time, and I may be able to provide a few numbers so you can compare yourself

-- Markus
Editor
opticallimits.com
opticallimits.com