Sigma 10-20 Initial Impressions and Shots

herion · July 22, 2005

Well, I was all ready to get my 10-20 after seeing that it was "in stock" at B&H last night and was more than a bit teed off when I double-check this morning and it's now listed as "out of stock"

Before I walk over, I call B&H to double-check. Yup. Out of stock. Damn.

However, all is not lost - there's Willoughbys down the street from me. I walk in and they have them in stock, but haven't updated their website.

Andy, my favorite salesman, gives me the Sigma 10-20 and a Canon 10-22 for comparison before the purchase. I think I've financed his son's college ...

Initial thoughts:

Build quality - lovely EX finish, built like a tank, included petal hood. Doesn't have the cheap plasticky feel of the 10-22. Comes with a nice heavily padded leatherette case with urethane foam core. Works on my 300D and my D30. Andy also let me test on a 20D and a 350D

AF Speed - subjectively, no difference between the 10-20 and the 10-22. HSM is a *little* louder than USM - but that's about it.

Quality - superb. One of the reasons I wanted to get one of the early units was that the QA should be more stringent during the first run than later. Cynical? yes - accurate? unfortunately yes.

And the thing you've been waiting for ... sample shots! OK, these were quickies of my workroom taken at 10mm, 12mm, 14mm and 20mm. No touchup, all taken with a 580EX, no FEC and using a bounce flash from a white ceiling.

http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/1020.htm

Tomorrow, I'll be taking some outside shots ... keep posted!!

John Mueller · July 22, 2005

This is good news

What is the price difference?
Looking forward to the outside pics.
Thanks

herion · July 22, 2005

Sigma 10-20 - First Production Run

John Mueller wrote:

This is good news
What is the price difference?
Looking forward to the outside pics.
Thanks

I got a B&H price match - once they update their site, it may be higher.

Khaos · July 22, 2005

Is this a true super wide or is it built for the 1.6 crop like the 10-22 and the Tamron 11-18?

herion · July 22, 2005

Khaos wrote:

Is this a true super wide or is it built for the 1.6 crop like the 10-22 and the Tamron 11-18?

This is from Sigma's "DC" line - DG's for digital (1.6 crop) cameras. There would be some vingnetting on a FF body.

John Mueller · July 22, 2005

Khaos wrote:

Is this a true super wide or is it built for the 1.6 crop like the 10-22 and the Tamron 11-18?

Built for 1.6 and I believe 1.3

Red Bull · July 23, 2005

It says on B&H:
"Important Notice!
Not compatible with 35mm or digital full-size image sensor cameras"

So it's not built for full frame bodies.

This lens is only $469? That seems like a really good price seeing that the Canon 10-22 is $799

herion · July 23, 2005

Outside Sample Shots
OK - nothing spectacular - shots as I was walking to get my paper, coffee and bagel this morning. Everything shot at 10mm, no CPL, no lens hood.

http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/IMG_0397.JPG
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/IMG_0398.JPG
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/IMG_0399.JPG
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/IMG_0400.JPG

Red Bull · July 23, 2005

Your neighborhood looks nice.

Were all of those at 10mm?

herion · July 23, 2005

Red Bull wrote:

Your neighborhood looks nice.Were all of those at 10mm?

Thank you

: All were shot at 10mm, 1/160 and f9.

photocat · July 23, 2005

herion wrote:

Thank you : All were shot at 10mm, 1/160 and f9.

What strikes me is that it does not seem to have the normal barrel distortion... Congrats on your new lens.

Chase · July 25, 2005

photocat wrote:

What strikes me is that it does not seem to have the normal barrel distortion... Congrats on your new lens.

grrrr
I called wiloughbys and they said they dont have it.

Any other suggestions on where to get one?

herion · July 26, 2005

Where to get a 10-20mm?

Chase wrote:

grrrr
I called wiloughbys and they said they dont have it.

Any other suggestions on where to get one?

Sigma4less.com by the end of the week - I've ordered from them before and they are excellent (and will be cheaper than B&H)

Chase · July 26, 2005

herion wrote:

Sigma4less.com by the end of the week - I've ordered from them before and they are excellent (and will be cheaper than B&H)

Im gonna be on oahu by then.

Then im off to kauai for 10 days. Guess 24mm will have to cut it as "wideangle". :cry

herion · July 26, 2005

Chase wrote:

Im gonna be on oahu by then.

Then im off to kauai for 10 days. Guess 24mm will have to cut it as "wideangle". :cry

You can always have it shipped directly to the hotel ...:D

tlittleton · July 27, 2005

Thanks for the update. I've been waiting for this one to come out and was just about to ask if anyone had a chance to use it yet!

I was curious as to why it was so much cheaper than even the Sigma 12-24. Was a little worried about the quality of the lens.

I'm sold though..just have to wait for one to be in stock.

Matthew Saville · July 28, 2005

tlittleton wrote:

Thanks for the update. I've been waiting for this one to come out and was just about to ask if anyone had a chance to use it yet!

I was curious as to why it was so much cheaper than even the Sigma 12-24. Was a little worried about the quality of the lens.

I'm sold though..just have to wait for one to be in stock.

The Sigma is a little pricey because they added the 35mm, FF compatibility. And, apparently, yielding quite acceptable results at 12mm, even on an FF body! That's why it's comparatively expensive...

Herion, here's MY question:

Does the lens extend when zooming? I have recently concluded that I am too hard on my equipment to purchase any more "moving parts" lenses; so currently I'm highly considering the Sigma 24mm macro lens.

I'm torn because I really like the reproduction ratio of that lens (1:2.7) and the sweet f/1.8 apeture. But, I know all too well that 24mm very often doesn't cut it when shooting digitally.

