I am currently struggling between 2 options:
- Tamron 90 mm f2.8 as a all-in-one portrait + macro lens or
- Nikon 80 mm f1.8 + Sigma 105 or 150 macro 2.8

of course the price is not the same, and if someone can report about the Tamron as a portait lens if would be the best option (money wise + weight too). Thanks in advance.

You could also wait for first reviews of Tamron 60/2 macro...on paper it's really interesting.

I've used my Tamron 90/2.8 for quite a few portraits and I love it. I got the 50/1.8 as a portrait lens but I hardly use it for that purpose.

jsheridan1 wrote:
You could also wait for first reviews of Tamron 60/2 macro...on paper it's really interesting.
I think 60mm even on a DX sensor is a bit too short for a macro lens, I consider 90mm as being the minimal focal for my usage.

linathael wrote:
jsheridan1 wrote:
You could also wait for first reviews of Tamron 60/2 macro...on paper it's really interesting.
I think 60mm even on a DX sensor is a bit too short for a macro lens, I consider 90mm as being the minimal focal for my usage.


The Tamron 60mm's working distance is 100mm and Tamron 90mm's 110mm. Anyway the price of the 60/2 is a little more expensive than I expected so the cheaper FX lens may be better way to go especially if you already have 50/1.4 or 50/1.8. And who knows if the new 60/2 sucks in every aspect

jsheridan1 wrote:
linathael wrote:
jsheridan1 wrote:
You could also wait for first reviews of Tamron 60/2 macro...on paper it's really interesting.
I think 60mm even on a DX sensor is a bit too short for a macro lens, I consider 90mm as being the minimal focal for my usage.


The Tamron 60mm's working distance is 100mm and Tamron 90mm's 110mm. Anyway the price of the 60/2 is a little more expensive than I expected so the cheaper FX lens may be better way to go especially if you already have 50/1.4 or 50/1.8. And who knows if the new 60/2 sucks in every aspect
Thanks for this comment, the 60 mm appears to be 40% more expensive than the 90mm. I also like to have the extra reach, even though the sigma 150 is probably best in class here.

What bout a second hand Nikkor 60/2.8D? Great lens and sharp as a knife! Does both portaits and macro very well!

Ivo Heshusius wrote:
What bout a second hand Nikkor 60/2.8D? Great lens and sharp as a knife! Does both portaits and macro very well!
I would like to have the extra reach, so 90mm is my lower limit.
Of course second hand is always an option if you can ensure the quality of your purchase. but I might be biased and the "extra reach" between 60 and 90 mm might not be that huge.

Yes, the 90mm makes a great portrait lens. The bokeh is good, the slower focusing speed and lens extension don't matter for portraits, and the image quality is excellent.

As a matter of fact, it's almost too excellent. Not that you should ever shop for an un-sharp lens, but the Tamron 90mm is a pretty sharp lens and I've noticed I have to be careful to process the sharpness out of the pictures of the women I take

binary visions wrote:
Yes, the 90mm makes a great portrait lens. The bokeh is good, the slower focusing speed and lens extension don't matter for portraits, and the image quality is excellent.

As a matter of fact, it's almost too excellent. Not that you should ever shop for an un-sharp lens, but the Tamron 90mm is a pretty sharp lens and I've noticed I have to be careful to process the sharpness out of the pictures of the women I take

my thought exactly. very nice images come from this lens....and it's very very sharp!

binary visions wrote:
Yes, the 90mm makes a great portrait lens. The bokeh is good, the slower focusing speed and lens extension don't matter for portraits, and the image quality is excellent.

As a matter of fact, it's almost too excellent. Not that you should ever shop for an un-sharp lens, but the Tamron 90mm is a pretty sharp lens and I've noticed I have to be careful to process the sharpness out of the pictures of the women I take

thanks, I guess I will go with this one, next step a wide angle.
Thanks to all members who contributed