I have decided to purchase a Nikon D90. I have also narrowed my lens choice to either the Tamron AF 18-270mm f/3.5-6.3 Di II VC LD Aspherical (IF) MACRO or the Nikon 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED AF-S VR DX. I understand the potential compromises involved in lenses with these types of focal ranges. However, I shoot mostly while traveling and don’t want to carry multiple lenses and don’t want to expose the sensor while changing them out. I shoot landscapes and print up to 13” x 19” on an Epson R2400. I do this mostly for my own enjoyment but occasionally do show and sell my work. Two review sites that people seem to respect have written the following: SLR Gear.com, comparing the 2 lenses writes: “The Tamron is noticeably sharper than the Nikon in the majority of focal length / aperture combinations, except at the telephoto end (200mm) where both lenses produce similarly average results.” While this is only one sentence of a more comprehensive review, this struck me a quite a remarkable statement. Can Tamron really claim to have outdone Nikon on this one? Dpreview.com writes “It [the Tamron] the stands up well in comparison to both the Nikon 18-200mm F3.5-5.6G ED VR and the Canon EF-S 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 IS; it's softer than the Nikon at wideangle and the Canon at telephoto, but beats both in that mid-range.” I would greatly appreciate hearing from anyone that has an opinion on this subject.