Reading mode: Light Dark

Opinions, thoughts,examples on 10-20mm

Go to last post
ToasterFlyer said:
Please post/contribute..looking for a new lens to go with me on my
trip to Ireland.
Click to expand...
I use it on my Pentax. I like the lens a lot and it is often the lens of choice.

It is surprisingly big though. Much bigger than the amount of glass hints at it being necessary to be. The size gives it a kind of seriousness that impresses though :)

Hmmm ... it is not as wide angle on SD14 as on my Pentax. Thats a disadvantage.

--
Roland

support http://www.openraw.org/

X3F tools : http://www.proxel.se/x3f.html
 
I went through two copies. One was bad on the right side. The second was okay, but I sent it back because it just didn't seem that sharp. Frankly, I would just order one from B&H or Adorama and send it back if you don't like it. Some people like it, others don't. I think that with lenses you have to try them yourself. I did buy the DC 18-50 macro and really like that lens. With respect to Sigma, it's probably a bit*ch to make a 10mm lens in volume for the price they do.
 
Chrome,

Thanks..I was actually looking on Adoramas website earlier last week..notice they have one in stock....Its either this lens or the the straight up 20mm..

Rich
ny
ChromeLight said:
I went through two copies. One was bad on the right side. The second
was okay, but I sent it back because it just didn't seem that sharp.
Frankly, I would just order one from B&H or Adorama and send it back
if you don't like it. Some people like it, others don't. I think
that with lenses you have to try them yourself. I did buy the DC
18-50 macro and really like that lens. With respect to Sigma, it's
probably a bit*ch to make a 10mm lens in volume for the price they do.
Click to expand...
 
I had it, great lens. It is not tacksharp but it is definitely not soft either. Very well correted, little distortion at 10mm. It has a 77mm tilter thread so you should maybe get step-down rings to be able to use your filters. It is not superbright even at the wide end, and needs some stopping down for optimal sharpness but even at F4 you can get good results at 10mm due to the wide angle (lots of stuff in the frame=image appears to be more detailed anyways, huge DOF). Build quality is the best I have had from a DC lens. Pretty much like the 17-35.

The 15-30 lens is optically better but also bigger, has a dangerously protruding round front element, no HSM motor and does not take filters. If you do not mind the filter thing and the size, get the 15-30. If you do mind and prefer to have the 5mm more width, get the 10-20. If 16.6mm is wide enough for you, get a DP1.

O.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollivr/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ollivr/popular-interesting/
http://seen.by.spiegel.de/ollivr-1
 
Tiffles said:
The 15-30 lens is optically better but also bigger, has a dangerously
protruding round front element, no HSM motor and does not take
filters. If you do not mind the filter thing and the size, get the
15-30.
Click to expand...
Doesn't the 15-30 have far more distortion at the wide end than the 10-20? I've also heard it's less sharp.

--
John Reed
Film & Digital
 
MMm..regarding the 15-30, sigma4less shows they have one in stock, but in another post they dont seem to be recommended. Not only that the 15-30 is discontinued good luck finding one at a reliable source.

I really dont have the cash for a DP1(yet)plus Im leaving for Ireland next Sunday..and will not have the time to "learn" the cam..etc. Thought about the

20mm..but have seen shots @1.8 just a bit soft..and takes away from the low light interior shots..so whats the point really.

the 12-24 is out of my price range as well. I even thought about the 18-125 OS lens.. I have yet to see any samples availability..

Rich
ny
Tiffles said:
I had it, great lens. It is not tacksharp but it is definitely not
soft either. Very well correted, little distortion at 10mm. It has a
77mm tilter thread so you should maybe get step-down rings to be able
to use your filters. It is not superbright even at the wide end, and
needs some stopping down for optimal sharpness but even at F4 you can
get good results at 10mm due to the wide angle (lots of stuff in the
frame=image appears to be more detailed anyways, huge DOF). Build
quality is the best I have had from a DC lens. Pretty much like the
17-35.

The 15-30 lens is optically better but also bigger, has a dangerously
protruding round front element, no HSM motor and does not take
filters. If you do not mind the filter thing and the size, get the
15-30. If you do mind and prefer to have the 5mm more width, get the
10-20. If 16.6mm is wide enough for you, get a DP1.

O.
--
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ollivr/
http://www.flickriver.com/photos/ollivr/popular-interesting/
http://seen.by.spiegel.de/ollivr-1
Click to expand...
 
Chebb,

Thanks for the samples..as I figured this can be a very creative lens...

Is it a good landscape lens in your opinion?

Thanks
Rich
ny
CHEBB said:
I love it! Always in my bag...feel almost naked without it!
http://www.pbase.com/thechebb/image/97164064
http://www.pbase.com/thechebb/image/97164445
http://www.pbase.com/thechebb/image/97165521
http://www.pbase.com/thechebb/image/97173531
http://www.pbase.com/thechebb/image/74569024
Cheers!
Chebb
http://www.pbase.com/thechebb
Click to expand...
 
