Sigma 10-20

[MAJPLO]

What can you all tell me about the Sigma 10-20? I'm not looking for "research" type specs, but what your experience has been. Love it, hate it, useful?

 

[bob100]

What can you all tell me about the Sigma 10-20? I'm not looking for "research" type specs, but what your experience has been. Love it, hate it, useful?

the "research type specs" (reviews?) indicate it's not as sharp as the Canon 10-22, Canon 10-18, etc. but it's cheaper or at least cheaper than the 10-22.
so it might depend on the budget

 

[MAJPLO]

the "research type specs" (reviews?) indicate it's not as sharp as the Canon 10-22, Canon 10-18, etc. but it's cheaper or at least cheaper than the 10-22.
so it might depend on the budget

But I shoot Pentax so the Canon won't help me. Lol. But I have seen what you mean about the budget. The Pentax lens this is closest to is also close in quality but quite a bit less in price from what I read. Thank you for the response

 

[Gianna'sPapa]

I have researched this lens to death for Pentax. There are two versions, a variable aperture version (f4-5.6) and a constant f3.5 version. The variable aperture version is supposed to be sharper than the newer f3.5. The recommendation has been that unless you need the lower light capability of the f3.5 the 4-5.6 is a better all around version. The downside of the variable aperture is the size of the filter (82mm) vs the 77mm of the 3.5. They both have their strong points and are well regarded. Here are the slrgear.com reviews of both.

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1250/cat/31

http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/171/cat/31

Myself, when the funds become available, will be purchasing the variable aperture version. With the higher ISO usability of the Pentax cameras starting with the K5 series, I don't need the f3.5.

 

[nbaresejr]

I own the Sigma 10-20 variable aperture lens for Canon. I use it on my t2i. While I do not use this lens often it does have its uses and advantages. I use it mostly on vacation. For me it was cheaper then the Canon 10-22 and the performance was pretty close. Now that the price on the 10-22 from Canon has come down and the 10-18 is $300 it would be a harder choice.

Below is a few Disney Shots I took with the Sigma 10-20. Also it uses 77mm filters just like my Sigma 17-50 2.8

Spaceship Earth by Nick Barese, on Flickr

Night Time Memories by Nick Barese, on Flickr

Under the Sea re-edit by Nick Barese, on Flickr

 

[MAJPLO]

Thank you for the samples. We just got home from Yosemite and while 18 was wide enough most of the time I did see where I could have used wider plenty of times. I'm thinking I'd like a wide angle for my next lens since baseball season (kids) is over and I don't need as much zoom for a while.

 

[handicap18]

I've had this lens for a while. I don't use it often, but when I do use I'm glad I have it. I've used it at Disney and at a few baseball games....

 

[millys]

I have the Sigma 10-20 f3.5 which I regularly use on my D7000 and can highly recommend.
There are several competitors that will probably produce equivalent images.
I used to have the Tamron 10-24 which I found was a little softer and I also still have the Tokina 11-16 f2.8 which is maybe a little sharper - but when I say a little - I really can't justify the difference in my own (amateur) photography.
I may sell the two and purchase the Nikon 10-24 eventually - only because of the extra reach though.

Some recent(ish) examples from the Sigma at the 10mm end posted below.

[/url]Eranca View by Timfy Mills, on Flickr[/IMG]

[/url]Luskentyre Beach by Timfy Mills, on Flickr[/IMG]

[/url]Dubai Marina Skyline by Timfy Mills, on Flickr[/IMG]


Milly