Tamron Macro Lens questions

I have a Canon Elan IIe and need a good ~100mm macro lens for mushroom
photography. I'm leaning toward the Tamron 90mm Macro f/2.8 based on the
review on photo.net and a Google search of past posts to this group. I
have a couple questions:

1) I'll probably buy a used lens. I see these lenses for sale on eBay
and elsewhere with a variety of mounts - I need one for Canon EOS, which
I see only occasionally. My question is, are the mounts built-in or are
they a separate component? In other words, would it possible to pick up
one of these lenses with a Nikon mount then swap that out for a Canon
mount? Are there any other features that make a Tamron 90mm Macro for
Canon specific for Canon systems?

2) Tamron has just released a new version of this lens called a "Di"
(Digitally Integrated) macro. Based on what I've read, I'm pretty
skeptical that this feature is very meaningful in a macro lens - I read
that this improvement in lens design mainly affects edge-sharpness in
shots from wide-angle lenses, and that only a little. Also the lens is
"digitally integrated", though I have no idea why you'd need a different
lens in a digital SLR - in any event, I have a film camera. Has anybody
tried out this new Di macro and noticed any improvement in performance?

Thanks,
Peter

--
If replying by email, be sure to remove KILL SPAM from return address.

Peter Werner wrote:

I have a Canon Elan IIe and need a good ~100mm macro lens for mushroom
photography. I'm leaning toward the Tamron 90mm Macro f/2.8 based on the
review on photo.net and a Google search of past posts to this group. I
have a couple questions:

1) I'll probably buy a used lens. I see these lenses for sale on eBay
and elsewhere with a variety of mounts - I need one for Canon EOS, which
I see only occasionally. My question is, are the mounts built-in or are
they a separate component? In other words, would it possible to pick up
one of these lenses with a Nikon mount then swap that out for a Canon
mount? Are there any other features that make a Tamron 90mm Macro for
Canon specific for Canon systems?

Specific to body type. You need a Canon EOS version lens.

(There are adptors that will mount some off brand mounts to Nikon
bodies, other than that I don't think you'll find any for
Canon... I might be wrong).


2) Tamron has just released a new version of this lens called a "Di"
(Digitally Integrated) macro. Based on what I've read, I'm pretty
skeptical that this feature is very meaningful in a macro lens - I read
that this improvement in lens design mainly affects edge-sharpness in
shots from wide-angle lenses, and that only a little. Also the lens is
"digitally integrated", though I have no idea why you'd need a different
lens in a digital SLR - in any event, I have a film camera. Has anybody
tried out this new Di macro and noticed any improvement in performance?

I haven't heard much about it, and I'm curious too.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Peter Werner wrote:

I have a Canon Elan IIe and need a good ~100mm macro lens for mushroom
photography. I'm leaning toward the Tamron 90mm Macro f/2.8 based on the
review on photo.net and a Google search of past posts to this group. I
have a couple questions:

1) I'll probably buy a used lens. I see these lenses for sale on eBay
and elsewhere with a variety of mounts - I need one for Canon EOS, which
I see only occasionally. My question is, are the mounts built-in or are
they a separate component? In other words, would it possible to pick up
one of these lenses with a Nikon mount then swap that out for a Canon
mount? Are there any other features that make a Tamron 90mm Macro for
Canon specific for Canon systems?

Specific to body type. You need a Canon EOS version lens.

(There are adptors that will mount some off brand mounts to Nikon
bodies, other than that I don't think you'll find any for
Canon... I might be wrong).


2) Tamron has just released a new version of this lens called a "Di"
(Digitally Integrated) macro. Based on what I've read, I'm pretty
skeptical that this feature is very meaningful in a macro lens - I read
that this improvement in lens design mainly affects edge-sharpness in
shots from wide-angle lenses, and that only a little. Also the lens is
"digitally integrated", though I have no idea why you'd need a different
lens in a digital SLR - in any event, I have a film camera. Has anybody
tried out this new Di macro and noticed any improvement in performance?

