Wide angle lens for Greece: Viltrox 13mm f1.4, Fuji 10-24mm f4 or Sigma 10-18mm f2.8?

biza43 said:

Paulmorgan said:

biza43 said:

The Viltrox 13 is a good lens, but in my experience is very prone to flare. You have to constantly watch out for it. Much better in that regard are the Fuji 14 and Fuji 10-24. What sort of night shots you are thinking about? Keeping your ISO under check to avoid noise, perhaps you need to be around f/1.4 to f/2.8 range? That might limit your depth of field?

Just practice with your 16-55 at night with f/2.8 and see how it works out. It could be that the 10-24 is sufficient.

Click to expand...

Todays raised ISO`s are much nicer than they once were.

You can quite easily compensate for a slower lens by raising the ISO a stop or even several stops, up it to 400 or 800 and you would be hard pressed to notice the differences side by side without pixel peeping.

Click to expand...

Sure, that was my gist to the OP. If the OP shoots Raw, he can even set ISO at the dual gain point (in some cameras it is ISO 640), and then raise the shadows in processing.

Click to expand...

The trick is getting enough light on the sensor, my old Olympus EM5 was terrible even in good light displaying noise in the blue channel at base ISO, exposing to the right a little and it was all gone.

Hello! Thanks so much everyone for all your kind advice! I've been a bit busy this week and haven’t had the time to reply until now

Honestly I’ve been wanting to get an UWA lens like the 10-24mm for a while, not just for landscapes but also for architecture and interiors (i’m an architect), though mostly thinking about travel and day trips (like cathedrals, museums, caves, etc.). That’s why I think a zoom might be more flexible and suit me better for both landscape and architecture than something like the Fuji 8mm, Samyang 12mm or Viltrox 13mm.

Right now I’m leaning towards the Fuji XF 10-24mm F4 over the Sigma 10-18mm F2.8… mainly because of the price (around half the cost 650-600€ vs 350-300€), and apparently better corner sharpness at F8 and better flare control. I’d probably go for the older version without weather sealing. On the other hand the Sigma would be smaller and lighter which would be great.

That said, my plan is to mainly shoot with the 16-55mm F2.8 II and just switch to the UWA for specific situations, as I don’t want to be constantly thinking about which lens to have on On this trip in particular, I’d use the UWA during the day for landscapes, like the Odeon of Herodes in Athens, narrow streets in the Ionian islands like Naxos town or Oia, and for landscapes + sunsets at Meteora, the Temple of Poseidon in Sounion, or in Santorini from Oia or from Imerovigli with the full caldera view.

Not planning on much night shooting with the UWA, maybe some blue hour shots after sunset where I can bump up the ISO. Once it’s fully dark I’d just switch to the 16-55mm F2.8 II and raise ISO there too (as I’ll probably sell my 23mm F2 to help fund the UWA).

I’m attaching a few reference images of the kind of views I have in mind for the UWA (just for inspiration, don’t judge me too hard )

What would you recommend me then? Fuji 10-24mm or Sigma 10-18mm?

Thanks!

Victor

victorgm said:

Hello! Thanks so much everyone for all your kind advice! I've been a bit busy this week and haven’t had the time to reply until now

Honestly I’ve been wanting to get an UWA lens like the 10-24mm for a while, not just for landscapes but also for architecture and interiors (i’m an architect), though mostly thinking about travel and day trips (like cathedrals, museums, caves, etc.). That’s why I think a zoom might be more flexible and suit me better for both landscape and architecture than something like the Fuji 8mm, Samyang 12mm or Viltrox 13mm.

Right now I’m leaning towards the Fuji XF 10-24mm F4 over the Sigma 10-18mm F2.8… mainly because of the price (around half the cost 650-600€ vs 350-300€), and apparently better corner sharpness at F8 and better flare control. I’d probably go for the older version without weather sealing. On the other hand the Sigma would be smaller and lighter which would be great.

That said, my plan is to mainly shoot with the 16-55mm F2.8 II and just switch to the UWA for specific situations, as I don’t want to be constantly thinking about which lens to have on On this trip in particular, I’d use the UWA during the day for landscapes, like the Odeon of Herodes in Athens, narrow streets in the Ionian islands like Naxos town or Oia, and for landscapes + sunsets at Meteora, the Temple of Poseidon in Sounion, or in Santorini from Oia or from Imerovigli with the full caldera view.

