Sigma 10-20mm/f3.5 vs Sigma 10-20mm/f4-5.6 for Sony A55
I have been looking for a ultra wide lens for my wife's Sony A55. Went through lots of reviews and basically down to 2: Sigma 10-20/f4-5.6 vs Tamron 10-24/f3.5-4.5.
Went to a dealer yesterday and got pursaded to buy a Sigma 10-20/f3.5 instead. Made in Japan and f3.5 was just irresistable. The shop hasn't got a Sony Alpha camera battery charged, so I was not able to test the lens.
I took some shots of the Hong Kong city skyline from my apartment this morning and was totally shocked by the results. The lens is absolutely not usable wide open (10mm), until I stepped down to f7.1. At 12mm, f3.5, it wasn't any better. It got much better when stepped down to f4.5 though
My question is: why pay more to get a f3.5, (lens and filter alike), carry more weight when f3.5 to 4.5 cannot be used!
I went back to the shop with a notebook and showed the sales agent. He was surprised. He took many shots in the shop with different apertures. Softness was evident. We then tried the Sigma 4.5-5.6, and the pictures came out pretty decent.
Loaded some sample shots here for reference.
Not sure if it was just a bad copy that needs calibation or something more deep rooted. So, beware!
|Post (hide subjects)||Posted by||When|
|Mar 25, 2012|
|Mar 29, 2012|
|Apr 1, 2012|
|Apr 5, 2012|
|Apr 13, 2012|
|Apr 16, 2012|
|Fangorn Forest by cand1d|
|Yosemite Falls with Moonbow by Jonathan Shapiro|
from Best Landscape of the Week 4