Wide angle lens comparison....

ronuser · 08-22-2015, 07:26 PM

OK...It's a big clunker, but I love the Sigma 24-70 2.8 (macro). I have the non HSM version. I'm looking for a wider zoom ....

Sigma 10-20 f/3.5
Sigma 10-20 f3.5-4.5
Tamron 10-24 f/3.5-4.5
Sigma 17-35 f/2.8-4 (I'm leaning towards this)
Pentax 16-45 f/4 (I'm leaning towards this as well)

Thoughts.....? Not interested in the Pentax 10-17

**sholtzma** · 08-22-2015, 07:29 PM

Why not the Pentax (or Sigma) 12-24mm?

**Digitalis** · 08-22-2015, 08:54 PM - **1 Like**

You might also want to consider the Pentax DA15mm f/4 ASPH or the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6

**rod_grant** · 08-22-2015, 09:09 PM - **1 Like**

Sigma 10-20 f3.5-4.5 at 10mm and f8

---------- Post added 08-23-2015 at 02:11 PM ----------

and @10mm f7

---------- Post added 08-23-2015 at 02:14 PM ----------

and another.

I don't use the Siggy 10-20 much, but I am pretty happy with the results when I see them.

**UncleVanya** · 08-22-2015, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by rod_grant

Sigma 10-20 f3.5-4.5 at 10mm and f8

I don't use the Siggy 10-20 much, but I am pretty happy with the results when I see them.

Looks like flare may be less controlled than on a DA 15 but otherwise everything looks superb. Great compositions and images.

**rod_grant** · 08-22-2015, 10:26 PM

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Looks like flare may be less controlled than on a DA 15 but otherwise everything looks superb. Great compositions and images

Thanks Uncle Vanya.
It's a pretty big front element, with a very shallow hood - hard to keep the sun off the lens.
But overall I'm happy and the price was right at the time.

**Digitalis** · 08-22-2015, 10:57 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by UncleVanya

Looks like flare may be less controlled than on a DA 15

The DA15mm f/4 is a hard act to follow.

Pentax K10D - Pentax DA15mm f/4 ASPH

With the sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 you have to be clever with managing flare.

Pentax K5IIs - Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC HSM

rob1234 · 08-23-2015, 03:48 AM

For what it's worth, I hate the colours I get from my Sigma 10-20mm (f4-5.6)...

Sandy Hancock · 08-23-2015, 04:50 AM

Why a zoom? I agree with Digitalis; the tiny DA15 is a pretty compelling ultra-wide package.

And I would also echo his thoughts on the Sigma 8-16.

@8mm

@16mm

And to put in a word for the DA10-17 - it's *really* wide.

Even when de-fished it is wider @ 10mm than the Sigma is at 8mm:
Warning! Boring test shots follow....

ronuser · 08-23-2015, 05:17 AM

Originally posted by sholtzma

Why not the Pentax (or Sigma) 12-24mm?

I haven't seen them at a reasonable price. Although I didn't even know Sigma had a 12-24. Have you used either one? Good image quality at 12?

---------- Post added 08-23-15 at 05:20 AM ----------

Originally posted by Digitalis

You might also want to consider the Pentax DA15mm f/4 ASPH or the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6

Yeah, I heard the 15 is soft a f/4 and read about lots if distortion with the Sigma. You've used them.

---------- Post added 08-23-15 at 05:27 AM ----------

So many of the reviews indicate soft, or very soft wide open. I think that is what's bothering me. Although, distortion is a big thing with me. The Pentax 10-17 gets a lot of distortion. Same with the sigma 8-16. At least from what I've read.

Sandy Hancock · 08-23-2015, 05:37 AM

Originally posted by ronuser

The Pentax 10-17 gets a lot of distortion. Same with the sigma 8-16. At least from what I've read.

The DA10-17 is a fisheye - it is *meant* to distort, but all these can be corrected in post-processing if you really want.
Distortion is not necessarily a bad thing. Look at images and think about what moves you. Measurebation doesn't sell photos.

---------- Post added 23-08-15 at 10:09 PM ----------

Originally posted by ronuser

Yeah, I heard the 15 is soft a f/4

So soft.

**Digitalis** · 08-23-2015, 05:45 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by ronuser

So many of the reviews indicate soft, or very soft wide open

Only out in the corners, the center of the image is rendered sharply even at f/4. The downfall of the DA15 is that the corners never get as sharp as the center which is a discrepancy that attracts attention to the issue. And even then you have to be looking very closely to spot it at apertures f/8 and above.

DA15mm f/4 ASPH

Though you will never find any manufacturer that makes a lens as compact,well built or with the superlative flare tolerance of the DA15mm f/4.

Originally posted by ronuser

The Pentax 10-17 gets a lot of distortion. Same with the sigma 8-16. At least from what I've read.

The Pentax 10-17 is a fisheye, the sigma 8-16mm isn't. Yes, at 8mm distortion is visually noticeable, at the 11~14mm focal length range distortion is minimal, so much so that it is probably less than any lens at the same focal length on your list.

Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 @ 11mm

Nick Siebers · 08-23-2015, 06:30 AM

I liked the da15 and think it is a solid option; but for me there were times when I wanted still wider. The slower sigma 10-20 gives me great results, with noticeably better results than the wide end of the da 18-135. Colors might not be quite the same as Pentax, but sharpness is great. T was definitely better than the tamron 10-24, as well.

**UncleVanya** · 08-23-2015, 06:36 AM

Have you read this series?
Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 vs F4.0-5.6 Comparative Review - Hands-on Reviews | PentaxForums.com

In the linked article there are links to earlier comparisons as well.

**Aristophanes** · 08-23-2015, 07:39 AM

Pretty much all WA are soft wide open. The DA 15 is not really soft at f/4 wide in the centres but t the edges and then not so much.

People forget WA shooting is NOT about the edges. It's about the diagonals where the entire perspective draws the eye to the centre anyway. That's just how WA lenses work regardless of brand. Look at every shot above this post to see the effect.

Also, both the DA 15 and the DA 21 sharpen up substantially with a single 1/3 click to narrow f-stop, or ~1/3. That's all it takes for these sense to go bam! The DA 21 is really an f/4 sharp and the DA 15 is really an f/4.5.

The best zoom not mentioned from the OP is probably the Pentax DA 12-24. I'd rate that above all the rest in the list.

08-22-2015, 07:26 PM	#1
ronuser Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 32	Wide angle lens comparison.... OK...It's a big clunker, but I love the Sigma 24-70 2.8 (macro). I have the non HSM version. I'm looking for a wider zoom .... Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 Sigma 10-20 f3.5-4.5 Tamron 10-24 f/3.5-4.5 Sigma 17-35 f/2.8-4 (I'm leaning towards this) Pentax 16-45 f/4 (I'm leaning towards this as well) Thoughts.....? Not interested in the Pentax 10-17

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Wide angle comparison (different brands)	yusuf	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	38	07-29-2023 07:20 PM
Wide angle lens comparison	Wingincamera	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	8	01-07-2014 03:55 AM
Wide Angle lens	Geoff Ince	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	39	12-05-2013 06:05 PM
Wanted - Acquired: Wide / Ultra Wide angle lens for my K-5	GWARmachine	Sold Items	3	03-23-2013 12:03 AM

08-22-2015, 07:29 PM	#2
sholtzma Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Salisbury, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,043	Why not the Pentax (or Sigma) 12-24mm?

08-22-2015, 08:54 PM - 1 Like	#3
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	You might also want to consider the Pentax DA15mm f/4 ASPH or the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6

08-22-2015, 09:09 PM - 1 Like	#4
rod_grant Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wangaratta, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,951	Sigma 10-20 f3.5-4.5 at 10mm and f8 ---------- Post added 08-23-2015 at 02:11 PM ---------- and @10mm f7 ---------- Post added 08-23-2015 at 02:14 PM ---------- and another. I don't use the Siggy 10-20 much, but I am pretty happy with the results when I see them.

08-22-2015, 09:30 PM	#5
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,400	Originally posted by rod_grant Sigma 10-20 f3.5-4.5 at 10mm and f8 I don't use the Siggy 10-20 much, but I am pretty happy with the results when I see them. Looks like flare may be less controlled than on a DA 15 but otherwise everything looks superb. Great compositions and images.

08-22-2015, 10:26 PM	#6
rod_grant Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wangaratta, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,951	Originally posted by UncleVanya Looks like flare may be less controlled than on a DA 15 but otherwise everything looks superb. Great compositions and images Thanks Uncle Vanya. It's a pretty big front element, with a very shallow hood - hard to keep the sun off the lens. But overall I'm happy and the price was right at the time.