Not planning on much night shooting with the UWA, maybe some blue hour shots after sunset where I can bump up the ISO. Once it’s fully dark I’d just switch to the 16-55mm F2.8 II and raise ISO there too (as I’ll probably sell my 23mm F2 to help fund the UWA).

I’m attaching a few reference images of the kind of views I have in mind for the UWA (just for inspiration, don’t judge me too hard )

What would you recommend me then? Fuji 10-24mm or Sigma 10-18mm?

Thanks!

Victor

Click to expand...

The Sigma`s equ to a 15-28mm, the fuji a 15-36.

The Sigma remains wide even at its max zoom of 28mm, that Fuji gets you to 35mm, pretty much a standard walk around, I think you will find the Fuji more useful.

During the day good for everything from Landscape to the narrow streets of the Greek Islands.

Once more this 10-24mm can be picked up cheaper than one of Fuji`s f2 primes new.

I think I paid about £285 second hand for my 10-24, a good price, I was not interested in paying the extra for the newer WR version that I believe uses the same optics.

--
Hoka Hey

I would be careful with second hand (or new) 10-24s (either version), there are more than a few subpar copies out there. I'd definitely rather have a good copy of the 10-24 than the Sigma (which also seems to suffer from sample variation issues). Whatever you choose, buy with a solid return policy. Personally, I'd go for the Viltrox which, besides being great during the day, also excels at night and indoors at very wide apertures, but the versatility of the 10-24 is hard to beat if you're walking around with it on a single body.

Erik Baumgartner said:

I would be careful with second hand (or new) 10-24s (either version), there are more than a few subpar copies out there. I'd definitely rather have a good copy of the 10-24 than the Sigma (which also seems to suffer from sample variation issues). Whatever you choose, buy with a solid return policy. Personally, I'd go for the Viltrox which, besides being great during the day, also excels at night and indoors at very wide apertures, but the versatility of the 10-24 is hard to beat if you're walking around with it on a single body.

Click to expand...

This last second hand 10-24mm I got hold of came with a 30 day return policy and a 12 month warranty, there really is very little to worry about.

Paulmorgan said:

Erik Baumgartner said:

I would be careful with second hand (or new) 10-24s (either version), there are more than a few subpar copies out there. I'd definitely rather have a good copy of the 10-24 than the Sigma (which also seems to suffer from sample variation issues). Whatever you choose, buy with a solid return policy. Personally, I'd go for the Viltrox which, besides being great during the day, also excels at night and indoors at very wide apertures, but the versatility of the 10-24 is hard to beat if you're walking around with it on a single body.

Click to expand...

This last second hand 10-24mm I got hold of came with a 30 day return policy and a 12 month warranty, there really is very little to worry about.

Click to expand...

That’s great, but that isn’t always the norm.

Erik Baumgartner said:

Paulmorgan said:

Erik Baumgartner said:

I would be careful with second hand (or new) 10-24s (either version), there are more than a few subpar copies out there. I'd definitely rather have a good copy of the 10-24 than the Sigma (which also seems to suffer from sample variation issues). Whatever you choose, buy with a solid return policy. Personally, I'd go for the Viltrox which, besides being great during the day, also excels at night and indoors at very wide apertures, but the versatility of the 10-24 is hard to beat if you're walking around with it on a single body.

Click to expand...

This last second hand 10-24mm I got hold of came with a 30 day return policy and a 12 month warranty, there really is very little to worry about.

Click to expand...

That’s great, but that isn’t always the norm.

Click to expand...

It depends on where your buying from, private sellers forget warranty.

In the UK we have places like Wex and MPB offering 12 months warranty second hand, there could be more.

victorgm said:

What would you recommend me then? Fuji 10-24mm or Sigma 10-18mm?

Click to expand...

If you're going to use the 16-55 most of the time, the 10-18 would be more suited. But based on the photos you shared, I would go with the 10-24 as a main lens. I find it a great travel lens, because it can cover architecture to landscape and street.

Thanks for sharing your images. I own XF 10-24/4 Mk I, Viltrox 13/1.4, Tamron 11-20/2.8, and Sigma 10-18/2.8.

My favorite combination is XF 16-55/2.8 II and Sigma 10-18/2.8 attached to my X-H2 or X-T5.

When I want to shoot ultra-wide, I like the flexibility of a zoom. The Sigma 10-18/2.8 is so small/light, I can forgive its slightly reduced image qualities wide open and close. The XF 10-24 and Tamron 11-20 are both large/heavy lens to me.

