Hello,

I am having a hard time deciding: should I opt for the Sigma 8-16 or the Tamron 10-24 which costs nearly
250 EUR less?

Is there anyone here who has more than just passing experience with both lenses?

Do those 2 extra mm make such a big difference in p r a c t i c a l terms or is 8-10 mm more of
a curiosity?

For your feedback in regard to this matter I would be immensely grateful.

Thanks,
Dominic

[RobA_Oz]

A depth of field calculator will show you that the difference between focal lengths of 8 and 10 mm on a APS-C DSLR is 121 to 110 degrees respectively, for rectilinear lenses. Any reason why you chose the 8-16 Sigma, when the nearest equivalent to the Tamron is the Sigma 10-20?

A depth of field calculator will show you that the difference between focal lengths of 8 and 10 mm on a APS-C DSLR is 121 to 110 degrees respectively, for rectilinear lenses. Any reason why you chose the 8-16 Sigma, when the nearest equivalent to the Tamron is the Sigma 10-20?

Just a fear I have: that I might come to regret the lack of 8-10 mm at some point. As for the Tamron, with its 10-24 mm it is a very versatile lens (more versatile than the Sigma 10-20; and they both cost the same). I never really ever gotto try out the 8-16 myself; I have only seen videos and pictures and must say that I am quite intrigued.

D

[newmikey]

Iǘe had the opportunity to sample both Sigma's, the 10-20 as well as the 8-16. The latter proved a keeper as it wins hands-down. The difference in reach between 8mm and 10mm is actually striking. Quality wise the 8-16 outperforms the 10-20 in almost every single area. I do not have experience with the Tammy but I have read that its corners are definitely a bit fuzzy at any aperture.

[VoiceOfReason]

I like my Tamron 10-24, and I'm not sure I'd need wider. I found I can take a picture of a person at 10mm and from less than 3 feet away have them completely in the frame. I like the flexibility the 10-24 gives me while doing landscape stuff, and I found that it makes interior shots in a house interesting too!

I like my Tamron 10-24, and I'm not sure I'd need wider. I found I can take a picture of a person at 10mm and from less than 3 feet away have them completely in the frame. I like the flexibility the 10-24 gives me while doing landscape stuff, and I found that it makes interior shots in a house interesting too!

I guess I will have to order both from amazon and return one. I also have the feeling that 10-24 might
suffice.

D

[pacerr]

Do those 2 extra mm make such a big difference in p r a c t i c a l terms or is 8-10 mm more of a curiosity?

One thing to note regarding FL -- it's not linear. A 2 mm change at a nominal FL of 10mm is about 20-percent. Compare that to 2mm at 100mm FL which would only be a difference of 2-percent. A small change in FL below 21mm begins to make a significant difference in field of view and perspective as well.

[normhead]

The thing that turned me towards the 8-16 is the no barrel distortion @ 12mm. To me, that's worth buying the lens for on it's own.

[Macario]

I totally agree with Norm

[koper]

you need both lenses
Sigma 8-16 one of the best wide angle lenses in the market.the problem that you cant mount uv filter.it meens that you can not use the lenses in bed whether conditions
you dont have this problem with Sigma 10-20 , Tamron 10-24

[normhead]

you need both lenses
Sigma 8-16 one of the best wide angle lenses in the market.the problem that you cant mount uv filter.it meens that you can not use the lenses in bed whether conditions
you dont have this problem with Sigma 10-20 , Tamron 10-24

You realize that if I accept this argument, there's a very good chance my wife will hunt you down?

[civiletti]

you need both lenses
Sigma 8-16 one of the best wide angle lenses in the market.the problem that you cant mount uv filter.it meens that you can not use the lenses in bed whether conditions
you dont have this problem with Sigma 10-20 , Tamron 10-24

I've used my 8-16 everywhere I wanted an ultrawide, including the Oregon coast surf. My only adaptation to the exposed front element is recapping before I move more than a few steps.

The Tamron 10-24 pool on Flickr is very disappointing. Does anyone here have an online collection of pictures taken at 10mm?

D

[VoiceOfReason]

The Tamron 10-24 pool on Flickr is very disappointing. Does anyone here have an online collection of pictures taken at 10mm?

D

Here are some!

Voice0fReason on deviantART

Voice0fReason on deviantART

Voice0fReason on deviantART

Voice0fReason on deviantART

I have more taken with the lens, but at different zooms.

Here are some!

Voice of Reason is a nick I like; you should be able to convince me to get the 10-24 and thus save me 250 EUR.

Edited:

What I really like about the Tamron is the versatility it offers. In my case, carrying lenses is around deprives
photography of some of the fun. Or maybe I am just lazy...

I found your collection much more helpful as it was focused on a specific focal length.

How long have you had the Tamron and do you find it versatile?

I have had some bad experiences with Sigma in the past, which makes me hesitant in terms of buying
their products (admittedly it was one of Sigma's low end lenses). As for Tamron, I already have the 90mm
macro, which is a cracking lens.


D