| 
			
			 
			
				11-12-2013, 09:47 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. |