Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!

SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Tamron SP 90mm f/2.5 vs. Tokina AT-X 90mm f/2.5 Comparison
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:30 am    Post subject: Tamron SP 90mm f/2.5 vs. Tokina AT-X 90mm f/2.5 Comparison Reply with quote

This should be an interesting test. Fellow forum member Hinnerker has just posted a test he conducted, comparing his Tokina AT-X 90mm f/2.5 against a couple of other well-known aftermarket macro lenses. There was at least one well-respected aftermarket macro that wasn't included, however: the Tamron SP 90mm f/2.5. We decided it would be nice to conduct tests comparing these two lenses. But since I don't have the Tokina and Hinnerker doesn't have the Tamron, we've decided to try an intercontinental test of sorts -- using a 10 Euro note. I'll lead off.

First, a bit about my tests, so Hinnerker and everybody else will know what my end of the comparison is all about. My camera is a Canon XS (1000D), a 10mp APS-C DSLR. I mounted the Tamron 90mm to the XS using an Adaptall-2 Nikon mount on the lens and a Nikon to EOS adapter on the camera.

I did not use artificial light. I mounted my XS to a Canon Copy Stand 4, and carried the outfit outdoors and took the photos in open shade during mid-day hours. Except for the coin. I wanted light reflecting off the coin. I used an incandescent light source, then corrected the images' white balance in Canon's DPP software.

The XS shoots images that are 3888x2592 pixels in size, maximum resolution. My XS's in camera sharpness setting is 7 and contrast is 0 (neutral). The 100% crops I show are 900x600 crops of the original images. The resized images of the original ones are 900x600 resizes shown for informational purposes only.

I shot pics of the subject at all apertures, but have posted images taken at apertures f/2.5, f/4, f/8, and f/16 only. If you would like to see one of the other pics I took, please ask and I'll post a copy here.

Here's the 10 Euro note I used for the photos:


The first set of images were based on the note occupying almost the camera's entire frame, or a 1:5 magnification level. The note was located almost exactly 2 feet (about 60 cm) from the sensor plane.

The first four sets of images are 100% crops of the center and corner of the 10 Euro note at 1:5 magnification.

@ f/2.5



@ f/4



@ f/8



@f/16



Next, I adjusted the 10 Euro note for the 1:2 shots. I found out after a few test images that the note was not laying flat enough, so I taped it down to the copy stand base. Here's a resized shot of the entire image:



These next four sets of images are 100% crops of the center and edge of the above image.

@ f/2.5



@ f/4



@ f/8



@ f/16



And finally, I selected a US quarter for the coin images. If Hinnerker wants to take shots of a coin also, I don't think it matters which one he chooses, as long as it's reasonably shiny.

Here's a resize of the image I took at 1:2 magnification:


@ f/2.5


@ f/4


@ f/8


@ f/16


Taking pics of shiny surfaces is an easy way to check a lens's more obvious chromatic aberrations. As you can see in the above images, the Tamron 90mm f/2.5 shows some obvious purple fringing at f/2.5. BY f/4 there is only a tiny amount remaining. And by f/8 it is gone.

I have found from the use of this lens that it is remarkably sharp wide open in the center, although somewhat soft on the corners. By f/8, this lens is amazingly sharp from edge to edge and CA is minimized. This lens's "sweet spot," I've found, is between f/5.6 and f/11. By f/16, some fall off in sharpness becomes evident. By f/22, it is still good, but by f/32, it is just "okay." All in all, however, I rate this Tamron 90mm as one of my two sharpest lenses -- it is on par with my Micro Nikkor 55mm f/3.5. Hmmm . . . I need to compare these two lenses someday soon.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi,

are this .jpg out of the cam or RAW?

Sharpness 7 is to harsh for such a test because of artefacts seeing in the shown pictures of the note and especially the coin..

I can only shot with a 5D MKII, its the only cam i have with liveView - Feature to nail the focus.. sorry.

Another problem is the holographic security section of the note itselfs..
the Zone/area ist destroyed

normally it looks like that.. crop to same size from FF.. so its not equal..




