Not that bad, but not quite convincing!

I think the review of H. Weber puts it quite well to the point. I am "55-200mm 4-5.6 Di II LD Macro Tamron AF" (on a EOS 600D), not a hundred percent satisfied with the autofocus performance. At first glance, most shots are fine, but at 100% zoom on the screen you get the feeling that everything could still be a bit sharper. Now I am given the relatively low price quite willing to accept less, so I've also focused manually, because the results are slightly better. So if you made an effort and time taking can be done with the Tamron AF 55-200mm quite decent shots.

At home I have, however, still an old 'Voigtlander APO 28-210mm Zoomar 1: 4.2 to 6.5 VMV "lying around that fits with adapter ring (for Pentax K) on my EOS 600D. I'm not a lens expert, so do not know if this Voigtlander earlier was considered particularly good times. When Voigtlander course I have to adjust everything completely manually, particularly focusing depending on the lighting conditions sometimes more, sometimes less "icky" in halfway ordinary light it is but very well with the "Magic Lantern" zoom-Lupe, (in low light needs you also to ever see between open and working aperture toggling something more). When I then but everything (ISO, aperture, shutter speed and focus) manually adjusted properly, the images in any situation are significantly better than with the Tamron AF 55-200mm!

Conclusion (just for me):
If I have to work manually to obtain the best possible results in any case, I'll stay for now prefer the old Voigtländer!