Picked up the Nikon 105mm/2.8 and the Tamron 90mm/f2.8 macro lenses to compare side by side.  Shot about 100 frames each side by side and in other situations.  Like both lenses a lot, but can only keep one.  Both are sharp.

For those that used one or both lenses have any thoughts as to which one to keep?

TIA

-mp

Nikon glass on Nikon bodies is hard to beat. The 105 is listed as one of Nikon's sharpest lenses. Personally I find the build of aftermarket lenses to be their weakest part. I had a Tokina that seemed ever bit the great lens the Nikkor was. 2 years alter after light use it had problems. I replaced it with the Nikkor version and when I sold it almost 4 years later it was still performing like a new lens. My wife got a Sigma for her Nikon. It developed lens creep while still under warranty. I took it back and was told this was acceptable functionality and not covered. I bought a $5 rubber on Ebay and fixed the problem but NONE of my Nikon zooms have ever had the creep problem..or any other problems.

PS..on the D800 the 105 Nikor is great!

The newest Nikkor 105 2.8 macro is likely going to be my next purchase, based on the specs and anecdotal information available.
But, I don't have any real-world experience with it yet. Waiting for rental to get it in to try first.

I've had both

for true macro, I preferred the Nikon
for people, the Tamron

not sure which body you are using

but
for me on a D700

if you can handle the price, manual focus, and not going 1:1
the Zeiss 100/2 is unbeatable for portraiture

IMO

When in doubt, go with the camera manufacturers lens.

I have the Tamron and it's an excellent lens and razor sharp. Optically.... it's as good or better than the Nikon. Build quality and AF may be lacking though but it's a cheap lens used. A great bargain for me.

I like using this site, 

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Revi … &APIComp=0

(hoping the link works)

seems the Nikon is more sharper

We have the 105 Nikkor.  Love it for portraits and close ups.

Thanks for everyone's input. The image quality chart has me going with the Nikon, plus the Nikon on Nikon aspect.  Shooting with a D700 & D3.

Again thanks.

-mp

One of the best reasons to buy a Nikon is that you get to use Nikon Glass.

We owned the Tamron and the lens did not survive a 1 foot fall off of a shelf onto the floor. The cost of repair was almost the cost of a new lens - just not worth it. So, we bought the Nikon and it is now our favorite beauty lens in the studio. IMHO, it's a much better lens all around, having a much more durable build quality, better resolving optics and a superior auto focus system. If it were me, I would get rid of the Tamron and keep the Nikon.

FWIW: I have the new Sigma 150mm macro (with stabilisation). It's extremely sharp, but its bokeh is harsh. I'm looking at the Nikkor 105 as possibly my next lens. I'm using a D800E.

The Nikkor 105mm f/2.8 is one of my favourite lenses for portraits.  It's so sharp and has a really nice look to it (IMO).  Just a tad too long for my usual working space.