11-12-2013, 10:47 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 613
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by windcoast reefs
Come on man, you know just as well as I do by saying something like that, your not convincing anyone. It makes you look like your trying to justify your purchase of the 100mm, which is a fine lens, but has nothing to do with the post. And how is this helping him?
I have used the 90mm, its slow to focus, and its noisy when focusing, but its sharp and its a huge savings over a canon or a nikon equivalent. I picked one up as a secondary lens, lightly used for $250. I use it while I'm climbing/mountaineering, just in case I take a fall or dump it in the snow, its not crazy to replace.
|
So anyway........:
Canon > Tamrom and I'd at least LOOK at the Canon equivalent of this lens because you'll likely find there's more to the price difference than just the name.
|