Love the image quality of the Viltrox 13/1.4; but, it is so large and heavy to me.

Currently on a trip to New York, D.C., and eventually to a friend's son's graduation. Just brought X-T5, XF 16-50/2.8-4.8 (because my XF 16-55/2.8 II is being repaired *sob*), Sigma 10-18/2.8, *and* XF 18/1.4. Much easier to carry that 18/1.4 for indoor shots at a museum.

I recently came back from a family holiday and my XF 10-24 (the first / non-WR version) got a lot of time on my camera during the day. The fact that it can shoot at the wide range for scenic / vista shots, and then provide a 24mm 'normal' focal length makes it incredibly versatile. I was on a family holiday trying to get photos primarily of family and kids, and didn't have time to set up great shots or change lenses, so the versatility trumped other considerations. The 10-24 (being internally zooming) on my X-S20 was light enough to carry on a sling without concern.

I have had the 12mm Samyang manual focus previously, primarily for astro / interior architecture type photos, and while I liked the lens having a single fixed wide angle can be very limiting - sometimes 10mm is perfect, sometimes 13 or 14mm, sometimes 16-18 is better. I would love the Viltrox 13mm but it would be in addition to a UWA zoom (especially if I got back into astro), but when travelling with family the single UWA view would be too limiting - I am not sure of your user requirements, mind you.

In terms of IQ I do find the faster prime lenses give me more impressive results, and the 'special' nature of the images coming out of the 10-24 is a result of having nailed composition. I'm not a pixel-peeper and while I suspect my 10-24 is softer in the edges and is, I suspect, slightly softer on the right hand sand than the left side of images, in reality I have to actually squint or zoom in to see and displayed or printed images are impressive for my needs.

The only other point I would note - I travelled through Greece when I got my very first 'proper' camera, an entry-level Nikon D3000 with the very limiting kit lens. I got some amazing images from Athens, Delphi and Meteora with this set-up simply because the scenery is so spectacular and I took so many images so a few were bound do stand out! You can't go wrong with any of the options you are looking at so choose what you will enjoy carrying and shooting with the most given your requirements.

Many thanks again! I'm still going back and forth, but I’d really like to make a decision today

As many of you have mentioned, both lenses will probably do the job quite well. In any case, I've read some more reviews and posts, and here are a few final thoughts in case you can help me make the better choice for me:

Image quality – the main use will be for landscapes, so I care about sharpness both in the center and at the edges at 10–12mm and f5.6–f8. From what I’ve read in several reviews, both lenses seem to offer similarly good quality in this range. Wide open (f2.8 or f4) at the focal extremes is a different story, but I don’t expect to use them that way often.

Aperture – the Sigma's f2.8 is definitely welcome, but I wouldn’t say it's essential for me in this case. For indoor use, I could simply rely on higher ISO with the stabilized Fuji XF 10-24, which I think would be good enough for me.

Focal length – since I’ve just gotten my new XF 16-55mm f/2.8 II and plan to use it as my main lens, I don’t mind that the wide-angle lens only overlaps up to the Sigma’s 18mm. I think this will actually help me choose more easily which lens to use, rather than second-guessing myself (which i tend to do). This focal range can still be very useful indoors or in narrow alleys, compared to a fixed focal length like the Samyang 12mm. As for the XF 10-24mm, I understand that having a longer range can be useful for those who use it as their main lens, but in my case, it would feel odd to use it at 20–24mm when I have the XF 16-55mm in the bag offering better quality at those focal lengths. Does this make sense?

Backlight performance / lens flare – one area I do care a lot about is backlighting / flare resistance and, optionally, nice sunstars. I’m excited about capturing panoramic landscapes at sunset in places like Meteora, Santorini, the Acropolis, etc. It seems the Fuji performs better than the Sigma in this regard, and this is what’s keeping me undecided. Do you think this is something I would really notice in sunset conditions, or is it less critical when the sun is already low? I'm also an hobby photographer, so maybe my untrained eye doesn't notice it as much. Thoughts?

Price/Size – the price difference isn’t a big deal for me, but the size and weight are, since I’d like to travel light. I tested and found that my Fuji X-S20 with the XF 16-55mm II mounted, the XC 50-230mm, and the Sigma 10-18mm would all fit in my current shoulder bag (Bensfoto S). However, if I go with the XF 10-24mm, either it or the 50-230mm would need to go in a separate pouch (which I also have). It's not a no-go for me, but could help to travel more comfortably.

