Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: "Neil Harrington" <not@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2009 21:54:23 -0400
"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:mPadnfjg1uDgx3LUnZ2dnUVZ_jli4p2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Neil Harrington wrote:
"Mark Sieving" <Mark_Sieving@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:khjqu4hrg4h6rva0kjjj6vgtrhh0ohkajg@xxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:30:16 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
2.5" sounds very short (so does 3.5") as focus distance is measuredYes, focus distance is measured from the sensor plane. Minimum focus
from
the film/sensor plane to the subject...
distance for the 90mm F/2.8 is 11.4", and for the 60mm F/2.0, it's
9.1". But minimum working distance is measured from the front of the
lens to the subject.
Or more specifically from the front of the lens barrel to the subject,
and the 90mm Tamron has a very deep set front element. That may be one
reason why its working distance is shorter than this new 60mm lens.
At 1:1 I would guess the lens element protrudes completely (minus the lens
shade). That is the case with my Minolta 100 f/2.8 @ 1:1.
Not with the Tamron 90 -- the barrel moves forward as you go to 1:1 and the
front element remains just as far back from the front end as ever; that
distance never changes.
The Tokina 100mm macro (which also has a deep-set front element, though not
as deep set as the Tamron) is the same way. The barrel moves forward on
close focusing and the front element keeps the same relationship to it.
Both lenses come with generous-sized lens hoods, but neither seems at all
necessary except to keep stray light away from a filter if you're using one.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: Alan Browne
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- References:
- To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: infiniteMPG
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: Mark Sieving
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: Alan Browne
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: Mark Sieving
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: Alan Browne
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: Mark Sieving
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: Neil Harrington
- Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- From: Alan Browne
- To Tamron or not to Tamron
- Prev by Date: Re: Bargain Lens @ B&H
- Next by Date: Re: Travel Kit Question
- Previous by thread: Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- Next by thread: Re: To Tamron or not to Tamron
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading