Don, as often happens you fail to appreciate the minutiae of the discussion.
I never claimed that your Tamron lens was either in or out of tolerance, how could I know? I am quite prepared to accept the likelihood that it isn't for reasons I mentioned earlier.
My point was that the lens or camera can be within tolerance but not "perfect" which seems to be what you are expecting.

Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
Peter, I know from where I speak, so please to be offended when I say, "Are you, like, on something?".......had to be absolutely, without a doubt, dead-on and within tolerance. Otherwise "REJECT!" with a big red tag...........
I give you credit for thinking you know "from where you speak" but here you claim the item of equipment was "dead on" yet in the same sentence claim it was "within tolerance".

Implicit in the statement, "within tolerance", is that the item is not "dead on" but lies within an acceptable deviation around the ideal. We also know that tolerances can accumulate in a very negative way. That's why stock engines get blueprinted for racing at extraordinary expense (for example).

The simple fact is perfection cannot be achieved at any sensible price in the manufacture of a lens particularly at Tamron prices. Zeiss get closer but at a much higher price which some are prepared to pay whilst others won't.

If you can't recognise these simple facts of life there is no hope for you. It's necessary to understand a problem before you can deal with it.

A statement from one of your earlier posts really says it all...
Quote Originally Posted by DonSchap View Post
One of the benefits (if you could call it that) on the two Full Frame SONY DSLRs (α850/α900) is the Micro-Focus Adjustment, ..........