I haven't heard much about it, and I'm curious too.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Peter Werner wrote:

I have a Canon Elan IIe and need a good ~100mm macro lens for mushroom
photography. I'm leaning toward the Tamron 90mm Macro f/2.8 based on the
review on photo.net and a Google search of past posts to this group. I
have a couple questions:

1) I'll probably buy a used lens. I see these lenses for sale on eBay
and elsewhere with a variety of mounts - I need one for Canon EOS, which
I see only occasionally. My question is, are the mounts built-in or are
they a separate component? In other words, would it possible to pick up
one of these lenses with a Nikon mount then swap that out for a Canon
mount? Are there any other features that make a Tamron 90mm Macro for
Canon specific for Canon systems?

Specific to body type. You need a Canon EOS version lens.

(There are adptors that will mount some off brand mounts to Nikon
bodies, other than that I don't think you'll find any for
Canon... I might be wrong).


2) Tamron has just released a new version of this lens called a "Di"
(Digitally Integrated) macro. Based on what I've read, I'm pretty
skeptical that this feature is very meaningful in a macro lens - I read
that this improvement in lens design mainly affects edge-sharpness in
shots from wide-angle lenses, and that only a little. Also the lens is
"digitally integrated", though I have no idea why you'd need a different
lens in a digital SLR - in any event, I have a film camera. Has anybody
tried out this new Di macro and noticed any improvement in performance?

I haven't heard much about it, and I'm curious too.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Peter Werner wrote:

I have a Canon Elan IIe and need a good ~100mm macro lens for mushroom
photography. I'm leaning toward the Tamron 90mm Macro f/2.8 based on the
review on photo.net and a Google search of past posts to this group. I
have a couple questions:

1) I'll probably buy a used lens. I see these lenses for sale on eBay
and elsewhere with a variety of mounts - I need one for Canon EOS, which
I see only occasionally. My question is, are the mounts built-in or are
they a separate component? In other words, would it possible to pick up
one of these lenses with a Nikon mount then swap that out for a Canon
mount? Are there any other features that make a Tamron 90mm Macro for
Canon specific for Canon systems?

Specific to body type. You need a Canon EOS version lens.

(There are adptors that will mount some off brand mounts to Nikon
bodies, other than that I don't think you'll find any for
Canon... I might be wrong).


2) Tamron has just released a new version of this lens called a "Di"
(Digitally Integrated) macro. Based on what I've read, I'm pretty
skeptical that this feature is very meaningful in a macro lens - I read
that this improvement in lens design mainly affects edge-sharpness in
shots from wide-angle lenses, and that only a little. Also the lens is
"digitally integrated", though I have no idea why you'd need a different
lens in a digital SLR - in any event, I have a film camera. Has anybody
tried out this new Di macro and noticed any improvement in performance?

I haven't heard much about it, and I'm curious too.

Cheers,
Alan

--
-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource:
-- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.--

Alan Browne wrote

I haven't heard much about it, and I'm curious too.

Two things struck me about it: it felt flimsier than any other Tamron
lens I've tried, and it doesn't have full-time manual focusing. Canon's
100mm macro wins on both these counts, (at additional cost, of course).

--
Hil

Alan Browne wrote

I haven't heard much about it, and I'm curious too.

Two things struck me about it: it felt flimsier than any other Tamron
lens I've tried, and it doesn't have full-time manual focusing. Canon's
100mm macro wins on both these counts, (at additional cost, of course).

--
Hil

Hils wrote:

Two things struck me about it: it felt flimsier than any other Tamron
lens I've tried, and it doesn't have full-time manual focusing. Canon's
100mm macro wins on both these counts, (at additional cost, of course).

I'm not sure what you mean by 'full-time manual focusing' - please
define.

Thanks,
Peter

--
If replying by email, be sure to remove KILL SPAM from return address.

Hils wrote:

Two things struck me about it: it felt flimsier than any other Tamron
lens I've tried, and it doesn't have full-time manual focusing. Canon's
100mm macro wins on both these counts, (at additional cost, of course).

I'm not sure what you mean by 'full-time manual focusing' - please
define.

Thanks,
Peter

--
If replying by email, be sure to remove KILL SPAM from return address.

Hils wrote:

Two things struck me about it: it felt flimsier than any other Tamron
lens I've tried, and it doesn't have full-time manual focusing. Canon's
100mm macro wins on both these counts, (at additional cost, of course).

I'm not sure what you mean by 'full-time manual focusing' - please
define.

Thanks,
Peter

--
If replying by email, be sure to remove KILL SPAM from return address.