The right SLR for the job & Megapixels vs Lens

[Anbesol]

Sigma also makes a high quality 24-85mm f2.8 lens that costs under $500. But I still think that the Nikon and Canon stuff (other than their cheap kit lenses) is built to a higher level of durability than the 3rd party lenses. The Tamron and Sigma lenses might be just as sharp and less costly, but I don't think they are as well suited to the rigors of day in, day out professional use.

If rigors include all-weather outdoor use, I suppose. As Lynn mentioned Portrait/wedding, I can't imagine what problems you foresee with the Tamron. I wouldn't discourage the Tamron based on its extending zoom, lack of weatherproofing, or the sorts. Those features will cost lynn mucho bucks that he could apply better towards other lens, strobes,speedlites, etc. No need to have a lens that can withstand the rain for portraits/wedding. Just my 2 cents...

Gotta agree with you on Olympus though, they have their nook and they do well, but they don't have quite the lens variety and selection that all the other big guys do. The 4/3rds format is a pretty niche market.

[Dougjgreen]

My only issue with the Tamron 28-75 is that, on a small sensor body, 28mm isn't wide enough for wedding work, as it's a 35mm equivalent of 42mm. A 24mm (36mm equiv. FOV) is noticeably wider. 18mm would be even better, if there were a fast enough lens that also was at least 70mm on the long end.