Have I got A Bad Sigma 10-20..HELP PLEASE!

Margie wrote in post #2082161
OK...Here goes...looks like I should have turned the photos...but I would like to see if this is how you post the link to my account!

http://www.flickr.com/​photos/23261468@N00/?s​aved=1

Those look much better and pretty darn sharp if you didn't apply any in post processing for the web.

Click on the Insert Image tab to direct link a photo to your thread. The Forum allows 800x800 pixel dimensions.

I hate to say it but from seeing the tests on forums, most of the malfunctioning lenses seems like operator error. I do agree that there are some bad copies, but come on, if the quality control is so less than 50% so that about every other lens that any company makes is bad, they'd be out of business in a few years from overhead of replacing defective lenses IMO.

Some of the most common tester errors are shooting a deep scene and finding something that is not in the depth of focus out of focus and hence soft. Shooting at inapproapriately low shutter speed and inducing motion blur. Underexposing shots and recoving the underexposed areas and noticing "noise." Not selecting the AF point so you don't know what the camera focused on.

Sorry, I'll get off my soapbox now.

Margie: with your permission I'll post and edited photo you thought was soft.

Yes...please do! Anytime...I should turn that feature on !

Also I am just uploading a sharpened daisy...but please do it over again if needed.

Thank you very much, Margie

It seems a fine copy to me. You cannot pixel peep every inch of UWA shot on such deep scene. Like Tee said, shoot a flat subject for testings.

Thank you farrukh...I will look for a brick wall tomorrow...here in CA. they are not that easy to find !

Tee...I would not be at all surprised if this is user error. This is the first time I took a photo with a VWA lens and have some learning to do. I would rather it be me than the lens. IMO...I think the lens is OK...but I would like to see what other experienced members think.

Bluedog...what method is good to use to reduce the photo size to 800 X 800...?

Thank you all for taking the time to help me!

Margie

Bluedog...It looks great! My worries about a bad copy are over! I am so glad to see if I spend a couple of min. on PS...it will look good!

Thanks so much, Margie

I think you got a good copy.
Those are nice shots..

Bluedog_XT wrote in post #2082526
All I did to this was adjusted the Shadow and Highlights, set White Balance, Unsharp Mask at 50/1.0/0, adjusted Hue and Saturation + Contrast and lastly added Canvas and your © Margie. Took maybe 3 minutes tops.

Good PP Bluedog!

I had a Tokina lens and it was pretty much like these samples shots. With a UWA lens I found the best pictures taken at f8 to f16 in AV mode on a tripod. Because it is so wide it needs to have some time to do its stuff and on a tripod it makes for sharper images. Using the lens at the highest fstop like f4 will only have partial focus on whatever it is focused on rather then the big look for landscapes. The 17-40 L is much better but at twice the price and less wide angle, it should be.

Most likely what needs to happen is something I have heard about 4-10 times over the last few days, it needs to be sent to Sigma for recalibration. Or if you can, be returned to the store you bought it at for a refund or exchange. (as I did with a 24-70)

I copied your PP copy Bluedog and it really looks great!

I will use it as an example of what my photos should look like!

What a difference alittle PP makes!

Margie

Margie do you shoot in RAW? If you have photoshop then don't shoot in RAW because you'll then be able to save so many pictures

farrukh wrote in post #2082544
Good PP Bluedog!

Thanks farrukh

Margie wrote in post #2082563
I copied your PP copy Bluedog and it really looks great!

I will use it as an example of what my photos should look like!

What a difference alittle PP makes!

Margie

Thanks and your welcomed _ you've got a good copy for sure so rest at ease. In this Digital photo world we now reside in learning how to hone your post processing skills go a long way in the end results.

Margie wrote in post #2082530
Thank you farrukh...I will look for a brick wall tomorrow...here in CA. they are not that easy to find !

Tee...I would not be at all surprised if this is user error. This is the first time I took a photo with a VWA lens and have some learning to do. I would rather it be me than the lens. IMO...I think the lens is OK...but I would like to see what other experienced members think.

Bluedog...what method is good to use to reduce the photo size to 800 X 800...?

Thank you all for taking the time to help me!

Margie

Any flat wall will do. I live in so. cal as well and I shoot my apt. building wall with bright sunlight and look at the detail of the wall textures. In your shot, the posts in the foreground look very sharp and may have been the point of focus. I think the lens is fine personally. I say stop pixel peeping and go out and shoot more instead.