Wow, snake, I see you're starting getting personal, again. I'll only answer this:
We already can have a very good guess at:
+ being an OEM lens
+ build quality
+ launch date, being or not superseded by a new model
+ size and weight
What is missing is the optical quality,
the only one which I marked as "unknown". Guess which one you singled out...
P.S. I managed to find it cheaper at a Romanian store - special price, until 11th. Nice, but I'll pass it.
Originally posted by normhead Optically OK compared to what? I've been under the impression that this lens is top of it's class in IQ, so I'm always looking for an informed opinion that says otherwise.
I could argue any of those points… but that one stands out.
I'm curious how could you argue the other points... but I won't lose any sleep over it.
The answer is simple: I'm used with high quality primes, so hardly any 17-50-ish mm lens on the market would be IMHO optically "excellent". I'm explicitly including the Pentax 16-50, which I don't find it really worthy of the * designation. I think Canon's 17-55 is very good (and pricy!), but I don't know much about it.
This Tamron, if my memory serves me right, has very good center sharpness but so-so on corners (after a quick glance at photozone.de it might have been the field curvature kicking in). You can of course use it with good results, and for its price it's a steal. But, to get back at my point - it's not like it's optical qualities would be impossible to match.