[Lanfriendly]

to make a long story short a few weeks ago my camera bag was stolen while passing through regina with my sigma 10 - 20 and 50mm (as well as fgz 360) even worse a memory card full of pictures! but anyways, now all i have is my 16mm zenitar fisheye.

i need to buy some new lenses asap!

i really loved my sigma 10 - 20 but mostly just for landscapes and street photography, i found that as soon as a living subject got in the frame i didn't like the distortion. how is the pentax 12 - 24 compared to this lens? similar distortion? other wide angle options? i still have my 16mm fisheye as well

50mm is always great too but i want to try something different also, maybe something bigger? i was going to buy a tamron di 28 - 200 for $180 but am now having second thoughts, i definitely need a decent sized zoom though, i'd like to do some macro shots

i also really want to get into two things, infrared photography and astrophotography, any

thanks everyone! any advice is much appreciated

[troyz]

i really loved my sigma 10 - 20 but mostly just for landscapes and street photography, i found that as soon as a living subject got in the frame i didn't like the distortion.

Sorry for your loss. . .

There are three possible types of distortion you could be dealing with:

Barrel distortion (straight lines turn into arcs)
"Moustache" distortion (straight lines turn into wavy lines)
Perspective "distortion" (straight lines remain straight and circles become distorted; a consequence of using a wide rectilinear lens)

Would it be possible to post some examples of distortion you found objectionable with the Sigma?

[flyer]

Sorry for your loss. . .

There are three possible types of distortion you could be dealing with:

Barrel distortion (straight lines turn into arcs)
"Moustache" distortion (straight lines turn into wavy lines)
Perspective "distortion" (straight lines remain straight and circles become distorted; a consequence of using a wide rectilinear lens)

Would it be possible to post some examples of distortion you found objectionable with the Sigma?

There is also "distance" distortion. When a subject is rather close, the closest part of the subject (assuming the subject is not flat) will seem "oversize" compared to the part that are way back. That is something you have to live with, since it is caused by the large angle of viewd of the lens, not due to a flaw in the lens design.

[daacon]

Many that bites I do feel for ya ..

Search for 12-24 , 10 -20 , Wide angle lens lots of 12-24 shots. Also search on flickr. I have the 12-14 almost bought the 10-20. I like the 12-24 and at times yes there can be some distortion but overall I would not trade it. (well actually I did sell it , but I bought another one soon after )

As for generic telezoom I have the Tamron 18-250 and find it very aceptable. I believe the Pentax is pretty similar perhaps better coating ? Would do well with either.

Infrared - best is a converted camera. I think there may be one left in the markeyplace (Frak is selling them). Besides that a Hoya R72 filter - the K10D is ok, but earlier models are better (K100D, istD and the kit lens (18-55) is a good lens to use for infrared.

[Lanfriendly]

i definitely got heavy perspective distortion but that was a really cool effect. distance distortion with close subjects is really what i didn't like, sorry i'm not on my computer so i can post pics right now but i will later

i didn't really use my sigma on anything other that 10mm, pictures turned out too soft and seemed like it the distortion looked better at 10 anyways. is there any super wide angle primes?

[k100d]

DA14 2.8 is your best bet

[Ben_Edict]

Form the Sigma 10-20 you get a heavy perspective distortion the nearer your subject is to the edges of the frame. This is not a shortcoming of the lens. It is "in the nature" of a lens with such a wide angle of view and rectilinear projection. If you photograph people, keep them near the center of the image and everything will be fine... With a narrower angle you will also get less distortion.

Ben

[NaClH2O]

*snip* is there any super wide angle primes?

I'm not sure you qualify it as "super wide" but I really enjoy my FA 20mm F2.8 Quite sharp, even wide open and smooth smooth smooth

NaCl(like silk sliding on ice)H2O

[NaClH2O]

For a "decent sized zoom" I'd check out the Tamron 28-75 F2.8 a very versitile lens. It won't do true macro, but it gets damn good "near macro" shots and is fast and sharp.

NaCl(a fave here on the forums)H2O

[Lanfriendly]

the 28-75 2.8 does sound very tempting, or even the 17 - 50mm 2.8... guess i'll start saving my pennies

[Ash]

There are lots of choices, but you may find yourself missing the ability to go to f/2.0 at times as you can with the 50mm prime. If not, definitely consider any of the f/2.8 zooms, even the Sigma 17-70.

[Venturi]

I really hate thieves. My condolences for the loss.

the 28-75 2.8 does sound very tempting, or even the 17 - 50mm 2.8... guess i'll start saving my pennies

I picked up the Tam 17-50 about 2 weeks ago and am quite happy with it. It was perma-fixed to my K10D for a wedding shoot this past weekend and did not disappoint. A little noisy in AF but that's my only complaint.

I have the DA 18-250 also and it is a great workhorse of a lens. True it isn't an indoor/lowlight lens and the zoom creep can be annoying but for its intended use it is a great performer.