Tamron 60mm/f2 Macro - PLS HELP return or not

[hoof]

I disagree with your statement. The Tamron has more working distance for macro work, goes to F/2 for non-macro work, and seems to be as sharp as the 60mm from F/2.8 and smaller. What advantage is there to the Nikkor 60mm vs the Tamron, other than the fact you have the Nikon name on it?

So you still believe it goes to F/2 for non-macro work? I'm trying to explain that it goes to nominal F/2 (effective F/4 as displayed) only for macro work, while only slightly past F/2.8 at inf and for non-macro work. Have you tried looking through the lens and fiddling with the aperture lever and the focus position as I suggested above?

Kudos to Tamron though for at least trying to provide DX lenses with smaller F values that are needed to compensate for the smaller sensor size, like the four thirds community is doing... Nikon tends to leave the aperture the same or even shrink it as in case of the 85/3.5.

What advantage? SWM of course, and it is FX for those who care (a minority but a loud one ).

Yes, I have fiddled with the aperture lever, and done histogram analyses on my 60mm. It does indeed go to F/2, at least with my copy. When fully engaged, the aperture blades are not visible when looking into the lens from either end.

In addition, it seems to go to F/2 by design at infinity. My first copy would focus at infinity at F/2.8 but not at F/2 (indicating a slight focus miscalibration). Since the D90 doesn't have a microadjustment feature, I returned it for my current copy, which focused perfectly.

Note that this is a different issue than the exposure issue. My 60mm requires +1EV on my D90 to expose right, but the exposure is consistent regardless of aperture, when adjusting the shutter speed for aperture (e.g. 1/500 at F/2, 1/250 at F/2.8, 1/125 at F/4, etc)

My Tamron 18-270, however, has a miscalibrated aperture lever, so it's still F/6.3 at 270mm when the camera is at F/8, and at F/7.1 when the camera thinks it's F/9, etc. I was very disappointed with the sharpness on this lens until I realized this, so now I use F/11 (to get F/8 aperture). Fortunately, the lens seems to expose right anyway.

A few other lenses in my collection are off by 1/3rd EV due to miscalibrated levers, but none are miscalibrated in the wrong direction (fortunately). The Tamron (and most of my Nikon lenses) seems just fine.[/U]

 

[_sem_]

Yes, I have fiddled with the aperture lever, and done histogram analyses on my 60mm. It does indeed go to F/2, at least with my copy. When fully engaged, the aperture blades are not visible when looking into the lens from either end.

Intriguing. Thank you for your response.

Did you compare the view from the rear to other lenses? On my 50/1.8 and 18-200VR the rim of the aperture diaphragm never disappears from sight as much as with this one when the lever is in the final position.

Do you also see (from the front) the aperture close slightly at f/2.0 for the exposure (or using the DOF preview button)?

(I also obviously see the difference between f/2.0 and f/2.4, eventhough the exposure does not increase)

Note that this is a different issue than the exposure issue.

Understood; I have no focus issues, other that AF seems to be useful only for rather stationary targets mostly.

My 60mm requires +1EV on my D90 to expose right, but the exposure is consistent regardless of aperture, when adjusting the shutter speed for aperture (e.g. 1/500 at F/2, 1/250 at F/2.8, 1/125 at F/4, etc)

Now this part is tricky. I do get quite consistent exposure in A mode if I change the aperture value. But I get the underexposure shown in the histogram table at the start of the thread if I do this myself in M mode. The difference is due to the interference by the meter...

 

[hoof]

Did you compare the view from the rear to other lenses? On my 50/1.8 and 18-200VR the rim of the aperture diaphragm never disappears from sight as much as with this one when the lever is in the final position.

Unfortunately I sold my 18-200 to fund my Tamron 18-270, so I can't check that. I do have a Nikon 16-85mm, and you can definitely see the ring from the rear. My 35mm F/1.8 fully open, the ring can't be seen. It can't be seen from the rear on my 70-200 VRII either. This seems to vary from lens to lens.

Do you also see (from the front) the aperture close slightly at f/2.0 for the exposure (or using the DOF preview button)?

Now that you mention it, the aperture ring does close a bit at F/2, when using the DOF button at F/2. It closes more at F/2.2, and some more at F/2.5, etc. It's slight (nowhere near enough to cut half the area out, which is required for F/2.8), but it's there.

For comparison, I just checked both my 35mm F/1.8G and my 70-200 VRII, and both close a bit (about the same as the tamron) at maximum aperture when the DOF preview button is pressed, so I'd say my Tamron 60mm is matching both of those lenses. I'd be really surprised if my 70-200 VRII was malfunctioning, and malfunctioning the same as my 35mm and my Tamron 60mm.

I couldn't tell with my 16-85mm, as the aperture ring looks very small from the front, and whatever movement is there isn't visible with the DOF button.

As a side note, my inability to see the ring was from the rear (camera) side of the 60mm lens. I can always see the ring from the front.

Based on what I've seen from my lens, and from your results, I'd say you have a miscalibrated aperture lever.[/U]

 

[_sem_]

Another indication that seems solid to me that I obviously see exposure increase in M mode at 1:1 when going to F/4 (wide open) from F/4.8, while I don't see any at inf when going from F/2 to F/2.4. So this is not the case with your sample?

 

[_sem_]

Unfortunately I sold my 18-200 to fund my Tamron 18-270, so I can't check that. I do have a Nikon 16-85mm, and you can definitely see the ring from the rear. My 35mm F/1.8 fully open, the ring can't be seen. It can't be seen from the rear on my 70-200 VRII either. This seems to vary from lens to lens.

Actually the aperture also hides in the 50/1.8, but that's because I can see the inside of the built-in hood, which does not get into the image. If I align the lens so that this lens hood is not visible, the aperture rim is visible.

Now that you mention it, ...

... I'd be really surprised if my 70-200 VRII was malfunctioning, and malfunctioning the same as my 35mm and my Tamron 60mm.

No, this was not meant as a malfunction, just curiosity... I just used to think that the aiming&metering aperture position is equal to the nominal wide-open one. The only related implication being that this might be related to the odd metering requiring +1 (if I get no more light from 2.4 to 2.0, there likely also isn't from 2.0 to the final limit...).

Based on what I've seen from my lens, and from your results, I'd say you have a miscalibrated aperture lever.

I could agree with this if the wide-open-underexposure (in my first two histograms) could be caused by the aperture being closed too much. But, watching the aperture positions and resulting exposures, I don't think this is the case. I think by aperture recalibration one could only redistribute the underexposure to other F-stops, but not eliminate it. I think if you really don't have this underexposure there must be something else miscalibrated.