And the best part would be the hologram to show CA and so on..


But i will do my best in trying to this. Another problem is.. there is no quarter dollar in my bag.. only old Rubel from Russia.. Very Happy

Cheers
Henry


Last edited by hinnerker on Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:53 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:03 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Sharpness 7. Shocked I've never always use 3 or 4 and 4 already gives visible halos in some cases... (on files from my 5Dmk1).


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:09 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

AhamB wrote:
Sharpness 7. Shocked I've never always use 3 or 4 and 4 already gives visible halos in some cases... (on files from my 5Dmk1).


Yes.. thats why i prefer shooting with max 3.. to much artefacts.. (small stairs in highlighting areas)

7 says nothing to me, want only see the results of the lens and not the results of an more or less bad piece of Software.. Very Happy

To use max 2 or 3 in sharpness compensates the lost of sharpness by passing the light trough the AA filter in front of the sensor.. thats ok.. but more then this, especially sharpness 7 !! gives nearly no compairble results..

Cheers
Henry


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ok, here are some results, showing parts of your setup and scale..



Sharpening 5 as a compromise between your 7 value.. and please keep in mind, that the following crops from the right down/lower corner of the note is made with the Tokina in Front of Fullframe Sensor !! Not on a APS-C cam !

@2.5, fully open





f4.0






f8







IMHO showing higher aperture values is not neccessary, because only the DOF will grow.. a good lens shows the maximum at f8.. and on a plan sujet like this note. there is no need to show f16 or f32.. this values are only for 3D objects.

Will do the coin shoots later..

Cheers
Henry


Last edited by hinnerker on Tue Aug 03, 2010 11:25 am; edited 4 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:27 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

And here are two crop pics @2.5.

No live view feature on my 400D so i focussed with my Haoda split/prism Screen..




So far this notes shooting with different requirements..

for me, i would prefer the Tokina as a conclusion.. the edge to edge ratio for fullframe is better then in the shown Tamron shot wide open.

In the wide open shot your Tamron fails already on the down/lower right corner of an APS-C Sensor.. The Tokina give better results on a fullframe !!!!

Your Tamron on APS-C, sharpened 7



my Tokina on Fullframe.. sharpend 5





But i think, first of all, the conditions are to different to make such a comparison.

Let us define some exact conditions for that.

Cheers
Henry

BTW.. there are no small "TEN" marks on your note... Very Happy
Funny money?


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 1:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hey Henry. Interesting results. The "look" of your 400D's images seem to be closer to mine than your 5DII's. The 5DII's images look sort of smoother, I'd guess I'd say.

Tell you what I'll do -- I'll retake the test shots with my XS's sharpness cranked down to 3. I probably should have done this anyway, just didn't think of it until I'd already taken the shots. Then I'll post these new images. And perhaps I should post them separately in this thread, rather than just replace the existing ones, to show the difference. What do you think?

I posted f/16 pics mostly to show the sort of sharpness fall-off my lens is experiencing by that point. I agree, there's not much point in using it at that setting since the fall-off is quite noticeable.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Woops... I can not focus.... it's all $$ there. Shocked
Tamron SP rocks, IMO. Wink
Mike


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hinnerker wrote:
BTW.. there are no small "TEN" marks on your note... Very Happy
Funny money?


You mean phony (falsified). But the little 10 marks are under the red EURO/EYPO on his note. I compared a few €20 notes and the hologram part is vertically shifted on each of them, so it's normal and cooltouch's note is real.

cooltouch wrote:
I posted f/16 pics mostly to show the sort of sharpness fall-off my lens is experiencing by that point. I agree, there's not much point in using it at that setting since the fall-off is quite noticeable.


The word falloff is mostly used to indicate a decline in sharpness towards the corners, not to indicate the overall decrease of sharpness due to diffraction. It's also used for vignetting (light falloff) so it's used in a spatial sense mostly.
Not that important, but it's easier if we all use the same language... Wink

@djmike: You're fooled by the stronger sharpening and contrast of the Tamron. The Tokina has better definition and resolution.


