New Sigma 10-20mm lens initial observations

[photo5]

Just wanted to tell everyone here that my new Sigma 10-20mm zoom lens is really fantastic and is better than I

expected. I find it sharp at all focal lengths and the build is excellent. No noticeable vignetting at 10mm. I'll

get a lot of use out of this lens on my trip to London for sure!<P>

 

<center><img src="http://hull534.smugmug.com/photos/358249731_u2JEZ-M.jpg"><P>

 

My old apartments (1997-2005) now to become more expensive condos...Sigma 10-20mm at 10mm f8, D300<P>

 

<img src="http://hull534.smugmug.com/photos/358252941_923Rb-M.jpg"><P>

 

A detail taken at 20mm</center><P>

[frank uhlig]

These are full frame 35mm film images, right?

[Rene11664880918]

Dave.... More than a lens I think you need a new home! :) I am sure you will love your lens! good luck and have fun!

 

Frank... The sigma 10-20 is a DX lens

[Matt Laur]

Welcome to the cult, Dave. Your membership packet is in the mail!

<br><Br>

I was just using that lens the other day in some really <a href="http://www.photo.net/photo/7691063&size=lg"><b>cramped quarters</b></a>. That extra 2mm out to 10mm really makes a difference. Have fun!

[Two23]

The Sigma 10-20mm was my most used lens. It is also an excellent value.

 

 

Kent in SD

[jakegagne]

I adore this lens. The optics are great, though I'm sure the Nikon 12-24mm is better. Then again, it also costs $400 more and doesn't go as wide. Either way, the 10-20mm is lots of fun.

[photo5]

Kent, what do you mean your most used lens? Did you switch to FX format? I couldn't afford the Nikon 14-24mm if I tried!!

 

I had the Tokina 12-24mm for a year and a half, and it is excellent no doubt, but I always wanted something a little wider. The Sigma is a little smaller and lighter weight as well, and thankfully takes 77mm filters.

[z_newbie]

I have been using this lens for over a year and just love it. Keep in mind that the len does warp on anything less than 11mm (nothing PS can fix) - Enjoy

[Matt Laur]

I think Kent has committed heresy and gone with the Tokina 11-16/2.8. He feels the need for speed!

[robert_hooper1]

It is gratifying to hear about your positive experience, Dave. As they say, looks like you've got a keeper.

[timothy_comben]

I purchased this lens as my first non Nikon Len, I have to say its great!

I use it a lot snowboarding, it work very well in the cold.

[victorwei]

I agree with all of the nice things said above. This lens can turn a good shot into a great one - regardless of

what type of image - landscape, architecture, street, etc. etc....I guess Sigma should pay us to share these

comments...LOL...

[angkordave]

The Sigma 10 -20 is the only wide lens I've owned that I have not had to use at its widest.

The ability to use 77mm filters without vignetting was a big plus over my old Sigma 12-20.

I have had such a lot of fun with this lens and had results no other lens could achieve!

 

See my recent shot of Angkor Wat with polarizer and corrected for convergence.

[angkordave]

Sorry image did not upload<div></div>

[photo5]

Wow Dave, beautiful photo! Glad to hear most people seem to like this lens. I hadn't heard too much until recently, I guess it's a sleeper due to the slow f5.6 at 20mm. So far that hasn't bothered me much.

[Matt Laur]

Yeah, that slower 20mm can be an issue, but I find that I'm almost always using that lens more in the 10-16

neighborhood, where it stays a stop faster or so. If you really need a faster lens, there are other choices (like that

Tokina 11-16/2.8). But if you need 10mm on a DX sensor, this here's the one.

[photo5]

I find that I appreciate the lens having the reach to 20mm more than not having f2.8. After using this lens over the weekend, I am really glad I have the full 10-20mm range, rather than the smaller 11-16mm range.

[marek_stepien]

I had Tokina 11-16 for a couple of weeks, and did not fully liked it. Then I bought Sigma 10-20, compared both and

returned Tokina. Both lenses were very sharp, overall Tokina a little bit sharper, especially far in the corners.

However, Sigma gave a little bit better colors, and the pictures seemed to be more lively. When I was comparing

them I also rented Nikons 12-24 and 14-24. Nikon 12-24 was a tiny bit better than Sigma, in both sharpnes and

colors, but the price difference (almost $500) did not justify it.

 

However, I falled in love with Nikon 14-24. It is heavy, big, and the front lens exposed for scratches. I love it not so

much for it's sharpness, but for the colors it gave. I have never seen so crisp and vivid pictures. This lens is on my

list to buy.