Ultra-Wide Zoom Review and Comparison

Thanks very much for the comparison review, I think this is a great source of info for potential buyers. I'll just join those requesting that the Sigma 10-20 be added to the review.

Thanks for the comparison!

i have the tamron 10-24, and i find the range of zoom v useful, such that sometimes it is the only lens i bring out. another good thing abt it is the closeness of the focus, v good for wide angled flower shots. one thing i dont agree about with the review is the sharpness though. from what i use, the tamron does suffer from poor extreme corner sharpness, but centre sharpness is stellar even wide open, even better than the other 2, and definitely much better than what i see on the test pictures in the review. might be the copy i think!

Hmm... interesting. As long as I can correct most things in post (autocorrect distortion in Lightroom for example) I want the widest thing possible. Even if it's rather dark, for interior work you'd shoot with a tripod anyway to get ISO 100, stopped down to F11.

After having read the review I conclude the Tamron is perfect for me. No quick shift... normally I'd hate that, but for interior photography (main use for this lens) I usually use a tripod and move it around, it's awful when the lens changes focus accidentally.

Furthermore you'd usually shoot stopped down to around F8 - F11, perhaps even higher, so the sharpness issues at 3.5 isn't that much of an issue. Then you get more wide angle (means you may be able to avoid having to shoot panoramas) than with the other lenses. And any further problems should be automatically corrected in Lightroom anyway.

Thank you for the review, Adam. I personally own the Pentax 12-24 and love it. Still, I too must ask... why didn't you include the Sigma 10-20 - either the older and cheaper f/4-5.6 version or the newer f/3.5 version? The 10-20 is the lens most asked about on these forums in comparison to the Pentax 12-24 and the Tamron 10-24. Just sayin'...

Is distortion with or without camera auto correction? Sigma's don't correct on Pentax cameras but wouldn't that be a reason a rate-able factor in a comparison? Or chromatic aboration for that matter?

Wow...what a timely (somewhat) review. Just THIS morning I bought the Tamron 10-24 along with a K-5 and Tamron 70-200 f/2.8. Based on the reviews of the Tamron wide angle, I knew it would be a compromise, especially compared to Pentax's 12-24, my first choice. I've got to be honest, though...the sharpness of the Tamron SUCKS in this review. I'm a little bummed with my purchase. Anybody shoot with the Tamron 10-24 who can speak to its performance on the K-5? Thanks!

For the life of me I cannot understand if you are reviewing UWA lens then why was the Sigma 10-20 in either forms not reviewed. It is by far the most popular UWA lens and receives rave reviews by even Canon & Nikon users. This site as @ 24.3:
Tamron 10-24 ave 8.73 (11 reviews)
Sigma 12-24 ave 8.67 (6 reviews)
Sigma 10-20 3.5 ave 9.25 (9 reviews)
Sigma 10-20 4-5.6 ave 9.03 (41 reviews)
Pentax 12-24 ave 9.20 (36 reviews)

That is 50 reviews for the Sigma 10-20 compared to 11 Tamron & 6 for the 12-24 Sigma.

I know why I purchased the 10-20. It is stunning.

I have a 12-24 waiting in repairs for back ordered parts for 5 weeks now. Cameralensrentals, did you get you lens repaired, how long did it take?
Even it's being phased out, Pentax is required under the law to provide service support for ten years. Not to mention the impact of sales might have poor service support.
Other than this, 12-24 is a magnificent lens: very sharp a its widest aperture and focal length! A reference for my next lens be it Pentax or perhaps not...

I use the Sigma 8-16 ultra wide lens, it just blew my mind away with the image quality.

I am just now getting into the wide angle zooms. I just bought the Pentax 10-17 fisheye zoom so I need to get accustomed to using it first. The Tamron appeals due to it going all the way to 10mm even if it has slight distortions but my PTLens can correct that in PP. However another factor for my choice is the speed of the lens. The Pentax seems to be f4 over it's zoom range, the Sigma goes all the way down to 5.6 at 24mm which for me is likely unacceptable. The Tamron varies around f4 but the review states it needs to be stopped down to get the sharpness one would want from a lens like these. So I think at the time of purchase I would get the Tamron although I would desire a full frame lens. I may shop for older full frame lenses in the approximate range that may be MF. If I can find it I would seek a faster, maybe f2.8, lens that could be used with film either an AF or MF.

The comment from cameralensrentals that replacement parts for the Pentax 12-24 are not made any more confirms the impression that this lens is on the way out. It was widely unavailable for most of last year from the big sites (B&H and Adorama), and looks like it is due for replacement soon based on the recent Pentax lens roadmap, which indicates a new "DA wide zoom" (12-28 or thereabouts) for release in 2013.

I tried both Pentax and Sigma 10-20 (not 12-24 which doesn't belong in this comparison). Sigma beats it in ca (by far), is wider, and less expensive. Mine is equally sharp as the Pentax lens that i tried.

@Mickey - If you're concerned about security then you are welcome to browse our site using the https protocol :) Note that our CDN site doesn't support this, so you won't be able to see any of the image comparisons.

Well...what can I say..I own this objective...for me as a very amateur photograph, is very good. I like it at lot as I can cover quite much of the nature. I enjoy a lot traveling and this as far as I know the best lens for me that covers all the nature. I don't think that the price is an impediment in buying this lens...even if sigma is "better". I wish all the photographers "good light"
Iulian

Nice review, but some advice:
1. The Pentax 12-24 has been out of stock in BH since a long time, I think you should check the links that goes out of the forums.
2. If you call 135mm format "full frame", then you should call APS-C "half-frame". Be consequent in the reviews.

Mickey: pentaxforums,com is listed as dangerous? Really? I think your "protection" software is lying to you. It seemed pretty safe to read the review to me. I didn't get a virus or anything.

So what happened? They couldn't fix it?? Wow.....what's the point of buying a $700 plastic lens that they can't fix? I was really considering this as my next major lens too :(

There are so many tests that have notices that the site is dangerous that I am surprised that you sent this to your subscribers.

I, for one, will not take any chances with those sites. Thus the complete reviews are unavailable to me.

Will those dangers be eliminated in the future?

Mickey Oberman

Worth to be mentioned would be the Sigma 8-16, which lies in the same price range but gives an even wider field of view.

If you compare with Tamron 10-24 why not include Sigma 10-20?

Great article. This is going to help us when ordering for the 12-24 range. I want to let you know we recently sent in a 12-24 Pentax for repair. Two parts that it needed, are not even being made anymore. This should also help a few decisions. The Pentax 12-24 has been a solid performer for us, but when they stop making parts on a lens thats really not that old, its hard to want to buy one.

I am more hoping you review either the sigma 10-20 f4-5.6 or the 10-20 f3.5 instead of the sigma 12-24

Good job with this review! Thank you for the time and effort