08-22-2015, 10:57 PM - 1 Like	#7
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by UncleVanya Looks like flare may be less controlled than on a DA 15 The DA15mm f/4 is a hard act to follow. Pentax K10D - Pentax DA15mm f/4 ASPH With the sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 you have to be clever with managing flare. Pentax K5IIs - Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 EX DC HSM

08-23-2015, 03:48 AM	#8
rob1234 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire Photos: Albums Posts: 1,760	For what it's worth, I hate the colours I get from my Sigma 10-20mm (f4-5.6)...

08-23-2015, 04:50 AM	#9
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	Why a zoom? I agree with Digitalis; the tiny DA15 is a pretty compelling ultra-wide package. And I would also echo his thoughts on the Sigma 8-16. @8mm @16mm And to put in a word for the DA10-17 - it's really wide. Even when de-fished it is wider @ 10mm than the Sigma is at 8mm: Warning! Boring test shots follow....

08-23-2015, 05:17 AM	#10
ronuser Junior Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 32 Original Poster	Originally posted by sholtzma Why not the Pentax (or Sigma) 12-24mm? I haven't seen them at a reasonable price. Although I didn't even know Sigma had a 12-24. Have you used either one? Good image quality at 12? ---------- Post added 08-23-15 at 05:20 AM ---------- Originally posted by Digitalis You might also want to consider the Pentax DA15mm f/4 ASPH or the Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 Yeah, I heard the 15 is soft a f/4 and read about lots if distortion with the Sigma. You've used them. ---------- Post added 08-23-15 at 05:27 AM ---------- So many of the reviews indicate soft, or very soft wide open. I think that is what's bothering me. Although, distortion is a big thing with me. The Pentax 10-17 gets a lot of distortion. Same with the sigma 8-16. At least from what I've read.

08-23-2015, 05:37 AM	#11
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	Originally posted by ronuser The Pentax 10-17 gets a lot of distortion. Same with the sigma 8-16. At least from what I've read. The DA10-17 is a fisheye - it is meant to distort, but all these can be corrected in post-processing if you really want. Distortion is not necessarily a bad thing. Look at images and think about what moves you. Measurebation doesn't sell photos. ---------- Post added 23-08-15 at 10:09 PM ---------- Originally posted by ronuser Yeah, I heard the 15 is soft a f/4 So soft.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-23-2015, 05:45 AM - 1 Like	#12
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by ronuser So many of the reviews indicate soft, or very soft wide open Only out in the corners, the center of the image is rendered sharply even at f/4. The downfall of the DA15 is that the corners never get as sharp as the center which is a discrepancy that attracts attention to the issue. And even then you have to be looking very closely to spot it at apertures f/8 and above. DA15mm f/4 ASPH Though you will never find any manufacturer that makes a lens as compact,well built or with the superlative flare tolerance of the DA15mm f/4. Originally posted by ronuser The Pentax 10-17 gets a lot of distortion. Same with the sigma 8-16. At least from what I've read. The Pentax 10-17 is a fisheye, the sigma 8-16mm isn't. Yes, at 8mm distortion is visually noticeable, at the 11~14mm focal length range distortion is minimal, so much so that it is probably less than any lens at the same focal length on your list. Sigma 8-16mm f/4.5-5.6 @ 11mm

08-23-2015, 06:30 AM	#13
Nick Siebers Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Madison, WI Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,165	I liked the da15 and think it is a solid option; but for me there were times when I wanted still wider. The slower sigma 10-20 gives me great results, with noticeably better results than the wide end of the da 18-135. Colors might not be quite the same as Pentax, but sharpness is great. T was definitely better than the tamron 10-24, as well.

08-23-2015, 06:36 AM	#14
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,400	Have you read this series? Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 vs F4.0-5.6 Comparative Review - Hands-on Reviews \| PentaxForums.com In the linked article there are links to earlier comparisons as well.

08-23-2015, 07:39 AM	#15
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Pretty much all WA are soft wide open. The DA 15 is not really soft at f/4 wide in the centres but t the edges and then not so much. People forget WA shooting is NOT about the edges. It's about the diagonals where the entire perspective draws the eye to the centre anyway. That's just how WA lenses work regardless of brand. Look at every shot above this post to see the effect. Also, both the DA 15 and the DA 21 sharpen up substantially with a single 1/3 click to narrow f-stop, or ~1/3. That's all it takes for these sense to go bam! The DA 21 is really an f/4 sharp and the DA 15 is really an f/4.5. The best zoom not mentioned from the OP is probably the Pentax DA 12-24. I'd rate that above all the rest in the list.