 |
|
|
oajlu
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 19, 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 170
|
|
Review Date: Nov 20, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $500.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Value, ultra wide, HSM,
|
|
Cons:
|
some noisy, heavy, soft edge, slow speed, distortion, flare, ghosting
|
|
|
I used this lens for an year, and overall it's an good lens if you are on budget.
|
|
 Nov 20, 2008
|
|
Leginmat
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Nov 21, 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 11
|
|
Review Date: Nov 9, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, colours, contrast, price, build quality and HSM!
|
|
Cons:
|
Not horrendous but as expected, distortion of corners and wished it was constant aperture...
|
|
Paid $659 AUD (Just before the Sigma price rise!)
After parting with my Sigma 100-300mm, I decided why not continue the good experience concerning the short end.
Once again, build quality is excellent and so is the performance. Highly impressed by the sharpness and colours this lens is able to produce! Let alone the price of it as compared to the 10-22...
Hood is included and mine came with the centre pinch front cover meaning the front cap is not an issue.
Completely un-edited shot below:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/leginmat/3018405260/sizes/l/
|
|
|
Nov 9, 2008
|
|
online_mark123
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 20, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 6
|
|
Review Date: Oct 7, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price, range, build, sharpness.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing.
|
|
This is only my second lense for my 350D which I bought brand new (I know, it's a long time) but I'm so happy with it!
I've never used an L-lense so can't compare, but I've taken a hundred shots with this yesterday and the results are tack sharp and with colours lust flowing off the screen.
Very highly recommended, it seems I don't have a duff copy although I've not checked it thoroughly yet.
Filters are expensive so I've not bought one yet, but included hood is a bonus.
10-20 doesn't sound like much but it really REALLY is in real world usage.
Buy one!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/evansie/2920414984/
Mark.
|
|
|
Oct 7, 2008
|
|
Todd Cphen
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Oct 13, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Sep 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $350.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Build quality and clarity are fantastic.
|
|
Cons:
|
Some minor distortion at the outter edges
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep 28, 2008
|
|
Fusion08
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 16
|
|
Review Date: Sep 12, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, well built and great price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Some vignetting wide open at 10mm.
|
|
|
I used this on my Canon 10D and it gives great results, good colour and sharpness, quite and accurate AF a real keeper.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2008
|
|
scottsymonds
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Aug 1, 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Aug 1, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 10
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, price, performance.
|
|
Cons:
|
None for the money.
|
|
|
I've had this for a year now and it's a brilliant bit of gear - if you get a good 'un. I like it so much, I bought another body just so I could keep it permanently attached to my camera.
I've run a 10-22 and my own 10-20 side by side, and the differences are negligible. The Canon handles flare better and that's about it. Only other gripe is the lens hood/filter thing, but I can live with that.
It's sharp, especially when stopped down a bit, fast and accurate focusing, and better built than the Canon 10-22. However, I am planning on upgrading..... To a 5D and a 16-35!
|
|
|
Aug 1, 2008
|
|
JustForFun
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 23, 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 23, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $530.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Excellent Construction and HSM
|
|
Cons:
|
CA and f-stop
|
|
|
Bought it to pair up with my EF24-105 f4L IS USM on my EOS 40D. So the comments below are with EOS 40D.
Love the EX finishing and HSM but totally turn off by the CA. I have seen worse cases on similar Sigma lenses and generally, mine is not that bad but it still gets me. I probably had an average copy.
In most applications, f4-5.6 is generally okay but if you are doing low light, please make sure to bring a tripod or be ready to crank up the ISO. Alternatively look for a fast wide angle prime or zoom. The later is now a viable cost alternative with the Tokina ATX-116.
Sharpness is not as good as Canon L lens but generally acceptable. Barrel Distortion, considering that its a wide angle zoom, is well-controlled.
Sold mine after six months and currently, moving to the 1D MkIII.
|
|
|
Jul 23, 2008
|
|
SebR
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 16, 2008
Location: Norway
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Jul 16, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $790.00
| Rating: 7
|
|
Pros:
|
Decent sharpness
Fast (and accurate) AF
Much "bang for the buck"
|
|
Cons:
|
Lenshood/cap-problem mentioned.
Use of filter needs special products (Like the Cokin P-system)
Could be sharper
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jul 16, 2008
|
|
Joe Hunt
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 34
|
|
|
Jul 2, 2008
|
|
Joe Hunt
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: May 21, 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 34
|
|
Review Date: Jun 6, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $499.00
| Rating: 8
|
|
Pros:
|
See review
|
|
Cons:
|
See review
|
|
|
I've read hundreds of lens reviews in FM before I buy anything, this lens was no different. Knowing the shortcomings of the Sigma 10-20, I purchased one and ran it through my tests. Comparing them to the 17-40 L this was a decent lens with some minor CA in the corners. Sharpness overall was good with only a few soft spots. I was a little disappointed so I thought I'll send it back and move over to the 10-22 EF and be done with it.
