It wouldn't have to blow away Canon. Your thinking like a forum user. Most shoppers are price driven. The Canon version sells for $799 WITH the current sale price. $200 cheaper for a brand new version 'for today's higher sensors' would sell fine. People can convince themselves to spend 'a little more than' $500 for the tamron, but $800($880 off-sale) is much closer to $1000. That gives the impression it's much more expensive. And mentioning Canon....why the hell haven't they replaced that one yet? We've had 3 versions of the 18-135 in the same time that lens has been out???
Anywho, the current model sell for $649. Releasing a new updated version that's sharper with a new better VC and tap-in console compatible for $50 cheaper than the outgoing model would be perfect. They did that with the new 70-200g2. Sigma's got a pretty big sale going on now with the 17-50, that makes me think they're either dropping it, or replacing it. I wouldn't hesitate paying more for a brand new Tamron g2 over the very old Sigma. The 18-35 is the odd duck in this group. That'd be the tough one to decide on. I've considered that lens several times. No stabilization and quite a bit shorter. BUT I think most Rebel users would go cheaper price, bigger zoom.
$599 for a new g2 VC crop version while the FF comes out at $1199 or $1299 is a perfect price point. Hell if they line priced it with this new 18-400, had similar construction I think they'd still sell it. But I think if they marketed the $50 cheaper price point it'd work in their favor.
