Tamron SP AF 10-24mm F3.5-4.5 Di-II LD Aspherical IF  reviews

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Hotdog   review date: September-22-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

£349 New

positive:

Good range. Sharp once closed down. Light, compact, quick.

negative:

The ridiculous wide hood!

comment:

A nice whydangle lens with a very useable range. I chose this over other lenses simply because the range of 10mm to 24mm is so good. At its best when stopped down between f8 and f11. Some soft corners below that. The huge hood is a pain in the camera bag but does its job well when on the lens.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 3 

user: Gert van den Bosch   review date: September-21-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Samyang 8mm F3.5-4.5

price paid:

376 € (new)

positive:

Light weight, compact.

negative:

The Sigma is more solid, but the Tamron is goeed enough for me

comment:

This is one of my favourite lenses. Because of the extra 4mm I also use it for streetphotography. The Sigma 10-20 mm is more solid, but I have decided to choose the Tamron.
I use it on animals, landscaping, for my split shots half underwater. It never lets me down. Really value for money.
I got 5 Sigma's in my bag, but this Tammy is bought for the exta 4 mm and the price.
You need to stop down a lot for sharpness at the corners. But as I mostly use F8 or smaller, no problem for me.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: robberly12   review date: June-19-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

SAL1855

price paid:

359 USD (new)

positive:

Excellent focal length range
Great value
Quite sharp at the wide end (stopped down)
Low distortion
Light, but solidly built

negative:

Generally soft in the corners
Some CA
No focus motor (minor issue)

comment:

After reading many reviews, I settled on the Tamron 10-24. The price and good performance at the 10mm end, compared to the Sony & Sigma ultra-wide zooms, were the clinchers.

The lens is not perfect but it's hard to beat for the price. There is some softness across the range but it is quite sharp at the wide end when stopped down. Softness at longer focal lengths is not that important to me.

As a side issue, I was confused about whether the lens had a built-in focus motor when I ordered it. I generally prefer that lenses have an in-lens motor. The Dyxum database lists it as not having an in-lens motor, but it also incorrectly lists the Tamron SP 60/F2 macro lens as not having such a motor. Vendor images of the lens almost always show it with a focus-motor switch. The truth is that it does not have an in-lens motor/switch, and the vendor images are for the Canon/Nikon version. High-end focusing is not an overall important feature to me for a wide-angle zoom, in any case, but I thought I'd mention it.

Distortion is remarkably low, but the lens suffers from some CA, especially at the longer end. Fortunately, overall image quality at the important (to me) wide end of the focal range is very good.

Build is very good for a lens in this price range. It is light, but still feels very sturdy.

To protect the front element, I bought a B&W slim 77mm XS-PRO UV filter (~$105). This also turned out to be an excellent buy, because it has low flare & produced no vignetting. Importantly, it was also compatible with Tamron's standard lenscap.

As mentioned by other reviewers, Tamron's lens hood is very bulky, which can make it inconvenient to carry in a camera bag. While this is a valid criticism, this is not a big problem in my particular case.

Overall I find the Tamron SP 10-24mm a very capable lens at a bargain price. Highly recommended!

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: lifeispixels   review date: March-08-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tokina 11-16mm f2.8

positive:

- Great resistance to flare
- Great distortion control
- best range among ultra wide lens
- amazing colors!
- extremely sharp in the center
- Great minimum focus distance!

negative:

- soft around corners wide open
- feel a bit plasticky.

comment:

Choosing between Tamron 10-24mm f3.5-4.5 and Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 is a difficult choice. They're 2 lens with very different personalities. Each excels in different areas and also have different drawbacks. I own both lens and I'm not going to sell either of them because of this reason. Both of them can produce colorful, punchy images with great contrast. Colors rendition of both lens are quite different too. Tamron gives lively bright colors, much like modern Sony lens, while Tokina has its deep signature colors.