The Canon 10-22 was horrible and it's most likely a bad copy, but I tried everything I could to sharpen the image with fstop and the lens would simply not perform. Bummer. And so it goes back.
Having a decent copy of the Sigma in hand and letting it go is a bummer in hindsight, I should have kept it. I'm going to order one this weekend, hope it's a keeper.
|
|
|
Jun 6, 2008
|
|
majo d
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Dec 28, 2006
Location: Slovakia
Posts: 282
|
|
Review Date: May 7, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharpness, WIDE angle, colours, contrast, fast and quiet AF, build quality
|
|
Cons:
|
vignetting, not constant aperture
|
|
|
I have this lens for two days now. I tested it, went for a walk with it and I'm very satisfied. For such price (304GBP) probably you can't get nothing better (in Europe...). only true oponent is tokina.
I've chosen this lens, because it's really wide and it has quiet and fast AF.
Vignetting is visible wide-opened, but at F6,3+ it's not a big issue. In wide-angle lenses world, you don't go lower than F5,6 many times, so it's not a problem for me.
Distortion is visible at 10mm, but it's easy to correct in photoshop for example. And I haven't notice any flare yet.
Build quality is really good, lens is solid, robust, very easy to control focal length and focus distance. about that caps and hood problems, really not sure what people talk about, I can put lens cap on and off, when hood is attached.
This lens is really good, you have to try it. Before I bought it, I also tried tokina 12-24 and tamron 11-18, tokina is very good lens, but I chose +2mm and better AF. tamron has very poor build quality for me.
|
|
|
May 7, 2008
|
|
jj sach md
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jan 22, 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 42
|
|
Review Date: Apr 28, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Price and performance according to price. Cheaper than Canon 10-22. Hood a lot easier to store than the Canon 10-22 one. The extras it comes with in the price.
|
|
Cons:
|
Tad lower quality the EFS 10-22 I had. Can't get to lens cap with lens hood on.
|
|
|
I had a Canon EF-S 10-22 for 1 year or 2 but realised I was not using it enough to justify keeping it esp. after I added a 5D to my kit. Low on behold a few months after I sold it, and for other reasons sold the 5D, I found myself sometimes needing an ultra wide, but not enough to justify the price of a Canon 10-22.
1st copy was soft and had focus issues Exchanged for second copy and that was much better.
The colour rendition and sharpness is only little below that of a Canon 10-22 but I am more than happy with this lens for price I paid and the amount I use it.
I use it for internal architectural work and also for more dramatic/scenic wedding photography.
I sometimes feel that Sigma lenses and their QC are bashed more than necessary. Yes I had one bad copy but with minimum of fuss it was sorted. This is my second Sigma lens for Canon I would happily buy another.
|
|
|
Apr 28, 2008
|
|
Karl-P
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 12, 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
|
|
Review Date: Apr 12, 2008
|
Recommend? no |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 4
|
|
Pros:
|
Sharp, affordable, good build quality, lens case included.
|
|
Cons:
|
Quality control - the lens became unusable.
|
|
|
After carefully reading the reviews here, and trying to decide between the Sigma 10-20 and the Canon EF-S 10-22, I purchased this lens. Initially I was very impressed. But although very sharp, and of good build quality, it developed major problems, which resulted in me returning it, and switching to the Canon EF-S 10-22.
The Good
========
Sharpness - excellent. After all the negative reports here I carefully compared my Sigma 10-20 against the nearest lens I had in terms of focal length, my Canon f/1.8 28mm prime. Photos taken at f/8 with the Sigma were sharper in the centre, both at 10mm and 20mm than the prime. At the edges the prime had the edge, but only just.
Focal range - fantastic. In old medieval towns pictures of buildings, streets, squares, piazzas are easy and fun to take. A sense of space can be captured with this lens making it excellent for both landscapes and interiors. I think the extra 2mm at the wide end is important for all of this. 12mm would be too short.
Build - Very solid. The focus and zoom rings are nice and tight - better than my Canon f/1.8 28mm and f/1.4 50mm primes.
Lens hood - Included in the price. I actually found it to be quite good and locks in place.
Packaging - environmentally friendly. No styrofoam in sight. The lens comes packaged in its own case, which is padded at both ends. Nice solution. Canon, take note.
Price: significantly cheaper than the Canon EF-S 10-22.
