Sigma 10-20mm, anygood?

It's an awesome lens, and one I wouldn't be without.
 
Send kerso a PM. He can usually get them quite cheap. Bought a D200 grip and a 30mm f/1.4 from him. Excelent service.

Let him know I pointed you in his direction.

King.
 
Kerso recently quoted me 285 + p&p you can't get a used one for much less than that on Fleabay (I know I tried). It is the next lens on my list but I'm waiting to buy it in the states cuz well it is cheaper!
 
Got mine from HERE
£289 + £10 P&P. It was here within 2 days of ordering it.
 
They do. Its a Canon 10-22. I hear that its technically better but for the most part you'd never know. Its also £200 more.
 
Blast my Tamron 28-74 is a f2.8

Am I right in thinking the Sigma 10-20 is only f4.5-5.6 ?
 
:eek: OMG I hadnt seen that!!!!


And I hope my husband doesn't!!!! :eek:
 
Janice said:
Blast my Tamron 28-74 is a f2.8

Am I right in thinking the Sigma 10-20 is only f4.5-5.6 ?
Click to expand...

Its f4-5.6 but due to it being 10mm you can use it at 1/10th and get away with shots. Hell I've hand held at 1 second with it :)
 
Blimey...£200 extra just for the name? What a rip off.
Click to expand...

Not sure myself.

I've not used the sigma or canon 10-22 but it's said that the sigma doesn't offer quite the image quality of it's big brother the 12-24.

If that's true and the canon is no better than the sigma then it must be one of canon's poorest offerings.

Getting a superwide zoom to give a decent image would seem to one of the biggest challenges in lens design. I know we've all seen great images here taken with all the various superwides but at that size, my phone will produce a decent image. It's looking at the detail in real full size close up that tells the full story.

Luckily for all of us, much of the time the shots we look to use these lenses for don't really on great detail but on pure composition and perspective. In these cases, some pretty poor detail quality can pass by un-noticed.
 
Sorry but I was glad I spend £200 more on the Canon version. It offers better image quality that I saw reviewed online and decided I would buy this to make sure any disapointments were to a minimal.

A recent magazine this month reviews the Nikon, Canon, Sigma & tammy.

The Sigma gets a really poor round up, the Canons was better but had its own problems (just not as many) The Nikon rated top.

I also got £70 cashback for the EF-s 10 -22. The advantage of the others is that they are compatable with FF cameras.
 
The advantage of the others is that they are compatable with FF cameras.
Click to expand...

The Sigma 10-22 is crop sensor only too, the 12-24 is FF compatable but much more expensive though.
 
Sigma 10 - 20 I think you mean. Yeah the 12 - 24 is a much better option for users thinking of moving to FF
 
TomB said:
I've been reading a few things about this lens and the Cokin P-series filters... does anyone know how wide you can go with this lens before the edges of the P-series holder become visible?
Click to expand...

You will see a small amount of vignetting at 10mm, at 12mm it goes completely in my experience. This is a great lens by the way, the EX glass is superb.
 
Woodsy2k said:
Bloody hell pete!

Did the shot come out like you would hope?

I really want one of these lenses as well :(
Click to expand...

monday_29thCRW_0426-01.jpg


It came out well enough :)
 
petemc said:
I stood very very still :D
Click to expand...

Well that was the obvious answer :lol: . I tried some hand held HDR on saturday, only looked at one of them so far and it didn't look too great, I guess I need more practice :(
 
I just read this review which was quite interesting. Can't comment really myself as I don't have any of these lenses, although I was about to buy a Sigma. This article reckons the Tokina is better, but then it's only one person's view. Anyone have the Tokina lens?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top