Let's start with Tokina:
Advantages
- very sharp from f2.8 already and stop down a bit, the corners look great. So no need to stop down a lot for this lens to get evenly sharp.
- f2.8 is very useful at low light to gain higher shutter speed to stop motion at night. For example shooting people on the street at night.
- better build quality, although heavy.

Disadvantages
- Flair and ghosts are heavier than Tamron.
- CA is worst than Tamron (if you don't do pixel peep, this is no problem)
- shorter 11-16 range.
- barrel distortion

For Tamron,
Advantages:
- better range 10-24, although optimum range seems to be at 10mm.
- distortion control is great. If you align the lens properly vertically, all buildings, walls, etc.. look straight up.
- can get much closer to object than Tokina
- greater resistance to flair.

Disadvantages:
- only sharp in the center and need to stop down very hard to get evenly sharp. I always fix it at f8-f11 whenever I shoot with this lens. This makes it difficult at night where you will need to shoot wide open. So only center is sharp, you will need to put your subject there. Tokina at f4 is much much better than Tamron at f4, considering sharpness.
- build quality is worse than Tokina.

You can't go wrong with either one of these. It's only the matter of time after you bought one and you might consider buying or trying the other later. They're both great in their own way. If I go out at night or low light, I will take tokina and I will not hesitate to shoot at f2.8-4. If I go out on a bright day or with a tripod, I carry tamron and always shoot at f8-f13.

Extra things you might need to consider and this can help decide which lens you should buy first. If I have to decide now, I'd choose the Tokina for its more flexible day and night ability. Usually when we shoot with ultra wide lens, you will find that 90% of the time, we stick to the widest setting at 10 or 11mm. For the ultra wide lens, that 1mm extra in the widest end means significantly more than the difference in the long end.

Also at the time of writing this review, Tokina just introduced the version II of the 11-16mm lens with better coating. However they only make for Canon and Nikon, and didn't mention Sony. So the future of this lens is still unclear if Tokina would continue offering Sony mount of not. If not, this lens is going to become rarer and rarer. And it would be wise to buy one now before the price starts going uphill. The version II is going to be quite more expensive too. So even if it you have waited for the version II if it will actually come out, the final price might become out of reach.

Tamron 10-24 is a new lens so it's going to be available for sony mount for a long while and they shouldn't be any update soon. I bought my Tokina first and had been looking for a nice 2nd hand tamron, then acquired one later at great price. I love both Tamron 10-24 and Tokina 11-16 equally much.

See my photos with Tamron 10-24mm f3.5-4.5 and Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 PRO on my Flickr collection at: http://www.flickr.com/photos/lifeispixels/collections/72157628204412995/

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: Rebecca   review date: January-15-12  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tokina 11-16mm

price paid:

478 usd (new)

positive:

great focal length
affordable
nice color

negative:

photos can be kind of vague looking

comment:

I tried this lens from my local photo dealer, then took it back and exchanged it for the Tokina 11-16. I honestly hated to do it, since I think the Tamron has a much more useful focal length and it costs less. In fact, the Tokina is outside what I've budgeted for a lens, so it was a big deal to me to do this.

This lens takes nice photos, and with its focal length it is pretty versatile, too. It does distort things. I had a lot of fun with it, distorting things on purpose, first one way, then the other, then pulling them back to normal. I've never had a lens like this before, so it was a big learning experience for me.

The only problem I see with this lens is that it makes photos that are kind of vague. I don't know how else to describe it. I looked it up and there was a lot of talk about softness. I can see that, especially in the corners, but I don't think that's the real problem. It's more of a flatness, like the lens doesn't give enough contrast or something.

I don't know. All I can say is that the Tokina takes much better photos, and I wish this one was better because I like it's price and focal length a lot.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Gemma   review date: December-21-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

$A695.00

positive:

Quite sharp from 11mm to 14mm. moderately sharp 16mm to 20mm.
Excellent colour. a lightweight,compact lens.

negative:

Lens Hood is large and cumbersome, but it is effective

comment:

I previously reviewed this lens in June-19-11, only having had the lens for a short while.

