• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Sigma 10-20

Bob Rogers

New member
My wife and I are planning a trip to Europe (probably the only time we'll go). I have a Nikon d200 (crop sensor). I have the 18-105 which is pretty good for general purposes. I'm thinking of getting a Sigma 10-20 to take as well. I'm thinking of photos of church yards, fountains, and alleyways.

Does that make sense? Any comments on that particular lens or others in a similar price range (~$325 used) I might look at instead?

I'd might take just those two, leaving at home the 80-200/2.8, 24/2.4, and 8/3.5. I'm undecided on the 50/1.4. I'd probably take it. If I didn't get the 10-20 or something similar I would take the 8 instead, which works well enough defished at small reproduction ratios.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
My wife and I are planning a trip to Europe (probably the only time we'll go). I have a Nikon d200 (crop sensor). I have the 18-105 which is pretty good for general purposes. I'm thinking of getting a Sigma 10-20 to take as well. I'm thinking of photos of church yards, fountains, and alleyways.

Then, bob, this lens makes perfect sense. The difference form the nikon lens is that while this sigma lens is excellent in the center, the corners are just good. but that's fine. for an image to work pleasingly, we don't really want bitingly sharp rendering all over the picture. In the old days we even darkened the corners and edges a tad to put interest in the center.

You'll enjoy the lens and it's great value for the money. Read this review.

Asher
 

Robert Watcher

Well-known member
The Sigma 10-20 is absolutely one of my favourite lenses when I shot Nikon up until a few years ago. It is great value (especially compared to the Nikon) and that ultra wide angle of view is addictive. Almost all of my wedding and portrait work up until I changed camera brands, included many images taken with my Sigma 10-20. I wish that it had the same focal length on my Olympus cameras - or I'd still be using one.

I relied on it heavily with some of my commercial shoots such as this one - http://robertwatcher.com/journal/index.php?jp=26&title=antiquity-flooring

You can see it's value in these shots from an Aerospace Museum - http://robertwatcher.com/journal/index.php?jp=27&title=aerospace-museum-toronto

And here I used the Sigma 10-20 for parts of this Silent Auction I was hired to shoot - http://robertwatcher.com/journal/index.php?jp=34&title=chances-for-children-event
 
Have you looked into the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 prod Dx? It might bust your budget a bit but I've heard almost nothing but great things about this lens. Many think it is the best ultrawide angle zoom for crop bodies.
 

Bob Rogers

New member
Thanks everyone!

Asher, that review was part of what got me looking at that lens originally. Thom seems to have a good perspective about cameras.

Robert, did you need to correct distortion in post for those flooring shots? Beautiful wood there.

Jake, thanks, I looked at the Tokina, but it costs about twice as much. I get the impression that it's a fair bit bigger too, but I've never seen either lens in person. We'll be walking a lot, so I want to keep bulk down.
 

Robert Watcher

Well-known member
Thanks everyone!


Robert, did you need to correct distortion in post for those flooring shots? Beautiful wood there.

No. The key to keeping vertical distortion to a minimum, is keeping the lens square on to the subject. The head on my tripod has several bubble levels that I use to keep everything true. When I want extreme distortion though - the rules fly out the window and I make use of the optics to provide me that.


----
 

Chris Calohan

Well-known member
Funny thing. I just researched both and had the good fortune to use both in my research. While I preferred the lack of dropoff with the Tokina, the lens is a beast compared to the Sigma. I was able to purchase the Sigma at a greatly reduced price because it was a demo unit (but still get full warranty - whoohoo). When it arrives next week, I'll shoot some images.

I plan on selling my Nikkor 70-200 2.8 with the 1.7 tele-extender, my 35mm and my Tokina 100 macro/telephoto and keep to the 10-20 and the 18-105 which I really like as a lens, kit lens or not. Probably use Amazon as I've had the best luck with them and used equipment.
 

Michael Nagel

Well-known member
To throw in another possibility - if you don't desparately need the 2mm at the wide end, there is the Tokina AT-X Pro SD 12-24mm F4 (IF) DX (review).
I have the Pentax DA 12-24/4 which shares the optical design with the Tokina, but has a different mechanics and coating (I can't complain that much about flares though there are also flares sometimes).

Best regards,
Michael
 
Top