dwayne_fuhlhage

I bought the Tamron after reading various comparisons between the four lenses mentioned so far. For me, price and size were the kicker. I was able to pick up a near mint used Tamron for $325. I have run around 600 exposures with it in recent travel to northern California and the Everglades.

Yes, it does have its weaknesses. Wide open it can be very soft in the corners. The focus ring is overly wide and it seems like I am always running into it when I am autofocusing. The extra width at the bottom and wider range of the Canon would be a major plus for that lense.

The good parts:

Clean and crisp 2 stops up from wide open. Very clean at f8.

Deep field of view. I think this is standard on all of the ultrawides. I don't need a tripod or my pocket digicam for depth.

Very light. Some see this as a deficit. However, I travel a lot on business and can carry it, a mid range and a telephoto and my 30D without breaking my back.

Good color rendition. I am pleased with the overall color from this lens. It isn't quite at the level of my 70-200 f4 L but gives good output.

If I had unlimited money and a porter I would go with the Canon. But for my purposes, this lens works well. I'd be happy to email some sample images if you send me a message.<div></div>