In order to get the best out of this lens it is almost a must to use a tripod. It will produce nice sharp images from 11-14mm after applying USM, images taken from 16-20mm may need extra sharpening.

For those who are prepared to capture their images with care and process them accordingly will be rewarded with images capable of being printed to A3 size.

I am more than happy with the colours this lens produces, very natural.

Used with thought this lens will produce satisfying images.

I would have no hesitation in recommending this lens to my friends.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: Snowcat   review date: November-17-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

-Sony 11-18
-Sigma 10-20/4-5.6

price paid:

530 USD (new)

positive:

-Usable at all range at f=4.5
-Nearly perfect from 5.6
-Quite sharp everywhere
-Extremely sharp in large center area
-Fast AF
-Good flare control (for UWA)
-Great range
-Semifast lens

negative:

-Corners are blurred at f=3.5 at wide end significantly
-Strange hood (that's why 4 for build)

comment:

I know this lens is often bashed in the reviews. Perhaps it has big quality fluctuations, because I really cannot see why could I possibly want to bash it. CAs are very little, and barely seen, not more that those from Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, which is known for little CAs. Distortion is quite small also. Well, quite small for an UWA lens. Sharpness is good at 4.5 throughout the field, and great at 5.6 already. My Sigma had to be stopped to 8 to achieve that. The zoom range is very useful. Overall, I am very happy with this lens, at least for now.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: zatik   review date: October-03-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

sigma 10 20

price paid:

430 euro (new)

positive:

centre frame sharpness
well priced
MFD
range
distorsion

negative:

soft @ 20+ mm
funny hood

comment:

my had some backfocus issue, but after microajusment it's fine...fine lens for crop cameras; in my opinion better than sigmas version

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 5 

user: MichaelKz   review date: September-16-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

450 USD (new)

positive:

Broad zoom range
Distortion well controlled for an ultrawide

negative:

Ridiculously awkward hood

comment:

This lens is especially good for photographing building interiors. So much of a room can fit into a photo, with surprisingly little distortion compared to what one sees so often in interior architectural shots.

Because of all the detail in a wide angle shot, I find myself more tempted to pixel peep than with other lenses. If others have succumbed to this temptation, it may explain why some have downgraded this lens on sharpness.

This is a practical lens that fits easily in my bag and doesn't weigh it down, so it goes with me regularly. If I could only figure out where to put the enormous hood!

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: justchuck   review date: September-04-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 17-50

price paid:

459. US new

positive:

Well priced
Handles distortion very good
Sharper than I expected from reviews

negative:

comment:

For a wide angle on a budget I think this is a fine lens, sharper than I had expected.

sharpness: 2.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 3 

user: Ophtho   review date: September-03-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

350€ new

positive:

Price is right
Covers a very, very useful range for travel shots while being light
Great colors in bright daylight

negative:

Resolution is awful
Flare is not only omnipresent but noisy
Really bad in low light, especially at the long end

comment:

Hate and love this lens at the same time. The optical quality is crap. However, at 10mm distortion is minimal for the angle, and it gives you a fun and useable perspective at a reasonable price.

For travel the lens is great, just don't plan to blow your pictures up above screen-size.

Flare is a problem (that I don't care much about with any other lens). I'm not picky here, and I know how hard wide angles are to control, however this has ruined some shots for me (see examples).

Some day I'll afford something better at the low end - but if you can't and want the range - go for it like I did.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Blitzkri3g   review date: June-19-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony DT 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 SAM
Sony 18-70mm Kit lens
Tamron 55-200mm F5-5.6
Konica Minolta 75-300 F4.5-5.6 D

price paid:

420€ New.

positive:

-Perfect for wide angle shots.
-Not especially expensive.
-Sharp and good colours.

negative:

-Soft in the corners.
-Distortion in the corners.

comment:

Well,if you have a limited budget but love Wide angle shots,
I dont think you could buy something better for the money.
If you can find it cheaper as second hand just grab it!
Generally I m quite pleased using this lens for the last 3-4
years.Well built,metal mount,sturdy controls.
Dont forget to use the hood during a sunny day!
N.

