A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Macro Setup > Tamron 90mm F2.8 or Nikon 60mm...

Tamron 90mm F2.8 or Nikon 60mm F2.8 for Portrait?

Wim Scheyltjens , Aug 25, 2007; 05:16 p.m.

Hi, what do you guys and girls think is the better choice for close-up portrait photography, the Tamron 90mm F2.8 or the Nikon 60mm F2.8.

Could you tell me something about the pros and cons about these two lenses, what sort of differences would one see when using one or the other: handling, overall image, size, quality, distance to subject, ...

I'm using a Fuji S5, so the 90mm = something like a 135mm? In what way would this give me other results than the 60mm (90mm), which one would you prefer and why?

I have a 85mm 1.8 (about 127mm using 1x5 sensor) In what way would photographs taken with this lens (tight headshots) differ from those taken with the two macro lenses?

Kind regards,



Wim Scheyltjens , Aug 25, 2007; 05:19 p.m.

Btw, i'm planning on buying a full frame dslr in the distant future, so of course i'd like to buy a lens which will also 'deliver' when used in combination with this type of camera. Don't want to waste that hard earned money.

Jeff Adler , Aug 25, 2007; 05:43 p.m.

If you are going to get a full frame sensor DSLR then the 90 would better. The 60 would not give much working distance in the close up range and it is not supposed to be very good at infinity. Some people like using medium telephoto macro lenses for portraits and others do not. If you don't need the soft focus look I think they're fine. The 85/1.8 is good if you want to shoot wide open or nearly so for the selective focus look.

Juanjo Viagran , Aug 25, 2007; 07:35 p.m.

how about the Nikon 105mm 2.8 AFD micro..!?

I have the 60mm and 105mm 2.8 micro AFD and the only cons is slow autofocus, beside that there are ALL PROS.

the DOF of the 105mm is mind blowing.

Highly recommend both.

Adam Maas , Aug 25, 2007; 08:51 p.m.

@Juanjo The 90 Tamron simply blows any of the Nikkor 105 Micro's out of the water for portrait work. Absolutely creamy bokeh, while the 105 Micro's range from Harsh to horrid. If you must have a 105mm Nikkor instead of a tamron, go for the 105/2.5 or the 105/2 DC (the 105/1.8 AI-S is good too, but not up to its siblings in the Bokeh department)

I'm a big fan of the Tamron 90, it's a simply superb portrait lens. But it is a little long on DX format (135mm-e). The 60mm f2.8 is a better length for DX portraiture, and wickedly sharp, but the bokeh isn't nearly as nice (It's still better than the 105's though). I'd probably go for a 50/1.2 AI-S instead though.

Oskar Ojala , Aug 26, 2007; 07:45 a.m.

If you have a 85/1.8, then the only reason to get the Tamron is for macro work. 2.8 is not a particularly large aperture in this focal length and the 85/1.8 is sharp, contrasty and has good bokeh. 60/2.8 is good focal-length wise, but I'm not sure the handling and picture qualities are the best for portraits. I've used a 55/3.5 for some environmental portraits, it's good, but the aperture is limiting and the focusing is different from the 60/2.8.

Albert Darmali , Aug 27, 2007; 08:46 a.m.

At times I prefer the bokeh from my 90mm Tamron over my Nikon 85mm 1.4. Seriously. (This depends on the distance). It is that good of a bokeh

Tamron 90mm

Albert Darmali , Aug 27, 2007; 08:46 a.m.

Another one.

Tamron 90mm

Vincenzo Maielli , Aug 27, 2007; 12:34 p.m.

Whit all DSLR with small sensor is better to use the real portrait photo lenses. Change only the angle field, not the focal lenght. With a Nikon D200 or D300 a 60 mm remain a 60 mm. A 90 or 100 or 105 mm is better, than a 60 mm. Ciao.

Wim Scheyltjens , Aug 29, 2007; 09:36 a.m.

okay thank you guys, haven't really decided yet, but the tamron seems lik a great lens,


Back to top

Notify me of Responses