Rich, we see many 10-20mm photos here.. which is a good indication that lots of SD9/10/14 users have this lens and like it. I do too. But when you ask, is it a good landscape lens; well, that depends. What I found startling when first using it was how far and small away everything seemed. For big sweeping landscapes, I'll almost always use it at the "DP1" end, LOL, 16mm to 20mm range. I remember being at Valley of Fire after PMA2007 and I switched away from the 10-20mm initially because it wasn't doing the initial big landscape 'right' ... ie too far off in framing. I remember switching around between my 70-200mmEX the 28-70mmEX and 10-20mm.

The difference between 10 to 20 I've illustrated in a gallery I set up when I first bought it some years ago http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman/samples_sigma_1020mm__or_other_ex A lot of my old 2006 and earlier Lake Tahoe photos are with it too btw in other galleries.

Also be sure to study Carl Rytterfalk's comparison between the 12-24 and 10-20... even if you're not interested in the 12-24, he illustrates the lenses well somewhere back in the http://www.rytterfalk.com archives (I find it via search on his site).
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann
 
Thanks Sandy..

Carls site seems to be down atm.

Rich
ny
SandyF said:
Rich, we see many 10-20mm photos here.. which is a good indication
that lots of SD9/10/14 users have this lens and like it. I do too.
But when you ask, is it a good landscape lens; well, that depends.
What I found startling when first using it was how far and small away
everything seemed. For big sweeping landscapes, I'll almost always
use it at the "DP1" end, LOL, 16mm to 20mm range. I remember being at
Valley of Fire after PMA2007 and I switched away from the 10-20mm
initially because it wasn't doing the initial big landscape 'right'
... ie too far off in framing. I remember switching around between my
70-200mmEX the 28-70mmEX and 10-20mm.
The difference between 10 to 20 I've illustrated in a gallery I set
up when I first bought it some years ago

http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman/samples_sigma_1020mm__or_other_ex A lot of my old 2006 and earlier Lake Tahoe photos are with it too btw in other galleries.
Also be sure to study Carl Rytterfalk's comparison between the 12-24
and 10-20... even if you're not interested in the 12-24, he
illustrates the lenses well somewhere back in the http://www.rytterfalk.com
archives (I find it via search on his site).
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann
Click to expand...
 
When I bought my 10-20, it was more on a whim than anything else. I had used Chunsum's for a few minutes, and was taken by view (and the fact that I could get my feet in the frame if I wasn't careful.

I figured that it would be something that I used rarely, but I wanted to have it around. The bottom line is that I found it incredibly useful for landscape, and use it much more than I ever thought (I had it out this weekend). I've even used it for senior portraits (being careful not to get a nose at the edge of the frame...).

It's a very good lens.

--
Jim
 
Tiffles said:
The 15-30 lens is optically better but also bigger, has a dangerously
protruding round front element, no HSM motor and does not take
filters. If you do not mind the filter thing and the size, get the
15-30. If you do mind and prefer to have the 5mm more width, get the
10-20. If 16.6mm is wide enough for you, get a DP1.

O.
--
Click to expand...
That is NOT true.
The 15-30mm arrived today, I tested it and it´s going instantly back.
Bulky, superloud AF, and soft.
Plus hefty ditorted corners.
Or I have a unit, that is out of specs.....

Anyone has experiences with the 17-35?
Is it good fully open?
 
Thanks Jim..

Well today is the day I make my choice.. I thinks its between the 10-20
or the 18-125 OS, which seems to be available.

Can not get both at this time.

Rich
ny
JLK said:
When I bought my 10-20, it was more on a whim than anything else. I
had used Chunsum's for a few minutes, and was taken by view (and the
fact that I could get my feet in the frame if I wasn't careful.

I figured that it would be something that I used rarely, but I wanted
to have it around. The bottom line is that I found it incredibly
useful for landscape, and use it much more than I ever thought (I had
it out this weekend). I've even used it for senior portraits (being
careful not to get a nose at the edge of the frame...).

It's a very good lens.

--
Jim
Click to expand...
 
I find my (Canon) sample of the 10-20 to be sharp stopped down. I tend not to use it at wider apertures. I lent it to a friend for a while and I noticed he got soft extreme corners in large landscape prints. Best stopped down F8-F11 for corner to corner sharpness.

Like most lenses you need to watch for sample variation.

Some example shots from me:








ToasterFlyer said:
Please post/contribute..looking for a new lens to go with me on my
trip to Ireland.

Thanks
Rich
ny
Click to expand...
--
Galleries and website: http://www.whisperingcat.co.uk/mainindex.htm
 
Gene Hack wrote:
....
Gene Hack said:
Anyone has experiences with the 17-35?
Is it good fully open?
Click to expand...
all my PMA2008 photos here http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman/pma_200507&page=all are with a 17-35mm EX DG some are wide open, some are F4 when I was trying to 'mimic' DP1 maximum F/x of F4. Shot auto wb as I recall (not custom wb), monopod not tripod; just my personal, casual record of the trade show. The right side of that 17-35mm might have been a bit soft, as it happens I now have a second, different 17-35mm EX DG which seems sharper than the first, though that's just an initial impression. I haven't used it much; nothing is online yet with it. My most recent 6 online are with the SD14 + the fixed 50mm EX (non-DG) at http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann
Best regards, Sandy
[email protected]
http://www.pbase.com/sandyfleischman
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sandyfleischmann
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top