So in my head, it’s really a discussion between the lightweight/compact Sigma and the better backlighting (and I assume then better sunset performance) of the Fuji.
What do you think about these points?



P.S. I've attached a size comparison photo. From left to right = XC 50-230, XF 16-55 II, Sigma 10-18, and XF 10-24. Basically, taking the 10-24 would be like carrying two 16-55s..

18mm on APS sensors is too wide for me, I'd forever be swapping and 24mm would avoid a lot of that work.

I've been shooting at much higher ISOs than I've been used to (see the two recent plant pictures here - they live in the dark) and it is amazing what denoising can do now, indeed they were OK without. ISO 3200 and 2400 IIRC. Don't even stop to think about jacking up ISO speeds, just do it.

--
Andrew Skinner

I have noticed that (at least my copy of) the Sigma lens appear to have colder corners in some rare instances where there is a lot of white in the scene, which I usually have to correct for manually. I'm assuming the XF lens is better in that regard. Otherwise it is fine, and in most scenes it is unnoticeable.




House removed for privacy reasons

dh7 said:

I have noticed that (at least my copy of) the Sigma lens appear to have colder corners in some rare instances where there is a lot of white in the scene, which I usually have to correct for manually. I'm assuming the XF lens is better in that regard. Otherwise it is fine, and in most scenes it is unnoticeable.

House removed for privacy reasons

Click to expand...

The Sigma 18-50 seems to also share a similar uneven purpley color cast on many images. I was thinking it might just be a relatively simple vignetting issue, but it's more than that. Yeah, it's fixable to some degree...







...but while I could make a correction preset pretty easily, it would bug me to have to hassle with this issue on a regular basis. This issue might not always be immediately noticeable, but it's probably always there, always affecting your images to some degree, and it's not easily 100% fixable.

The more I look into these little Sigmas, the more I find to dislike about them - the small size is nice, but there are too many compromises to deal with, IMO. The Fuji 10-24 has had some long term quality control issues, but I think I'd rather seek out a good copy of the Fuji (or get the Viltrox 13, which is what I did) than go with the Sigma.

Yeah, it would be a problem if I used it more often, but it is manageable in the rare instances I need it. I later got the Viltrox lens second hand, as I was unhappy with how the Sigma handled aurora, and will most likely sell it at some point, but there are still a few things I want 10 mm for.

Whether this will be a consideration for OP depends on how often he is going to use the lens, and whether or not he shoots raw. If my main lens had a purple vignette I would sell it right away, but as a secondary lens it is less of an issue.

The 10-24 has been great for me on holiday, but I’m finding it a bit too big and heavy in my bag now. As a result I’m looking at the Fuji 8mm now, it’s about half the size of the 10-24 and gets good reviews. That extra 2mm could also come in handy at times.

The 8 is a very nice lens but it is also a very specialised one. If you know that you take a lot of extremely wide angle shots and can compose them, it gives good results. But don’t underestimate just how much difference there is between the 10-24 and the 8 in terms of tolerance of sucking things in at the edges and tolerance for angling the lens away from vertical: with the 8, even the slightest off-vertical shot gives very pronounced convergence. Your remark the “the extra 2mm could come in handy at times” suggests to me that you are hoping for some versatility from whatever replaces your 10-24; if so, I would consider the Samyang/Rokinon 12mm (AF or MF versions) as well: that focal length is vastly more versatile.

I still have a Pentax fit Sigma 8-16mm and mostly used that at 8mm so I’d expect the Fuji 8mm would suit me just fine. The only thing putting me off is the price at the moment. It’s a shame it’s so expensive. I think for those that like extreme wide angle it would seem to be a great travel lens.

21William said:

The 10-24 has been great for me on holiday, but I’m finding it a bit too big and heavy in my bag now. As a result I’m looking at the Fuji 8mm now, it’s about half the size of the 10-24 and gets good reviews. That extra 2mm could also come in handy at times.

Click to expand...

I suggested just that option earlier in the thread. The 8mm is a great small lens. I use it when I want to travel light and small. I’m considering the rumored X-E5 and 23mm pancake as an even smaller walk around camera. That setup paired with the 8mm, 18mm and 30mm will be a super light fun kit.

If you are okay with a manual focus lens, the Laowa 9mm is stellar and significantly less expensive.

Hi! I shoot at different wide angles

The most convenient and versatile yet Sigma 10-18mm/2.8

You can see examples in my gallery: