Sigma 10-20 as a replacement for Nikon 18-135?

[redeyeshev]

Hey peeps,

With the weather set to improve (in theory) I'm gearing up to go out shooting landscapes. I did several of these last year with my Nikon 18-135 kit lens.

This lens is okay but when I compare shots from my 70-300 it just seems to lack "that" sharpness when shooting at the widest angle. Even shooting at F8-11 the shots just lack that certain - what I would call "crunchiness" that I get from the 70-300. Plus, the chromatic aberration is awful. I'm thinking of upgrading to the Sigma 10-20.

So just wondering if anyone else has upgraded from the 18-135 to the Sigma 10-20 and noticed a real improvement?

Of course there's always the Nikon 12-24 but I'm not finding the price tag particularly attractive - still, if the quality is there I guess it's a sound investment.

 

[Steep]

You realise that the two lenses have almost nothing in common? one a mid range zoom and the other an ultra wide angle zoom. The Sigma is a nice lens but you're going to lose a lot of range coming away from a 135mm. I suppose only you know what you want to use it for but I'd be thinking of a better quality lens with the same range or close to the one I had.

 

[redeyeshev]

You realise that the two lenses have almost nothing in common? one a mid range zoom and the other an ultra wide angle zoom. The Sigma is a nice lens but you're going to lose a lot of range coming away from a 135mm. I suppose only you know what you want to use it for but I'd be thinking of a better quality lens with the same range or close to the one I had.

Thanks. I'm looking for a better option than the 18-135 at 18mm to shoot wide for landscapes - thus was considering the Sigma 10-20. I have a nifty-fifty and a 70-300VR so not worried about loosing range.

 

[Steep]

Ah, in that case the Sigma is a fine option.