Size/weight: Large enough for my left hand to get a good grip without having a finger or two past the hood, yet small and light enough to be manageable.
The Bad
=======
Lens cap. Unusable without taking off the lens hood first. Solution: the LC-77 Nikon centre-pinch lens cap works nicely (and you get to have Canon, Sigma and Nikon logos on one camera ...)
Filters: Slim filters caused vignetting at 10mm in the top left hand corner *only*. All other corners showed no vignetting. Others here have reported this. It's very annoying - and difficult to spot through the viewfinder.
The Ugly
======
One day in summer I went out to take photos of a town on a lake - and right in the middle of shooting the camera suddenly lost AF, and the viewfinder went very dim. Investigation showed the lens aperture blades had stuck somewhere around f/16 or f/22. After an hour or so of fiddling around they released. For several weeks the problem didn't return.
Then, on another trip it happened again. Once the blades jammed, I lost all chance of taking the shots I wanted. Pressing the DOF Preview button sometimes released the blades after a few minutes, sometimes it didn't. This problem continued to repeat itself on every sunny day. My Canon lenses had no such problems. None of the days were particularly hot, some not even warm.
After much experiemntation I concluded that the lens was prone to jamming at any temperature over 10.deg C when the sun was out.
I have now returned the lens, and switched to the Canon 10-22 ...
|
|
|
Apr 12, 2008
|
|
linuxgod
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Apr 1, 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Apr 2, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $499.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
half the cost of the nikon 12-24
wider (10 vs 20mm).
|
|
Cons:
|
marginally slower than the nikon
|
|
|
This is a great wide-angle lens for the money. I've taken shots with it and with a friend's Nikon 12-24 and I personally found them to be comparable. I like that the Sigma is a bit wider and less expensive, and several technical comparisons showed it to have less pin-cushioning at 10-12mm than the Nikon.
Some people will swear by the Nikon, but for half the cost for a very comparable lens, it's in my bag.
|
|
|
Apr 2, 2008
|
|
grumpy old sod
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Mar 29, 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 0
|
|
Review Date: Mar 29, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: Not Indicated
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Build, ultra wide angle, good distortion control, price, decent sharpness given the extreme angle.
|
|
Cons:
|
Nothing serious.
|
|
|
I don't normally post reviews like this, but I thought I'd do it for this lens as I also own a Tamron 11-18 for comparison. Truthfully I've never been convinced by the Tamron, especially with it's dreadfully cheap plastic build quality for it's price. I eventually bit the bullet and bought the Sigma (there's not much other choice in this zoom range) and I'm quite pleased I did. Both lenses produce sharp images however the Sigma has far, far superior edge sharpness and distortion control. The Tamron appears to have the edge colour wise with slightly warmer and more saturated results, however it must be said the Sigma produces more natural, neutral images. Build quality wise - I don't know how Tamron dare charge so much for the 11-18 - the body is totally plastic, the focus and zoom rings have no damping and feel loose, and the lens feels plain flimsy. The Sigma on the other hand is well made, feels solid and weighty, and balances nicely on a D200. It's a simple design and there's no auto/manual switch on the Nikon version (no great loss since Nikon bodies have this functionality built in) and I guess this is how they keep the price down. The ultra wide range makes this a fun lens to use and I'm using mine as a walk around lens.
I've read much about Sigma QC however this is my second Sigma lens (I also have the 150mm APO macro - an outrageously good lens) and I've so far had no problems. Overall I'd say if you want value for money and a great lens to boot, you shouldn't go far wrong with the Sigma.
|
|
|
Mar 29, 2008
|
|
lextalionis
Offline
Image Upload: Off
Registered: Jul 28, 2007
Location: United States
Posts: 1076
|
|
Review Date: Mar 10, 2008
|
Recommend? yes |
Price paid: $510.00
| Rating: 9
|
|
Pros:
|
Solid build, low distortion, good color and decent sharpness.
|
|
Cons:
|
A little degree of CA (purple fringing) present and a little slow on the AF side.
|
|
This is the widest rectilinear wide-angle lens I would ever recommend. For me, it's exactly what I was looking for in a wide-angle. Expect edge-softness at 10mm and probably more so on a full-frame sensor.
Fun lens for architecture and landscape.
Here are some sample shots taken with a Nikon D50:
Sample Shots taken with Nikon D50
-Lex
|
|
|
Mar 10, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reviews
|
Views
|
Date of last review
|
|
170
|
432091
|
Nov 5, 2017
|
|
|
Recommended By
|
Average Price
|
|
84% of reviewers
|
$468.72
|
|
|
Build Quality Rating
|
Price Rating
|
Overall Rating
|
|
8.89
|
8.90
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
