Sigma 10-20mm f/4: Does anyone in our group has used this lens and how does it perform? Thank you.

augieg27 Loc: Central California

Does anyone in our group has used this lens and how does it perform?
Thank you.

Adicus Loc: New Zealand

Great

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

augieg27 wrote:

Does anyone in our group has used this lens and how does it perform?
Thank you.

Several years ago, back when I was a Canon user, I purchased the f/4-5.6 version of this lens. When I switched to Pentax, that was the one lens I truly missed ... until I found a K- mount version of it
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-446161-1.html

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

rehess wrote:

Several years ago, back when I was a Canon user, I purchased the f/4-5.6 version of this lens. When I switched to Pentax, that was the one lens I truly missed ... until I found a K- mount version of it
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-446161-1.html

I found a picture I took with the EF-mount variant
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-265069-1.html#4466127
It's only a thumbnail, but gives an idea of SOOC distortion.

aflundi Loc: Albuquerque, NM

augieg27 wrote:

Does anyone in our group has used this lens and how does it perform?
Thank you.

Quick, there's a killer deal on Amazon for one at

<https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-10-20mm-4-5-6-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0007U00XK/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1516998003&sr=8-4&keywords=Sigma+10-20mm+f%2F4>

Out of curiosity, why choose the 10-20/4-5.6 over the 10-20/3.5 ?

augieg27 Loc: Central California

aflundi wrote:

Quick, there's a killer deal on Amazon for one at

<https://www.amazon.com/Sigma-10-20mm-4-5-6-Digital-Cameras/dp/B0007U00XK/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1516998003&sr=8-4&keywords=Sigma+10-20mm+f%2F4>

Out of curiosity, why choose the 10-20/4-5.6 over the 10-20/3.5 ?

Killer deal at $3,679?? They must be kidding.
1. Price, and 2. I mostly shoot landscapes so I don't need a faster lens.

Have you used either one of them - f/4 or f/3.5?

aflundi Loc: Albuquerque, NM

augieg27 wrote:

Killer deal at $3,679?? They must be kidding.
1. Price, and 2. I mostly shoot landscapes so I don't need a faster lens.

Have you used either one of them - f/4 or f/3.5?

My Mom was looking for a wide-angle a year or so ago, and after researching I decided on and bought her the f/3.5 fixed. She liked it but I never laid hands on it. I've also never laid hand on the f/4-5.6 version either.

I was just looking at DxOmark comparing the two. The f/3.5 fixed looked pretty good. The f/4-5.6 looked like it would come in well behind an unpolished Coke bottle bottom. Assuming DxO didn't mess up (which they appear to do sometimes), there'd be no comparison between the two.

I'd also look hard at the Tokina 11-16/2.8 and 11-20/2.8 if I were buying one now.

aflundi Loc: Albuquerque, NM

augieg27 wrote:

...1. Price, and 2. I mostly shoot landscapes so I don't need a faster lens. ...

Have you, BTW, read the reviews for the two on B&H? They are the same price of $400, but the pictures posted by the reviewers look to me like DxO was not wrong.

aflundi Loc: Albuquerque, NM

aflundi wrote:

Have you, BTW, read the reviews for the two on B&H? They are the same price of $400, but the pictures posted by the reviewers look to me like DxO was not wrong.

I take that back. They pre-emptively routed my f/4-5.6 request to the f/3.5 page on B&H because the f/4-5.6 is no longer available. When I did force my way onto the old f/4.-5.6 page to see the reviews, many were very positive and some of the posted pictures looked quite nice, so maybe DxO was wrong after all. I'd probably still go with the f/3.5 though.

mrpentaxk5ii

augieg27 wrote:

Does anyone in our group has used this lens and how does it perform?
Thank you.

Sigma made two 10-20 mm lens, a 10-20 F 4-5.6 that has been discontinued in all mounts except Pentax for now and the 10-20 F-3.5 that you should find in all mounts.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

aflundi wrote:

I was just looking at DxOmark comparing the two. The f/3.5 fixed looked pretty good. The f/4-5.6 looked like it would come in well behind an unpolished Coke bottle bottom. Assuming DxO didn't mess up (which they appear to do sometimes), there'd be no comparison between the two.

Your last statement may be true.

Your statement before it is untrue and unfair. I have already posted several images from the f/4-5.6 variant - to my they are plenty good .... in fact, as I've already stated, I like it very much!!

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

augieg27 wrote:

Killer deal at $3,679?? They must be kidding.

Amazon doesn't care when vendors misplace a decimal point. Most of the other vendors on Amazon are in the $399 range.

rstipe Loc: S. Florida

I have one. No complaints, here.

deanfl Loc: Georgia

augieg27 wrote:

Does anyone in our group has used this lens and how does it perform?
Thank you.

I have had the f/4-5.6 for many years. Many of my best photos were taken with this lens. I know other choices may test out better.

Here is a recent photo on a Nikon D7100.

(Download)

Bill Gordon

I too have used this lens on both my D300 and D7100 with satisfying results.