06-28-2010, 01:51 PM
[quote name='Дон Ðндре' date='28 June 2010 - 09:05 AM' timestamp='1277708741' post='737']
The Tamron 90 Macro is 100€ cheaper and a great macro lens. From the test it looks like f/22 is the only aperture where these lenses differ and where the Nikon shines.
I wonder how some lenses produce really really bad results at f/22 and others (newer ones) do fairly well. Has there been some advancement in the design of aperture blades?
[/quote]
are you sure you read the graphs right? The two Tamron's that have f/22 values are the same or better than the Nikon at f22, and
the other macro lenses do not have f/22 values, but they have values for f/32, which are of course much worse.
The Tamron 90 Macro is 100€ cheaper and a great macro lens. From the test it looks like f/22 is the only aperture where these lenses differ and where the Nikon shines.
I wonder how some lenses produce really really bad results at f/22 and others (newer ones) do fairly well. Has there been some advancement in the design of aperture blades?
[/quote]
are you sure you read the graphs right? The two Tamron's that have f/22 values are the same or better than the Nikon at f22, and
the other macro lenses do not have f/22 values, but they have values for f/32, which are of course much worse.