Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM - Wigma

_aravena wrote in post #5848976
Focus depends on subject but my camera is always set to M.

Same for me.

always manual. I tried some of the priotrity modes and just feel better with full manual. But shooting mode could be dependent on each individual tastes and plan for an given capture. Of all the priority modes I usually use Tv the most after M.

Interesting, that many do not use AF. If one has a subject with a lot of depth (like a landscape), where do you focus - in the middle?

I'm used to using center-point AF and exposure - not good with this lens.

I'm finding that using center for exposure doesn't work well with this lens - too much bright (blown out) sky in many pics. What strategy do you use for getting a good exposure with SWA?

From yesterday:

skanter wrote in post #5850445
Interesting, that many do not use AF. If one has a subject with a lot of depth (like a landscape), where do you focus - in the middle?

I'm used to using center-point AF and exposure - not good with this lens.

I'm finding that using center for exposure doesn't work well with this lens - too much bright (blown out) sky in many pics. What strategy do you use for getting a good exposure with SWA?

Here is a pic I posted earlier (the one I yanked out the power/phone lines from...) https://photography-on-the.net …?p=5839724&post​count=1208

That was full sun, hazy day, spot metering, full manual mode and AF as i described earlier. It took me a while to get the hang of not blowing out the sky on every single goll-dern'd shot but I am much better at it. Basically I stop down and don't completely depend on the meter, more by feel now. I wish I had the vocabulary and experience to explain my process, but I am simply not at that level yet. I can say that I am working off of the blown photo's in the past and simply not using the same settings. This is getting me much improved results.

BTW, neither pic used a CPL and both are on the 10-20mm...


Here is another pic I took in the same session:

https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=529703

brecklundin wrote in post #5847492
Terry:

THAT IS AMAZING...I really like that shot...since I am ahhhhhtistic (as in ahhhhhh at least you tried) not artistic, I can never express why I like something artistic, I just can say I like it then hit a wall in terms of explaining why I like something. But that is a well done picture to my tastes.

Errrr wow thanks...........

and there was me worrying if the thing was sharp or not. I guess if it gets that kind of reaction it can't be too bad!

Thanks again as its always nice to get a complement.

I'm beginning to think my new copy is defective as well!

The AF distance indicator is rarely correct. When I AF on a distant object, it says 3 feet. Often the distance indicated is incorrect. Am I missing something, or is this another defective HSM???

I returned my first one after screaming the managers ear off, i got a new one, works like a charm, do so yourself.

Adamora wrote in post #5854507
I returned my first one after screaming the managers ear off, i got a new one, works like a charm, do so yourself.

What was wrong with your first?

I assume the AF indicator should be accurate - am I missing something??

My first copy was totally defective - the distance indicator didn't move at all. This one moves, but is incorrect.

I'll return to B&H, but I don't think screaming at the manager will help...

skanter wrote in post #5854467
I'm beginning to think my new copy is defective as well!

The AF distance indicator is rarely correct. When I AF on a distant object, it says 3 feet. Often the distance indicated is incorrect. Am I missing something, or is this another defective HSM???

Have you really looked at the distance indicator? Like most it goes from minimum focussing distance, in this case 0.8 ft to 3 ft along most of it's travel then from 3 ft to infinity is a very tiny movement and easy to misread.

How are the images from the lens? If they are good then don't worry. Your question prompted me to look at the distance indicator on mine for the very first time. I doubt I'll look at it again as it produces very nice images.

HankScorpio wrote in post #5854638
Have you really looked at the distance indicator? Like most it goes from minimum focussing distance, in this case 0.8 ft to 3 ft along most of it's travel then from 3 ft to infinity is a very tiny movement and easy to misread.

How are the images from the lens? If they are good then don't worry. Your question prompted me to look at the distance indicator on mine for the very first time. I doubt I'll look at it again as it produces very nice images.

I've looked at the distance indicator very closely. It is totally incorrect. I focus on a distant object, it reads UNDER 3 feet. Sometimes it doesn't move at all when I change distances. My other Sigma lens (18-200 OS) reads the distance accurately every time.

As far as images go, I'm not sure about focus. I've taken lots of test images, most seem in focus, but with a huge DOF that is natural. I certainly don't want a lens that has a defective AF mechanism, or is not interfacing with my camera correctly.

If you could look at it the indicator again, I'd appreciate your telling me if it seems to accurately indicate the distance, taking into account the small range between 3 feet and infinity.

Thanks...

I can't really tell the difference between 5 feet and 20 feet with mine, the movement is very small. Under 3 feet it does seem fairly dead on but over 3 feet is anyone's guess really.

I focus on distant buildings, 200 yards away. The indicator reads under 3 ft. Does this happen with yours?
Anyone else?

This sounds like its defective to me - do you disagree? (just trying to find out if there is any other reason). Thanks...

there should be tiny movements between 3' to infinity because that area of the scale represents a HUGE range. But still if you are using spot metering and point at something a couple hunder feet away I would hope it goes to infinity.

Here is a test you might try to see if the scale is off and the lens is still focusing or the whole thing is foobar'd...on a very distant subject that should be in the infinity range of the lens, run a test shot with AF on then turn it off and manually focus on the same target but crank the focus to infinity...see if that makes a difference in the distant object.

I have read many lenses from many different mfg's can have probs so it's not unreasonable. Still one should expect perfect functioning from a new item.