So I have to decide:

If I get the 10-20, I'll have sweet 15mm digital, but NO 35mm compatibility. Furthermore, a sometimes cripplingly tight apeture (for me at least, f/4-5.6) and a very limiting reproduction ratio... (1:6.7)

If I get the 12-24mm, I'll have just-as-sweet 18mm digital, AND a full 12mm on my film body, although I suspect I won't shoot beyond 18mm for quality's sake. However I'll have the same tight apeture (f/4-5.6) and an even worse (1:7.1) reproduction ratio...

If I get the 24mm macro, I'll have 36mm digital (bleah!) and 24mm on my film body. The f/1.8 apeture and macro capability (1:2.7) really sweeten the deal, though.

A few other factors to consider for me are:

~The 24mm is a single (and therefore mechanically much stronger) focal length, while I am not sure about the zooms. It looks to me as if both of them do NOT extend when zooming, which would really make my day.

~HSM and it's full-time AF + Manual is quite near perfect on my 150mm macro; I'd love to have it on other Sigma bodies. I know that with non HSM lenses on Canon bodies, they're forced to actually manipulate TWO switches in order to go from AF to MF, which is wholly unacceptable in my opinion. I'm not sure if this will be the case on my Nikon, but if so then non-HSM is a no-go, right off the bat.

~Extension tubes are an easy alternative to drastically upping my macro ability, but I often like to have macro-to-infinity sharpness, which wouldn't happen if I slapped an extension tube on...

I'm so sorry to have totally hijacked your thread, Herion. For what it's worth, I think that in your "nothing spectacular" shots, the first one is definitely a spectacular shot. I'd love to see a 100% crop of any of those photos, BTW.

-Matt-

herion · July 28, 2005

Matthew Saville wrote:

The Sigma is a little pricey because they added the 35mm, FF compatibility. And, apparently, yielding quite acceptable results at 12mm, even on an FF body! That's why it's comparatively expensive...

Herion, here's MY question:

Does the lens extend when zooming? I have recently concluded that I am too hard on my equipment to purchase any more "moving parts" lenses; so currently I'm highly considering the Sigma 24mm macro lens.

I'm torn because I really like the reproduction ratio of that lens (1:2.7) and the sweet f/1.8 apeture. But, I know all too well that 24mm very often doesn't cut it when shooting digitally.

So I have to decide:

If I get the 10-20, I'll have sweet 15mm digital, but NO 35mm compatibility. Furthermore, a sometimes cripplingly tight apeture (for me at least, f/4-5.6) and a very limiting reproduction ratio... (1:6.7)

If I get the 12-24mm, I'll have just-as-sweet 18mm digital, AND a full 12mm on my film body, although I suspect I won't shoot beyond 18mm for quality's sake. However I'll have the same tight apeture (f/4-5.6) and an even worse (1:7.1) reproduction ratio...

If I get the 24mm macro, I'll have 36mm digital (bleah!) and 24mm on my film body. The f/1.8 apeture and macro capability (1:2.7) really sweeten the deal, though.

A few other factors to consider for me are:

~The 24mm is a single (and therefore mechanically much stronger) focal length, while I am not sure about the zooms. It looks to me as if both of them do NOT extend when zooming, which would really make my day.

~HSM and it's full-time AF + Manual is quite near perfect on my 150mm macro; I'd love to have it on other Sigma bodies. I know that with non HSM lenses on Canon bodies, they're forced to actually manipulate TWO switches in order to go from AF to MF, which is wholly unacceptable in my opinion. I'm not sure if this will be the case on my Nikon, but if so then non-HSM is a no-go, right off the bat.

~Extension tubes are an easy alternative to drastically upping my macro ability, but I often like to have macro-to-infinity sharpness, which wouldn't happen if I slapped an extension tube on...

I'm so sorry to have totally hijacked your thread, Herion. For what it's worth, I think that in your "nothing spectacular" shots, the first one is definitely a spectacular shot. I'd love to see a 100% crop of any of those photos, BTW.

-Matt-

Hi Matt,

Well, the lens extends 1/4" from its 10mm to 20mm lengths. I think (unless you are tossing the lenses like the barkeeps toss bottles in Coyote Ugly) that you should be fine with this lens - for this price, it's worth it!

herion · July 28, 2005

100% crops
Hi Matt,

Thanks again for the compliment on the "nothing spectacular" shots - I took a look at your gallery and I should be the one complimenting you!

Anyhoo, here's a 100% center crop from IMG_0397

and here's a edge crop from the same:

Matthew Saville · August 1, 2005

herion wrote:

Hi Matt,

Thanks again for the compliment on the "nothing spectacular" shots - I took a look at your gallery and I should be the one complimenting you!

Anyhoo, here's a 100% center crop from IMG_0397

and here's a edge crop from the same:

The crops look wonderful, I'll definitely have to go down to the local shops and see if anyone has it. I'll have to further inspect the mechanical design of the lens, and see what this 1/4" extension would present to me. Hopefully it will be solid and I'll be able to consider it!

Thanks for your replies,
-Matt-

Ben C · August 2, 2005

herion wrote:

Thank you : All were shot at 10mm, 1/160 and f9.

Hi, do you by any chance have any shot at 10mm wide open at f/4? Thanks. Ben

herion · August 3, 2005

Ben C wrote:

Hi, do you by any chance have any shot at 10mm wide open at f/4? Thanks. Ben

Hi Ben,

Here it is - f/4 @ 1/60

Ben C · August 5, 2005

herion wrote:

Hi Ben,

Here it is - f/4 @ 1/60

Hi, Herion, thanks for posting the photo. It looked pretty good at f/4. What camera body did you use for this shot? Ben

herion · August 5, 2005

Hi Ben,

I used a Canon 300D - handheld.

Sigma 10-20 Initial Impressions and Shots

Comments