Sigma 10-20mm 3.5 wide angle lens.
Sep 2, 2019 08:52:32 #
roy4711 wrote:
What do you guys think of this lens? I just bought this lens from Adorama for $329.00 which was 50% off.
I use this lens on my Pentax K5 and K3 DSLRs and I’ve been very pleased with the results.
Sep 2, 2019 09:03:57 #
I should serve you nicely and the price was definitely decent. Good luck with it.
Sep 2, 2019 09:28:00 #
ballsafire wrote:
If you bought this lens for your Canon -- then you missed a great deal with Canon zoom 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 STM for ~ $253. Yes, it is too late as was remarked already -- or could you send it back? Of course an f/3.5 lense is better? A prime lense---if that's what you want.
A prime lens is a lens with a fixed focal length, ie: not a zoom.
The Sigma 10-20 is a zoom lens with a constant maximum aperture.
Sep 2, 2019 09:29:30 #
gvarner
Loc: Central Oregon Coast
I used mine exclusively in our Utah canyons tour. Perfectly happy with the results. Try to keep it level at the 10 mm end or you’ll get some tilting in or out on vertical elements. Wasn’t a big deal for me, I don’t strive for "reality" in all my shots.
Sep 2, 2019 09:55:02 #
fetzler
Loc: North West PA
The lens is more than OK. Consider the Tamron 10-24mm ( the new version) it optically even better and uses a somewhat smaller filter that saves money
Sep 2, 2019 10:55:24 #
It is a good lens from what I know but I prefer Nikon optics for my Nikon cameras. Nikon manufactures a 10-20 lens that you could have bought for $219 refurb at some reputable dealers like Adorama.
Never buy first and then ask the questions.
Never buy first and then ask the questions.
Sep 2, 2019 11:25:26 #
Sep 2, 2019 11:39:53 #
ballsafire
Loc: Lafayette, Louisiana
GoofyNewfie wrote:
A prime lens is a lens with a fixed focal length, ie: not a zoom.
The Sigma 10-20 is a zoom lens with a constant maximum aperture.
The Sigma 10-20 is a zoom lens with a constant maximum aperture.
Yeah, you right!
Sep 2, 2019 11:44:13 #
rosjan wrote:
I have it and enjoy using it. Unfortunately, that opportunity rarely presents itself.
I was in a museum for several hours yesterday, and my Sigma 10-20 was seldom off my camera.
Sep 2, 2019 12:13:51 #
ballsafire wrote:
If you bought this lens for your Canon -- then you missed a great deal with Canon zoom 10-18mm f/4.5-5.6 STM for ~ $253. Yes, it is too late as was remarked already -- or could you send it back? Of course an f/3.5 lense is better? A prime lense---if that's what you want.
I am missing which is the prime lens as no prime lens was mentioned, just zoom lenses that I can see.
Dennis
Sep 2, 2019 12:14:42 #
billnikon wrote:
When seeking advice here, it may be a good idea in the future to ask BEFORE you buy.
Good advice but as you know some of the UHH members would then tell him to Google it for information.
Dennis
Sep 2, 2019 12:15:34 #
I bought this lens a few years ago and have used it for landscape, architecture, museums and anything in close places. I even like to shoot close up to get a different perspective. I find it very sharp. Use it on my 80D, so it is equivalent to 15-35mm on full frame sensor. I think you got an excellent deal.
Sep 2, 2019 12:25:11 #
The Sigma 10-20 3.5 is a great lens. I bought mine after discovering that shooting in the narrow streets in New Orleans was difficult using regular lenses. Even backed up against the wall on one side of the street wouldn't allow me to get the subject matter framed on the other side. I have used it to take group photos and interiors of homes with great success. As far as third party lenses go, I think that Sigma is at the top of the list. Solid build and excellent quality!
Sep 2, 2019 16:05:16 #
amfoto1
Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA
The Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 is a good lens and a good value... now that they've drastically reduced it's price. It used to be one of the most expensive ultrawides at $649. But now - thanks to Canon with their 10-18mm (now $199) and the 10-20mm that Nikon soon followed with (now $219) - Sigma has dropped the price close to 50%.
The only problem with the Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 is it's size and weight. It's well built, but that and it's larger, non-variable aperture make it one of the biggest and heaviest of the type. It's twice as heavy as the Canon 10-18mm or Nikon 10-20mm. It's even roughly 15% heavier than the fairly robust Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM (~$600) or Nikkor 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 (~$900). Only the 2/3 stop faster Tokina 11-20mm weighs more (approx. 40 grams... 1.5 oz. or 10 standard paperclips.)
The Siggy 10-20mm f/3.5 also uses an 82mm filter. The only other ultrawide zoom that uses that large a filter is the Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8. All the others use 77mm, except for the Canon 10-18mm (67mm) and the Nikkor 10-20mm (72mm).
Sigma used to make a smaller, approx. 15% lighter, lower priced, variable aperture version... a 10-20mm f/4-5.6 (77mm filters). It was pretty good, too. They discontinued it a year or two ago.
I wonder if Nikon will ever reduce the price of their AF-S 10-24mm (~$900) and AF-S 12-24mm f/4 (~$1150). Those have long been the most expensive ultrawides from any of the bigger lens manufacturers... Now, after the prices have been reduced on virtually everyone elses' lenses, those Nikkors are BY FAR the most expensive! They can't be selling very many of them, considering all the alternatives that are just as capable, but far less expensive!
The only problem with the Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 is it's size and weight. It's well built, but that and it's larger, non-variable aperture make it one of the biggest and heaviest of the type. It's twice as heavy as the Canon 10-18mm or Nikon 10-20mm. It's even roughly 15% heavier than the fairly robust Canon 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM (~$600) or Nikkor 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5 (~$900). Only the 2/3 stop faster Tokina 11-20mm weighs more (approx. 40 grams... 1.5 oz. or 10 standard paperclips.)
The Siggy 10-20mm f/3.5 also uses an 82mm filter. The only other ultrawide zoom that uses that large a filter is the Tokina 11-20mm f/2.8. All the others use 77mm, except for the Canon 10-18mm (67mm) and the Nikkor 10-20mm (72mm).
Sigma used to make a smaller, approx. 15% lighter, lower priced, variable aperture version... a 10-20mm f/4-5.6 (77mm filters). It was pretty good, too. They discontinued it a year or two ago.
I wonder if Nikon will ever reduce the price of their AF-S 10-24mm (~$900) and AF-S 12-24mm f/4 (~$1150). Those have long been the most expensive ultrawides from any of the bigger lens manufacturers... Now, after the prices have been reduced on virtually everyone elses' lenses, those Nikkors are BY FAR the most expensive! They can't be selling very many of them, considering all the alternatives that are just as capable, but far less expensive!
Sep 2, 2019 16:26:52 #
willaim wrote:
Use it on my 80D, so it is equivalent to 15-35mm on full frame sensor. I think you got an excellent deal.
NO-It is not. This is a "DC" series lens that is designed for a crop sensor camera.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.