Ps.The sharpness rating applies to F7.1 and beyond!

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: nicols   review date: June-07-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

350GBP

positive:

Good value
Sharp if stopped down

negative:

Soft in poor light / sub optimal conditions.
Not good at 20mm plus.
Awkward lens hood

comment:

Its an Ultra Wide Angle lens so I think you have to live with some compromises. However, as long as you keep it wide (18mm or below) and keep the f number upto 8 or so and work WITH the distortions, incorporating them into your composition, this can produce some stunning images. Its well built for the price but I do find the lens hood to be a bit awkward when it comes to fitting it into my bag.

sharpness: 2.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: comrade   review date: May-25-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

KM 17-35

price paid:

250GPB

positive:

Good range
Lightweight

negative:

Soft

comment:

This lens is very similar in build to my KM 17-35, which is a clone of a Tamron, so I suspect they are all similar. The optical qualities are quite different, however.

While the 17-35 is very soft in the corners, centre sharpness is reasonable. The Tamron 10-24 is very soft throughout its range at all apertures.
Out of about 10 lenses I have used on my A700, this was the softest, even behind the kit 18-70

On the plus side, the colours are reasonable, and distortion control is pretty good, especially at the relatively longer end. It exhibits very little perceptible distortion at 16 and 18mm, which makes a welcome change to standard zooms at their widest.

The build is reasonable, although completely plastic, it is reasonably light. I find the size a bit inconvenient, especially with the large, wide hood. This may be inevitable on ultra wide angles.

In summary, unfortunately I can't see any point in using this lens on a modern camera, since you will see very little resolution in your images. I picked mine up in a sale and sold it on, but I can't think it's worth anywhere near the RRP

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Gemma   review date: April-28-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

$A 695.00

positive:

Sharp from 11mm to 20mm at f8 & f11.Excellent colour. light compact lens.

negative:

Lens hood is large & cumbersome

comment:

I have only recently purchased this lens to use mainly for landscape photography. So far the performance of this lens has been acceptable. I have found this lens to be sharper than expected as the reviews read suggested otherwise,there is however a slight fall off in sharpness in the corners but not bad enough to be a worry. This lens produces excellent natural colours.The more I use this lens the more I like it.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: EmlD   review date: January-17-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sony 18-250mm f3,5-6,3
Sony 70-300G SSM f/4,5-5,6
Minolta 28-135mm f4-4,5
Minolta 50mm f1,4
Minolta 100mm f2,8 macro

price paid:

330 EUR (used)

positive:

color, price, distortion, range, angle of 10mm, very little CA.

negative:

soft corners, huge hood

comment:

Before I bought this one on ebay, I was thinking about a Sigma 10-20 too. Due to reviews in the web, tamron should be sharper in the middle but have soft corners compared to less sharp sigma but better balanced over the entire image surface. So is it concerning tamron. Corners look OK starting at 5,6 and get better at 8. Overall I am satisfied with it and will keep this lens, until going FF. Look at my samples made with this lens.

sharpness: 4 

color: 5 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Robokeh   review date: January-15-11  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Sigma 18-50mm f2.8 EX DC MACRO

price paid:

384 EURO (new)

positive:

lightweight
large zoom range
colours
good build

negative:

bit plastic feel
large hood

comment:

Until now my lenses didn't go lower than 18mm so I was impressed by the very wide-angle view this lens gives. It opens up new photo-opportunities and lets you look at the world in a different way.

I like this lens for being lightweight and despite the plastic it is well built, without any play in lens mount, focus- or zoom rings. No zoom creep. The hood is large, though, and only fits in my larger bag.

There's a bit of distortion noticeable at the short end but not too much and easily corrected afterwards. Colours surprise me; I like the colour rendition, it is better and more saturated than my Sigma (but may be a matter of taste). Sharpness is OK, really. The large zoom range makes it more universal than other offers, enabling you to make "normal" photos too at 24mm.

This lens is cheap (cheapest wide-angle I could get new) but not to be underestimated. Other wide-angle lenses may be performing (a bit) better but for the money this one is very good. Recommended.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 5 

user: Mandingo   review date: October-05-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

370GBP

positive:

Sharp
Colors
Cover range
cheap

negative:

distorsion
fast

comment:

Incredible value for money. Highly Recommended

sharpness: 5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: DulFlex   review date: June-02-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

no other wide angle lenses

price paid:

383 Euro (new)

positive:

not to expensive, very sharp, nice collors and wel build.
very nice wide angle from 10 all the way up to 24.
quick reaction and fast in sharpness.

negative:

a little distortion but not to much and the flare control could be slightly better

comment:

pretty happy with this lens, aspecially the price compared to the value that you get. a lens to buy and enjoy for a very long time

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 5 

build: 5 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: bmoss   review date: March-25-10  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

price paid:

469 USD New

positive:

Wide angle of view
Affordable
Good Build Quality

negative:

With any lens this wide, there are probs with distortion, especially in the corners

comment:

I recently purchased this lense for a trip to Washington DC. I looked at all the other lenses and decided this was the best of the bunch (I got tired of waiting for the Tokina 11-16 to come out with an A-mount). I don't have the ability or patience to test lenses methodically, so please accept this review with a grain of salt.

I was very impressed with the build quality. It is light, tight and easy to use. It gives me the wide angle I am looking for without going to a FF camera body. It is affordable and produces very good images. I have been impressed so far and highly recommend this lens to anyone wanting to have fun with lanscapes.

sharpness: 2.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: nygus   review date: November-23-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 11-18
Minolta 17-35G

price paid:

1700 PLN

positive:

- nice range
- good build

negative:

- soft at all apertures

comment:

Nice compact lens, with good range and has no underexposure problems like 11-18. Color is OK, distortions acceptable for this kind of lens.
But there is a problem, it is soft.
Closing down aperture doesn't help. It is just always soft - you need to downscale image to 3Mpix to look sharp. Only contrast is getting better when I close down aperture.
Maybe my copy was bad, so don't buy it if you can't test it first.

sharpness: 3.5 

color: 4 

build: 3 

distortion: 3 

flare control: 3 

user: DarkScribe   review date: November-01-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

The Tokina 19-35, Sigma 10-20, Sigma 12-24, Minolta 11-18

price paid:

au$80 - pawn shop.

positive:

It is cheap and I use it when on the water or in high risk places - no great loss if I damage it. It is softer and has more distortion than the the Sony 18-70 kit lens but has a slightly wider range.

negative:

It is a very basic lens - kit lens quality - no more - possibly less. You can stop it down to the level where diffraction is a real issue and it still isn't sharp.

comment:

I don't often buy "D" type lenses as I use both crop and full frame bodies, but I bought in the hopes that it would make a decent lens for a second body in real estate work - but it is nowhere near good enough. I keep it for "messing around in boats" or street use in bad weather.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 4 

flare control: 4 

user: gerbran   review date: October-04-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

3.5/10-20 Sigma and 2.8-4/17-35 Minolta (Tamron)

price paid:

419 euri

positive:

Wide range (10-24)

negative:

Sample variation

comment:

I did not really compare this lens to the other lenses I own, but I could compare in the shop the sample that I bought to the new Sigma 3.5/10-20. (The Sigma was also available in that shop). At 10, that sample of the Sigma was less sharp and had less contrast at the edges than the Tamron. I tested (a street scene) at full aperture and at 8, the Sigma at 20, 15 and 10, the Tamron at 24. 17 and 10. At the other zooming-positions than 10, the quality was about equal. The CA too is about equal. The build quality of the Sigma is a little better.
So it was not a difficult decision to choose (that sample of) the Tamron.

sharpness: 4.5 

color: 4 

build: 4 

distortion: 5 

flare control: 4 

user: Swoopy   review date: July-19-09  

tested on film camera:

tested on APS-C:6MP; 10MP; 12MP; 14MP:; 16MP:; 24MP:

tested on full frame:24MP

compared to:

Tamron 11-18/4.5-5.6 Di-II
Tamron 20-40/2.7-3.5 SP AF

price paid:

€439,- new

positive:

-best range of any APS-C Ultra-Wide
-low weight (though noticeably heavier than the 11-18)
-okay build for a plastic barrel, metal mount
-usable wide-open
-faster than 11-18, noticeably so
-no noticeable vignetting even wide-open at 10mm

negative:

-not exceptionally sharp on the wider end even at f11, though sharp enough to come close to the 20-40 at 24mm
-longer exposure under same conditions as 20-40 or 11-18, e.g. at same f-number, the 10-24 gets a bit less light in reality
-relatively dark though natural colours
-lack of contrast, no "pop", may cause undeserved misjudgement of sharpness, cleans up VERY well in post-processing though

comment:

First of all this lens completes my travel line-up, next to MinRS 24-105/3.5-4.5 (D) and 100-400/4.5-6.7 APO. Not only are there no more gaps in the range, but the 3 lenses are more or less consistent with colour which I feel is a lucky bonus. The 11-18 was a bit more difficult (more so on the 6MP Dynax 7D than on the a700) with the colours and left a gap.
Bokeh of the 10-24 takes getting used to, e.g. good results can be had with practice but you can end up with some weird stuff as well.
The lens loses in sharpness to the much heavier Tamron 20-40 (according to MTF on Photodo.com, the sharpest zoom Tamron ever made) but not by much. At any focal length, optimum sharpness is between f5.6 and f8, closing down aperture any further doesn't get you much.
AF speed is plenty fast on my a700 (set to slow AF mode, even).
The lens protrudes a little bit from the barrel but the wide bit at the end extends beyond it so a normal 77mm UV filter can fit, just like on the 2 comparison lenses. I didn't notice any vignetting with the low-profile filter mounted on the lens. Feel is quite solid for a plastic lens barrel and the manual focus ring is easier to grab than on the 11-18. Zoom ring appears identical.
The 10-24 is physically a bit longer than the 11-18 so if the 11-18 is already a squeeze to get into the bag, beware!
Hood is pretty much the same for all three lenses - flare is controllable but not always avoidable, e.g. sometimes coverage by a hand or a piece of cardboard outside the frame is needed to get rid of flare. I had no such problems with the 20-40 or the 11-18 that I can recall but the 11-18 consistently underexposed and over-contrasted so I think the anti-flare measures were overdone in that one.
Where I find the 10-24 truly exceptional is in it's relative lack of CA and geometric distortion, compared to other ultra-wides I've seen. Even at 10mm it defeats it's only competition at that focal length, the Sigma 10-20, and quite easily at that. As long as you don't aim this lens too much upwards or downwards, buildings, window edges, doorframes etc. end up looking near-straight.
I find the extra lens speed between f3.5 and f4.5 to be an added bonus. Even though the 10-24 jumps to f4 at 13mm already, it is consistently faster in maximum aperture than the 11-18 where they overlap in focal range.

Conclusion:
My 11-18 will be for sale soon, by the looks of it, since it doesn't do anything for me that the 10-24 can't do, despite being slightly sharper. The 20-40 is only kept because it fulfills the role of 20/2.7 prime (at which it does a better job than the Minolta 20/2.8).

-edit- Updated my sharpness rating after further use