Sigma 10-20

[cmo]

Hi all
Do you have any cons/prod opinions regarding Sigma 10-20mm f 4-5.6 EX DC HSM?
I’m looking to cover the wide range on my Rebel XT.
The price fits on my budget, but is it a good choice?
Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Corneliu

[ron chappel]

On a budget i don't think you can go wrong.

Honestly it's allmost as good as the canon 10-22.
In fact only real thing you would have to worry about is manufacturer quality control.Both these canon and the sigma lenses have had a spotty reputation with occasional complaints of softness

I'd say go for it! :)
Just buy from somewhere that cheerfully accepts exchanges in the unlikely event you get a dud.

[Jman13]

The Sigma 10-20 is amazingly sharp, and very well built. The only downside is very funky lens distortion on the wide end (and it's not uniform, but rather wavy and odd). Good lens. I went back and forth between the Sigma and the Tokina 12-24 as to which ultra-wide to get...finally getting the Tokina. I would have been just as happy with the Sigma, though.

[allanc]

I have one and I really love it. It is a sharp lens.

[4x4rock]

Can some one post a pic showing the "odd, wavy" distortion that Jman13 mentioned?

I'm looking for a wide lens too (leaning toward the Tokina) but just want to compare.

Thanks

[ron chappel]

That would be interesting.
To be honest i allmost never notce distortion,let alone irregular distortion .But of course different people see different things.

[cmo]

Thank you for sharing your experience! I’ve learned a lot by reading your posts; you are doing a great job here. Thanks again for advices!

[Jman13]

The Photozone review has a picture of the chart it uses for distortion. I guess it's not so much wavy...just odd. It's mostly distortion free, then goes to severe barrel distortion at the edges. The review is here: http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1020_456/index.htm

It does show what a strong performer the lens is, though..especially in resolution.

This pbase gallery has a brick wall shot that clearly shows the distortion at 10mm: http://www.pbase.com/audible/image/48221495

[In2Photos]

The Photozone review has a picture of the chart it uses for distortion. I guess it's not so much wavy...just odd. It's mostly distortion free, then goes to severe barrel distortion at the edges. The review is here: http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/sigma_1020_456/index.htm

It does show what a strong performer the lens is, though..especially in resolution.

This pbase gallery has a brick wall shot that clearly shows the distortion at 10mm: http://www.pbase.com/audible/image/48221495

The grid picture reminds me of what an older tube television (Pre-flat screen) would look like.

[ron chappel]

Wow ,ain't that just wierd.
The brick wall shows it well,thanks Jman

Like i say,i rarely ever notice distortion,which makes me wonder what other people must think of my wide angle shots.It's probably a good thing i haven't got many ;)





.

[4x4rock]

Thanks for the pic. I know that at their widest, some distortion will happen but will it still noticeable in real life picture?

I saw a few outdoor and building shots from the 10-20 and didn't see the distortions on them.

[Jman13]

Shouldn't be too noticable in most shots. The only times it will be really apparent is when you are shooting things that have lines parallel and very close to the edges of the frame. This is the Sigma's weak point. I have the Tokina 12-24, and it's outstanding as well, though it's weak point is chromatic abberation. The Canon 10-22's weak point is price and build quality (and, in the copy I tested, corner sharpness). There are always compromises when building lenses this wide.

[jojohohanon]

eh.

I have the canon 10-22 and it is a great lens. That said, I'm still not certain that I wouldn't have found the tokina 12-24 a more useful length.