Besides being expensive, if you believe the MTF graphs at lenstip.com the Canon's reslution is optimized at 17-22mm and not nearly as good at 10mm. The Tokina 10mm-24 (for one) is optimized for 10mm, and just okay from there on. Of course other issues exist with the Tamron that might make it a bit weaker than the Canon (gotta stop the Tamron down to get even decent quality). The same exists but is less intense on the Canon. Wide angle lenses seem to be all over the place in terms of quality and performance. It certainly isn't clear which is best for everything. If only we could buy them all and meld them Syfy-like.
(Can you tell it's Syfy Friday?)
Here are the MTF charts I spoke of
Canon: http://www.lenstip.com …USM_Image_resolution.html![]()
Tokina:http://www.lenstip.com …IF)_Image_resolution.html![]()
Based on this, a person might want to choose between the two lenses depending on if they mostly need 10mm shots or mostly need 17-22mm shots.
Update: I should note that I own the Canon, and I'm not a huge fan. It's great sometimes and a huge disappointment at other times....although if it were a $200 lens, I'd be ecstatic with it.