Last edited by AhamB on Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:31 pm; edited 4 times in total


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
Tell you what I'll do -- I'll retake the test shots with my XS's sharpness cranked down to 3.

I think both of you need to set in-camera sharpness to 0 to neutralize the differrences between the cameras. Or shoot raw and use the same settings in DPP during processing.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dimitrygo wrote:
cooltouch wrote:
Tell you what I'll do -- I'll retake the test shots with my XS's sharpness cranked down to 3.

I think both of you need to set in-camera sharpness to 0 to neutralize the differrences between the cameras. Or shoot raw and use the same settings in DPP during processing.


Thats right, and more.

I always shot in RAW.. (never .jpg with the intern jpg engine algorythm)..developing in DPP.

I use for the next stage/bunch of images the neutral profil settings in camera to 0,0,0,0...

A serie of 3 shots, compairing and take the best of the 3.

WB to Auto..


@cooltouch

The pics from the 400D are closer, because i havent got a copy stand. Instead of i use my Linhof Double Leg tripod this way..




So i cant adjust the tripod to get the correct distance. Its a bit closer.. 53-55cm..

But i will take the 5D MKII for LiveViewing.. its heavy for me to focus in this position trough the viewfinder.. i can do this, but i would prefer working with 5D..

Cheers
Henry


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:29 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

dimitrygo wrote:
cooltouch wrote:
Tell you what I'll do -- I'll retake the test shots with my XS's sharpness cranked down to 3.

I think both of you need to set in-camera sharpness to 0 to neutralize the differrences between the cameras. Or shoot raw and use the same settings in DPP during processing.


I always shoot raw, and have DPP convert to tif and jpg, then I post the jpgs here.

Okay, I haven't reshot the photos yet, so I'll set everything to 0's.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hinnerker wrote:

The pics from the 400D are closer, because i havent got a copy stand. Instead of i use my Linhof Double Leg tripod this way..


That'll work. Smile


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AhamB wrote:


@djmike: You're fooled by the stronger sharpening and contrast of the Tamron. The Tokina has better definition and resolution.


+1

Cheers
Henry


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

@cooltouch

Another question regarding the setup !

Do you use an Adapter with confirm chip in the shown sequence?

This gives darker images as without confirmation chip.. the metering works different if a resistor/chip is in the electrical contact loop!

If so, i first have to prepare my Tokina with an confirmation Chip on the new mount.

Cheers
Henry


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

No, I just have a plain adapter with no chip on mine. I just have to keep an eye on exposure and adjust the EV as required. Sometimes I may adjust brightness in DPP if I may have missed some on the EV. I think I may have had to do that on one or two of the above photos. Slight brightness adjustments to the raw images in DPP don't seem to affect the image quality.


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 4:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AhamB wrote:

cooltouch wrote:
I posted f/16 pics mostly to show the sort of sharpness fall-off my lens is experiencing by that point. I agree, there's not much point in using it at that setting since the fall-off is quite noticeable.


The word falloff is mostly used to indicate a decline in sharpness towards the corners, not to indicate the overall decrease of sharpness due to diffraction. It's also used for vignetting (light falloff) so it's used in a spatial sense mostly.
Not that important, but it's easier if we all use the same language... Wink

@djmike: You're fooled by the stronger sharpening and contrast of the Tamron. The Tokina has better definition and resolution.


I usually steer clear of semantics issues, but I can parse with the best of them, if need be. So I'll use "reduction in sharpness" instead perhaps. Or maybe "reduction in resolution." To me, these two terms are synonymous. But apparently they aren't to you? In fact, "sharpness and contrast" vs. "definition and resolution" sound awfully like distinctions without differences to me. Would you care to explain the difference?


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

AhamB wrote:
hinnerker wrote:
BTW.. there are no small "TEN" marks on your note... Very Happy
Funny money?


