[lesmore49]

I'm thinking about the Sigma 10-20 for my Pentax DSLR's...K10D and KM. I tried one at the local camera shop, liked it...

I take a lot of pictures of vintage cars and although the 16-45 is fine I would like to have a more extreme wide angle...also I would like to take more extreme photos of some landscapes...lakes, mountain scenes, etc.

I have a Pentax 16-45mm Zoom and although I like it, have been thinking of a more extreme wide angle.

On my Pentaxes...the 10mm would be approx, a 15 mm equivalent and the Pentax 16 mm is the equivalent (to a 35mm) of a 24mm.

How do you find the Sigma 10-20mm...quality wise (would it be match of Pentax glass-very happy with these), any odd characteristics, reliable, etc. Thanks.

[Driver3]

I like mine very much.
At the wide end you need to stay conscious of the perspective change...vertical lines converging, etc.
It takes a bit of getting used to just how wide it is. Extraneous elements not necessarily wanted in the frame have a tendency to sneak in!
It is awsome for automotive pics.
I am about a foot from this thing.

I am almost touching this car.

It does scenery nicely too.

[lesmore49]

Thanks for the pix and the comments. It's helpful towards making my decision.

[MoiVous]

There have been quite a few threads about the Sigma 10-20mm - great lens.

Whats the best superwide .....? and My Sigma 10-20mm finally arrived and this set of imaqes on Sigma 10-20mm lens review and discussion that sold me... - lots more if you search.

The trick with this lens is taking advantage of the hyperfocal distance by using an aperture of f8 or f11 and set focus to about 1m. The results are stunning.

In landscapes and scenes, here's a bit of what I mean...(click on the images to see them full size and get full exposure info)...


or


or


or


and

and


As you can see, it can be good for wide landscapes, but excels at drawing you into a scene.

Its also very good at catching interiors and cars.


and


and


It seems to have little distortion for such a wide len as well - the converging lines can be controlled with careful framing - move around a lot whilst framing to find the best image including bobbing up and down (read the Ken Rockwell article), and is admirably sharp

As Driver3 say - be careful of unwanted aspects to the image - look in your viewfinder!

I don't think you'll be disappointed.

Cheers

[rparmar]

Few complain about the Sigma 10-20 and many who use it are very enthusiastic indeed. I doubt you would be disappointed.

That said, I went for the Pentax DA12-24 because I do not find the distortion at 10mm to be favourable. And I like having the 24mm end for group shots of people where I want zero distortion. The lens is also sharper and has the Pentax rendering I like. When I looked to see what professionals used -- people doing interiors for magazine work, property sales, etc. -- they had the 12-24 (when they used Pentax at all, that is).

However, the recent price increase makes the extra expense of the Pentax very hard to justify.

[alexeyga]

It's funny... when you stick around on the forum for a while, you start noticing that people are bringing up the same question again... and again... and again...

Mods should put a disclaimer message under the "new thread" button... something like "use the freaging search before posting!!!!!!"... in really.... really BIG characters...


That being said, if you can get the 12-24 for under 600$US... go for it!!! It's better than Sigma in every way except the lack of 2mm on the wide end...

[ivoire]

Owned both, kept the 12-24mm. Better color and iq (by my eye). Both are very good

---

Last edited by ivoire; 08-30-2009 at 07:53 AM.

[alexeyga]

Clickie!!! Clickie!!!! Good price!!! Re-badged 12-24....

[JHfwp]

It's funny... when you stick around on the forum for a while, you start noticing that people are bringing up the same question again... and again... and again...

Mods should put a disclaimer message under the "new thread" button... something like "use the freaging search before posting!!!!!!"... in really.... really BIG characters...

I've noticed the same thing. But since I kinda like my 10-20 I don't mind talking about it. The search feature on forums like this can be quite awful anyhow. I wouldn't be surprised if "Pentax" came back with zero results.

I've got the old 10-20, and although I'm not a real estate photographer I sometimes play one, and believe I would find the 12-24 worthless for that use. Absolutely worthless. I'm betting the 10-20 would be really handy with car interiors. With that said, 24mm is more my speed for landscapes... If I could only have both!

[deadwolfbones]

Two from yesterday, 10mm f/8:

[jenko]

ooo that sludge on the water looks nasty.... don't tell me you went in that!

was tossing up between the 10-20 sigma and 12-24 pentax myself, went the 12-24 instead. picked it up 2 days ago but yet to put it's through it's paces

[Lowell Goudge]

I got mine in 2006 for use on my *istD after deciding I didn't want to shoot film any more with the kit lens for wide angles (*istD initially shippes with the SMC FA-J 18-35 full frame lens)

It has been a good reliable lens

I can't equate it to the pentax 12-24 but since I shoot 60% of the shiots taken with this lens at 10mm I would mis the width now if I had a 12-24

[alexeyga]

I got mine in 2006 for use on my *istD after deciding I didn't want to shoot film any more with the kit lens for wide angles (*istD initially shippes with the SMC FA-J 18-35 full frame lens)

It has been a good reliable lens

I can't equate it to the pentax 12-24 but since I shoot 60% of the shiots taken with this lens at 10mm I would mis the width now if I had a 12-24

That's the decision I had to make when i've got mine... 10 vs 12 isn't that much of a difference... however the extra 4mm at the long end does count when you hate changing lenses as much as I do... And if I needed distortion, i'd pick up the 10-17FE for that matter... That being said, for me the decision point was the price... I've got my 12-24 at a really great price... cheaper than most used 10-20s on this side of the boarder...

[Lowell Goudge]

That's the decision I had to make when i've got mine... 10 vs 12 isn't that much of a difference... however the extra 4mm at the long end does count when you hate changing lenses as much as I do... And if I needed distortion, i'd pick up the 10-17FE for that matter... That being said, for me the decision point was the price... I've got my 12-24 at a really great price... cheaper than most used 10-20s on this side of the boarder...

I am not sure about the comment regarding distortion,.

I do not find it a real issue with the lens, other than obviously the perspective distortion.
I do agree that some times the extra FL at the long end would avoid changing lenses, but it is not that big a deal at least for me

[deadwolfbones]

ooo that sludge on the water looks nasty.... don't tell me you went in that!

I did!

It was all wood chips. Annoying but not that nasty.