cruise4two

I still agonizing over choice of Nikkor vs Sigma UW lens for my DX format Nikon. Each has it's merits...ie, IQ, build quality, etc. I 'd like to hear from users of each. To me, the most obvious with Sigma is it's build quality and fixed aperture of F3.5. Price is about $100 apart with Nikon being the least expensive of the two. F3.5 is what I consider a "fast" lens so I don't know if that's a big enough factor to sway me towards Sigma.

With that said, I'm still a Nikon kind of guy...own a ton (literally) of legacy Nikkor lenses from back in the day when everything was glass and brass. Getting a little too old to haul heavy gear around and still enjoy what I'm doing...that's why I'm setting up a lightweight DX format system.

Like to hear everyone's 2 cents on these DX lenses.

tuomi1947

I have the Nikon 10-20 works great, I bought used and price was much better.

Pablo8 Loc: Nottingham UK.

I have the Sigma 10~20mm lens, use it on my Nikon bodies. Matches in quality with any of my Nikon or Sigma lenses.

Strodav Loc: Houston, Tx

I have the Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 and use it on both a D7200 and D500. Very sharp! There is some distortion, but easily fixed in LR and I really like the fixed f/3.5 aperture. There is no Vibration Reduction, but it's not really needed at those focal lengths. Looking at DxOMark.com , the Sigma gets a significantly higher rating then the Nikon equivalent. It was a good acquisition and I am happy with the lens.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

The Sigma is MUCH better built than the all plastic Nikon 10-20, but the Nikon does offer VR. Also, the Nikon is AF-P so you need to first check as to whether it will even be compatible with your camera body, some older models cannot be upgraded to AF-P compatibility at all.

kymarto Loc: Portland OR and Milan Italy

Be aware that the Sigma f3.5 is excellent in the center but the corners are very soft.

DanielJDLM

I have both lenses. I bought the Sigma 10-20 several years ago. It is a great lens! But on my Nikon D7500 seemed overly heavy. I keep it on my D90 now. After reading reviews i opted for the Nikon 10-20 for the light weight, VR and fact it is an AP MODEL. Quality lens all around.

NCMtnMan Loc: N. Fork New River, Ashe Co., NC

I went through this decision a year ago and decided on the Nikon 10-20. My reason for the decision was that I wanted a true ultra wide angle. The Nikon 1020 is designed for a DX body. The sigma is a FX lens and on my D7200 it would effectively be a 15-30mm lens. I already had the Nikon 18-55 so it made no sense to get the Sigma. The Nikon is lightweight and exceptionally sharp. It consistently gets excellent reviews. Just make sure your body is compatible with the pulse motor series of lenses. Could possibly need a firmware upgrade.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

The Sigma is a DC lens (Sigma equivalent to DX).
ALL lenses on your crop D7200 need a 1.5x crop factor added so the Nikon is a 15-30mm equivalent as well.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

OK...I am a system oriented person by education, experience, and personal bias. One of the most important considerations for me when buying a lens, grip, or flash is how well it is going to work with my camera, regardless of what specifications or design parameters or whatever else you can think of is claimed for it. Something very important that I've learned over the years is that some accessories, specifically lenses and flashes, are available not only with different capabilities, but also in different grades. Way back in the last century, I shot Olympus OM series film SLRs. Olympus offered three different "normal" lenses at the time...a 50mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, and 50mm f1.2. I eventually through the years owned all three of those lenses. I will tell you that there was vastly more difference among them than just the maximum aperture. They were of completely different designs and completely different performance levels. And by the way...the f1.2 lens needed more periodic care than the others. It was a professional lens and would quite literally stop working if not occasionally cleaned and relubricated. A tradeoff for much more substantial performance was the need need for periodic TLC.

I am not intimately familiar with either of these lenses, but it appears that you may be comparing lenses from two different categories. From what I have learned, with a couple of exceptions, Nikon does not make any truly high-grade DX lenses. One exception is the 17-55mm f2.8 DX zoom, and it seems that someone has mentioned one other high grade Nikkor DX lens in a discussion elsewhere on this site, but I don't remember what it is. Now I'm sure that the 10-20mm Nikkor is a perfectly acceptable lens, but when I looked at one as a possible DX pano lens for night sky and other uses, it did not seem that it would be a lens that would stand up to much handling in the dark, so those shots continue to be captured on a full frame camera with a 14-24mm FX lens. (There are a lot of other reasons for that as well.)

In short, ordinarily I'd be arguing in favor of guaranteed integration and buying a Nikkor lens. But in the case of buying DX lenses for DX bodies, I no longer make that argument. There are other more important factors to consider. Just try it to make certain that whatever you buy will work fully on your camera.

GKarl Loc: Northern New Hampshire

I have the Nikon 12-24. Constant f4.0. The build quality is outstanding.

chippy65 Loc: Cambridge

I have the Sigma lens and use it frequently

I like it with my Nikons

nikonbrain Loc: Crystal River Florida

When I had a Nikon DX Camera I had the Sigma it was visibly soft nothing though I couldn't sharpen to a some point ...I got a full frame later And now use a Nikon 14-24 f2.8 nikkor... Quite a leap...but worth it . If I had to do it again probably should have gotten the nikkor ....I heard back then from a lot of people the Tokina was the sharpest ...

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Let's just look at the glass. From a seminar I attended conducted by a Nikon Rep., Nikon has something like 200 different glass recipes. These are more top secret than most of our military operations. Each lens is formulated from these recipes to provide the best optical characteristics and sharpest focus that can be attained. Incidentally, this is why if you look at the front element of two different Nikkor lenses, they won't appear to be the same color. So, given a choice, I'll put Nikkor glass on my Nikon cameras over any other manufactured lens, unless I'm striving for a certain effect.
--Bob

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

You might have missed the point here, there is NO glass in the AF-P 10-20mm lens. All plastic elements. As in several of the entry level lenses from Nikon and Canon these days. So glass quality is a moot point in this instance.