-------------- Original message from Moose <olymoose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
--------------
> Jay Drew wrote:
>
> >Moose,
> >Do you have a preference between the Kiron and the Tamron? Doesn't the
> >Tamron & Vivitar require an adapter to go to 1:1?
> >
> >
> As you say, the Kiron goes directly to 1:1 and I like the slightly
> longer focal length. Because of the double focusing helix and longer fl,
> it is noticabaly larger and heavier than the Tamron. It also takes 52mm
> filters, which doesn't match any standard Oly size. Still it's my
> favorite for nature pics.
>
> The Tamron 90/2.5s do indeed need an adapter, which is just a 45mm
> extention tube with female adaptall mount on front and male adaptall on
> the rear. One can more easily use OM mount tubes and leave the adaptall
> on the lens. One model takes 49mm filters and the other 55mm. Optically
> I think they are the same, just styling changes. I have used the 90/2.5
> a lot for flat copy work making slides for a professor friend. It's
> really a superb lens, but the 1:2 limit without an accessory keeps it at
> home to use on the copy stand most of the time.
>
> The Tamron 90/2.8 that Walt posted about is a different, later, design,
> also excellent, which does go to 1:1 directly. There is also the Vivitar
> lens of the same specs, which has a good rep and is likely the Tamron in
> different clothes.
>
> >Just curious, I'll never be able to justify to the family hocking a kid to
> >buy a Zuiko 90, and I already have a Kiron.
> >
> >
> You already have one as good as they get. Don't worry, be happy.
>
> Moose
>
There are many different Vivitar macros at either 90 or 100mm. The Vivitar
100mm f2.8 serial no begins with 22 which implies it is made by Kino aka Kiron.
Although the focus grip is slightly different even the lettering looks the same
as the Kiron 100/2.8. They are so similar it is hard to tell them apart.
The older Vivitar Series 1 90/2.5 is definitely not the same as the Tamron
90/2.5. The Vivitar S1 90/2.5 is a superb macro but it uses an adapter
containing glass to get to 1:1 and has a 58mm filter ring. The adapter has a
tiny tripod foot.
The Tamron 90/2.8 is probably the lightest. It uses plastic and looks similar
to the Tamron 35-105/2.8 zoom.
If I didn't have any I would consider the Tamron 90/2.8 as a first choice. They
are all excellent lenses. The Tamron wins on size/weight.
I don't think performance would really justify selling one to get a different
brand. If you use the lens a lot there might be something about one that you
would prefer but someone else could easily prefer a different one.
-jeff
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|