[HEEGZ]

Those would be good enough for me. My next lens is going to be in this range and I would be happy with those results. I guess the real question is whether or not it meets your needs.

[littledrawe]

I couldnt justify keeping it because it seemed silly to me to have to stop down that much to get a usable image when half the reason I was buying it was for sunsets where the light is fading and 9.5 aperture means long shutter speeds which didnt seem like the right combo for sunset photos. It was also overexposing the sky and forcing me to compensate with the e/v. I hear ND filters might help with that but if I am going to start using them I want to start with a lens I have some confidence in.

[RioRico]

I hereby declare my copy of the Tammy 10-24 to be VERY GOOD.

Yes, there is a very little corner softness at 10/3.5, hardly any by f/4.5, and it's nice and sharp from f/5.6 and up, and at longer focal lengths. For detailed interiors where corners matter, I'd shoot stopped-down anyway, with any lens, and probably on a tripod.

No, I don't expect EL- or macro-quality edge-to-edge flatfield sharpness from any UW. The only UW/FE optics in which I'd expect brutal edge sharpness is with an oatmeal-carton pinhole cam with sheet film. And that's not exactly good for handheld work, eh?

No, I haven't tried any of the Sigmas, nor the DA12-24. Yes, I have the DA10-17 and Zenitar 16/2.8, and the Tammy is corner-sharper than they are at equivalent focal lengths and apertures, defished. My best widest glass are all for very different uses, like this:

* Kenko 180 Degrees FE adapter on F35-70 -- for special effects only, like full-circle
* DA10-17 -- for smallest and rounded spaces, and where angles are to be exploited
* Tamron 10-24 -- for small-to-medium spaces (@10) to streets and 'scapes (@24)
* Vemar 12/8 -- doesn't focus far, so it's for real close ultra-fishy shots, on tripod
* Zenitar 16/2.8 -- wide-open for interior subjects, stopped-down for fine sharpness
* Tokina 21/3.8 -- stopped-down & prefocused for street shooting with thick DOF
* Vivitar-Kiron 24/2 -- when speed matters, as well as rectilinear sharpness

The Vemar and Tokina aren't in my regular carry-kit. All the others now are. The Tamron 10-24 is a welcome addition. That's my story and I'm sticking with it.

[littledrawe]

The Vemar and Tokina aren't in my regular carry-kit.

I am jealous, I would like to see your regular carry kit from what I've read so far I think you would have to drive a bread truck to move your kit from place to place.
I'll just have to start playing with my 10-17 fisheye and save for a sigma 8-16mm

[Ratmagiclady]

I'm not sure, cause eye fatigue is setting in, but it looks like a lot of those shots are just plain missed focus, or the focus just isn't on where the objects to be examined are. (Is your AF dialed in for this lens, or how are you focusing?) (Edit: fyi, that wasn't my *eyes* so much as my browser having gotten zoomed the wrong way: they look a lot better, but I'm still suspicious of those brick wall shots and focus points. )

Even fishies don't have infinite DOF wide open. (And as someone mentioned, there's field curvature to consider. Lenses trace an arc, some a flatter one than others, you can get an idea what it is by manually-focusing and looking across the focusing screen from center to edge, where the sharpness goes. One of the virtues of my big Sigma 28 is a bit of a flatter field than most, which is nice for my style but IMO is what makes that lens also tend to totally-confound the very left-and-rightmost AF spots on my K20d. )

Certainly rather than wanting to put a ND filter on there, *stop down. *