[Docrwm]

I have both the Tamron 10-24 and Sigma 8-16 that I use for real estate. I have to say I really like the Tamron, except that I have to turn off the auto-focus because mine essentially worthless. Manual focusing isn't a big deal to me though. The distortion isn't as bad as the 10-17 shown above. Lightroom has a profile to correct the distortion as a RAW file, so that isn't a big deal either. I like that the Sigma gets down to 8 mm, and the auto focus actually works most of the time, but when used on a Pentax, anything shot between 8 and 10 mm is not recorded in the correct place in the EXIF data to be able to apply the lens correction profile in Lightroom. It requires extra steps to correct the distortion. They each have their advantages and disadvantages, but considering the cost and extra effort involved with going below 10mm, I like the Tamron.

Interesting, I don't have too many problems with my Tamron at 10mm unless I am taking shots with no real contrast (like and all white building exterior) when I am very close.

[RioRico]

Interesting, I don't have too many problems with my Tamron at 10mm unless I am taking shots with no real contrast (like and all white building exterior) when I am very close.

I've never had AF problems with my Tamron 10-24 but I tend to avoid monochromatic blocks.

[DSims]

when used on a Pentax, anything shot between 8 and 10 mm is not recorded in the correct place in the EXIF data to be able to apply the lens correction profile in Lightroom.

Can't you just manually edit the EXIF data before submitting it to LR? I think after a while you might even be able to recognize the difference in appearance between 8mm and 10mm. Or you could do it the way it's done with a film camera - make notes!


I'm not a big Sigma fan, but the 8-16 really interests me.

[Michaelina2]

I've used the 15, 12-24 and 16-45. All worked just fine paired to the K-5.

My choice would be the easiest to acquire.

Don't make too much of cost as an issue. You should be able to write it off your taxes as a business expense, your clients will love it and you'll get more referrals (more busine$$), faster.

Cheers...

[spyderweber]

Interesting, I don't have too many problems with my Tamron at 10mm unless I am taking shots with no real contrast (like and all white building exterior) when I am very close.

Yeah, I suspected that I just got a lens with bad autofocus. I suppose I should send it in under warranty. It doesn't work well on my K-5 or K-7. I just use it a lot and don't want to be without it for long.

[spyderweber]

Can't you just manually edit the EXIF data before submitting it to LR? I think after a while you might even be able to recognize the difference in appearance between 8mm and 10mm. Or you could do it the way it's done with a film camera - make notes!


I'm not a big Sigma fan, but the 8-16 really interests me.

Yes, you have to manually edit the EXIF data before sending it to LR if you want to apply the lens correction profile, which isn't as easy as I thought it would be. The data is there in the EXIF file, so I extract the focal length data, then copy it where LR looks for it. I've been working on a process that I will share soon. I haven't shot 8 mm in awhile, so I need to revisit my process and make sure I have it working properly.

[DSims]

Yes, you have to manually edit the EXIF data before sending it to LR if you want to apply the lens correction profile, which isn't as easy as I thought it would be. The data is there in the EXIF file, so I extract the focal length data, then copy it where LR looks for it. I've been working on a process that I will share soon. I haven't shot 8 mm in awhile, so I need to revisit my process and make sure I have it working properly.

Interesting. I haven't done it in a while, but I used to use a command-line tool for this. It seems like you could create a batch file or shell script to automate the process.

[Docrwm]

Yeah, I suspected that I just got a lens with bad autofocus. I suppose I should send it in under warranty. It doesn't work well on my K-5 or K-7. I just use it a lot and don't want to be without it for long.

Sorry to hear that, but Tamron service is suppose to be very good. Just to clarify, the one time i had a problem was at 10mm trying to shoot very close to one of those art museum buildings thst is itself trying to be minimalst art.

[Ishpuini]

Another vote for the Sigma 8-16.

Wim

[Frogfish]

I've used the Sigma 10-20 (older variable aperture version - still available new) for two years now, never a problem and the damn thing will focus in the dark (literally - in unlit rooms I just wait for the focus lock and have a perfectly exposed shot - must have steady hands for the 1/15 of a sec shutter though)

I'd recommend this lens for RE work (I work in RE) to anyone.

[Designosophy]

I don't work in real estate, but I've used my Sigma 10-20 f/4-5.6 in house hunting, as well as urban exploration, and it does a very nice job. What's funny about the assertions that the Tamron 10-24 is superior is that I almost bought a Tamron 10-24, but my research turned up comparisons between the Tamron and the Sigma that favored the Sigma. But your mileage may vary. I'm betting that a wide-angle rectilinear lens like the Tamron 10-24, the Sigma 8-16, or the Sigma 10-24 will be great. If I were you, I'd keep an eye out for a deal on a used copy of any of these. If you buy it here on the forum, you can generally count on getting full disclosure of a lens' condition/quality. That's how I got my 10-20 (as well as my K-5 and a number of other lenses). No, you can't have my 10-20.