Tamron lenses: Any significant difference between DI and non-DI?

[code]

Thinking of getting the Tamron 90mm lens for my DSLR. Wondering if there is any significant difference between the DI and non-DI version to warrant a marked price difference?

Thanks in advance for any advice given.

 

[Stoned]

Supposedly Di lenses have a higher resolution to cater to the cropped sensors using only the centre portion of the lens. The non-Di Tamron 90mm macro IIRC is not too shabby as well but the Di version IMO has a better build. It doesn't cost a whole lot more so personally I would go for the Di just for the build and the "better" optics would only be a plus.

 

[Tumbleweed]

Also Di lenses (and I think most of the so-called digitial lenses from other manufacturers) has multi-coating for the rear lens element. This is because the CCD is highly reflective and bright light entering through the lens may cause flare and a reduction of image contrast when the light is reflected off the surface of the CCD.

 

[code]

Thanks Stone and Tumbleweed

 

[solarii]

Hmm...interesting qn. Could just be a marketing ploy by tamron. Haven't come across any articles which actually test this... most just quote and explain tamron's write up on DI lenses. Perhaps someone wanna give it a try?

 

[code]

is the build for the DI version better than the non-DI? I would imagine it to be the same and the only difference to be optics.

 

[danster]

Hmm...interesting qn. Could just be a marketing ploy by tamron. Haven't come across any articles which actually test this... most just quote and explain tamron's write up on DI lenses. Perhaps someone wanna give it a try?

I read an article on Popular Photography a while ago and apparently, they did some tests and concluded that there were only marginal improvement in image quality in the digital lenses compared to conventional lenses (something about better flare resistance and contrast). Can't remember which issue it is, though...