You mean phony (falsified). But the little 10 marks are under the red EURO/EYPO on his note. I compared a few €20 notes and the hologram part is vertically shifted on each of them, so it's normal and cooltouch's note is real.
.
....

ok, i did a mistake during money note shooting.. one moment ago i did realize, that on the front of the Tokina lens was a P-Cir Filter mounted, that i havent seen, because i did shoot an insect behind a window glas, some days before or better should say before the notes shooting and forgot to unscrew the cicular polarisation glas.... so this will give different results from cooltouch's



Will remake the images without filter in front of the lens..



So my results are made with an additional glas/air element, the circular polfilter... sorry for that. But this fault speaks another clear word in the IQ of the Tokina.

I think, tomorrow i will do the shots again.

Cheers

Henry


PostPosted: Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Michael you could borrow a 5D II from a friend or if no friends have one, perhaps rent one for this test.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Boomer,

I'm not hard-core enough to rent one. And I don't have any friends that I know of off-hand who own a 5DII. Now, acquaintences, that's a possibility. I hang out at a Texas-based photo forum and somebody I might know slightly here in Houston may be willing to let me use theirs.

I was hoping to reshoot today, but duty called. We had a major problem with our kitchen plumbing that happened last night. Today, I had to remove everything under the sink, and even cut away a section of wall below the sink, then cut away a section of pipe, and replace everything from the pipe to the sink. And I still had to snake the line out a few dozen feet. This old house has the worst plumbing of any house I've ever lived in. Total cost to me was only $65. If I would have called a plumber, it probably would have been $300 or more.

I'm tempted to think that I can spend all that "money I saved" on photo gear, but that's false economics, isn't it? Still, I did splurge a bit. I got lucky on a Goodwill auction just a few minutes ago, and picked up a Nikon FE for $52. Sorry if I outbid one of you folks. Don't really need an FE, but I've always liked them, and couldn't resist going for this one.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 1:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

One of my favorite Nikons SLR's...in fact my daughter still uses one regularly.


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well... I might be figure this out soon.
I'm trying to get a Bokina in nikon mount in an upcoming trade.
And I already have the Tamron 90/2.5 (later version)...

So we'll se in a while. Smile
Hopefully I can get my camera back from repair soon so I can try it out then. Smile


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Swappo wrote:
Well... I might be figure this out soon.
I'm trying to get a Bokina in nikon mount in an upcoming trade.
And I already have the Tamron 90/2.5 (later version)...

So we'll se in a while. Smile
Hopefully I can get my camera back from repair soon so I can try it out then. Smile


Your Bokina? Vivitar or Tokina Version?
Which DSLR?

Cheers
Henry


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 8:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hinnerker wrote:
Swappo wrote:
Well... I might be figure this out soon.
I'm trying to get a Bokina in nikon mount in an upcoming trade.
And I already have the Tamron 90/2.5 (later version)...

So we'll se in a while. Smile
Hopefully I can get my camera back from repair soon so I can try it out then. Smile


Your Bokina? Vivitar or Tokina Version?
Which DSLR?

Cheers
Henry


It's the Tokina AT-X 90/2.5 I'm trying to get... Waiting for reply from the seller (a local camera store).

The DSLR of mine wich are at repair service is a Canon EOS 5D.


I'm always curious of "hyped" lenses, especially macro lenses...
Thats why I recently bought the Kiron 105/2.8 macro AND the Vivitar 100/2.8 macro. Yet to be tried on my 5D. Very Happy


PostPosted: Wed Aug 04, 2010 9:17 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

cooltouch wrote:
In fact, "sharpness and contrast" vs. "definition and resolution" sound awfully like distinctions without differences to me. Would you care to explain the difference?


Sorry about that messed up sentence. Laughing Pot, kettle, black... Embarassed
But I said "sharpening and contrast". Sharpening doesn't increase resolution, it only enhances edge contrast. That actually makes the definition on the Tamron shots better, and the higher overall contrast just makes it easier to see.
The patterns on the Tokina shots look more cleanly defined to me, without the heavy sharpening thickening the edges. Anyway... Rolling Eyes difficult to make a fair comparison like this.