How is the Sigma 10-20mm?

Started 9 months ago | Discussions thread
mike earussi Veteran Member • Posts: 8,651
Re: How is the Sigma 10-20mm?

Antone wrote:

absquatulate wrote:

Antone wrote:

Here's a shot at 10mm and f/8 with the f/4-5.6 version. You'll see the edges are not that good. You're unlikely to see meaningful improvement, and perhaps worse, performance from the f/3.5 version.

Anyone expecting perfect edges on any UWA lens is going to be disappointed, they're convex lenses with bulbous front elements, they're virtually impossibly to perfectly correct. The sensible thing to do, especially on a high resolution camera, is to shoot wider than you need and crop the edges wherever possible. This pretty much applies to all wider angle zooms in my experience. Ultimately the viewing distance dictates how important this is, and to be honest, no non photographer will ever notice what people on here agonise over. The 10-20mm, both versions, are excellent value for money and will do a sterling job. A quick check on Flickr, searching for this lens, will demonstrate that.

There's been nothing but talk in this thread so I posted an image so that Dan can see for himself how mediocre the 10-20mm lens is on the edges. If you have an image that shows the f/3.5 version is better, then post it.

If you take advantage of the field curvature it's not too bad. This is a pano taken with the lens in vertical position:

Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow