• Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.

Sigma 10-20mm

bigmouse64

bigmouse64

bigmouse64

Associate
Joined
2 Oct 2004
Posts
1,577
Location
PROPER Shields
I've recently bought myself a 450D, and I've done a lot of browsing, and most of the stuff I really like has been shot with this wide-angle lens. At the minute I'm just using the standard kit lens, 18-55mm. My question is;

what are your guys experiences with this lense?
Did it live up to your expectations?

Feel free to post some shots you've taken, I never get bored of looking at stuff people post.

Also, if anyone could post up some sample images, that'd be a big help also.

Thanks
 
I dont currently own one. But it will be my next purchase. I know of two people with them and they are very happy with them. Neither have had any problems with sharpness, which the 10-20 is supposed to suffer from.
 
Personally I am looking at the Tokina 12-24mm, it's about the same price but supposed to be sharper and better made. The only downside is that you lose 2mm on the wide end.
 
It depends what you want to shoot with it, the sharpness isnt a major factor if you're shooting landscapes all the time. The fact its so wide is great fun and allows you to be very creative.

Some samples:

182201555_CaD7J-M.jpg

061014-Hoover-Dam-5web.jpg

182205951_x9MSW-M.jpg
 
I find mine a bit too wide for my eye now but i've really enjoyed it for the past couple of years. Just be aware there are some soft copies around if buying second hand.

12.jpg


15.jpg
 
i love my sigma 10-20 :D most what i shoot is done with it.

candice.jpg


barrel.jpg


2.jpg


me_roof_radio.jpg


09_in_pool_light.jpg


BUT, you have a canon - and canon do a lovely ultra wide angle lens for a few more pennies, get that instead.
 
Mine was soft as sponge so it had to go back......to Hong Kong.

Bought myself one from a supplier in HK and saved a fair few quid on the UK price. The savings are now being lost on the price of the box to post it back, the postage, the insurance and the fact I have been without it for 3 weeks. Not to mention the fact that Sigma HK may do nothing with it and return it to me saying there is no fault with it while charging me for the priviledge!

Moral of this story- buy it from an official UK supplier if you are going to get it.
 
Would probably have been cheaper to just send it to Sigma UK and pay for it to be calibrated. They only charge about 30-40 quid.

This is the problem with Sigma - good copies are bargains but there are far too many bad ones out there for my liking. Had to send my 17-70 in for calibration as it was short-focusing out of the box. Things like this just make me more inclined to shell out the extra for a Canon lens in the future as they're far more consistent.
 
Vertigo1 said:
Would probably have been cheaper to just send it to Sigma UK and pay for it to be calibrated. They only charge about 30-40 quid.

This is the problem with Sigma - good copies are bargains but there are far too many bad ones out there for my liking. Had to send my 17-70 in for calibration as it was short-focusing out of the box. Things like this just make me more inclined to shell out the extra for a Canon lens in the future as they're far more consistent.
Click to expand...

Well, was £14 quid to send it back insured to HK and about a fiver for the packaging materials. If Sigma HK don't charge for the return then I will just about break even!
 
Tis a great lens if you know its limits.
Shoot in its happy zone and it sharp, contrasty, distortion free, CA free.


There is a tokina 11-16 2.8 thats is quite good, a little soft wide open though. IF you shoot indoors then this is the one to get.
 
i am not particularly happy with mine. i bought it because i was time limited and i needed the uwa. if i had the option again, i would look elsewhere. the canon seems to get good reports.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom