This is going to be quite a long post, but I find it very interesting, and I’ll be happy if others can do the same and post the results here.
Gordon, maybe it’s a good idea to add a “Comparison” forum for these things, there is no appropriate forum right now.
So, I decided to upgrade my lens from Tamron 18-200 to 2 high level Canon lenses. The first one was the 17-40L, the next one (when I have the money) will probably be the 70-200L f/4 IS.
I also have standard Canon lenses from my old film SLR (EOS 3000N): 28-80 and 75-300 III.
I decided to do a “lens test“ between the Tamron, the Canon 17-40 and the Canon 75-300.
I Placed the camera (EOS 350D) on a tripod, midday, ISO 100, and fine large JPEG.
I took photos in max aperture, f/8 and f/11 in each focal length. Using f/8 gave me better results than the max aperture (obviously), so I post here only the f/8 results.
All pictures are 100% cropped, no editing whatsoever.
Here are the results:
17-40 at 17:
18-200 at 18:
17-40 at 40:
18-200 at 42:
75-300 at 75:
18-200 at 76:
75-300 at 205:
18-200 at 200:
Strangely, it seems that at 17/18, the Tamron is sharper than the Canon L (
, can anyone explain this???).
At all other shots, the Canon lenses performed better.