[Okami]

Hey All

LBA has hit me again but not for a certain lens but a type of lens.

I currently have the 16-50 to do most of my wide angle but wanting a little more. So i'm stuck on two options (atleast the only ones that I know of)

Pentax 12-24 or the Sigma 10-20

So a few questions

1) Is the difference between 12 and 16 enough to justify buying the 12-24mm
2) Is the Sigma also a cropped lens that will not work as well with a FF?
3) How big are these lenses?
4) Is there any other lenses coming in soon that may be a better choice than either?

[ftpaddict]

1. You're talking 18mm vs 24mm (35mm equiv.) 18mm is VERY VERY VERY wide. It is definitely worth it if you do landscapes or are into wideangle a lot. I mostly use 30mm+, so for me it wouldn't be a worthwhile investment. (for me)
2. It's a DC lens, therefore unsuitable for use with full-frame cameras.
3. Can't say as I've never used them.
4. Not that I know of, but how much wider than that can you go, without sacrificing perspective?

[FastPhotography]

Be a first and try the tamron 10-24! You'll probably pay a little more but I'm 95% sure you won't be disappointed!

I think the sigma is smaller. If I were you, I'd go with the sigma or tamron

[Ben_Edict]

I have the Sigma 10-20 and it is a superb lens, apart from its somewhat slow max. aperture. It is a crop-sensor only lens, no full frame support. On the Pentax it is euql to the older Sigma 15-30 full frame lens, but much smaller.

Sharpness and contrast are very good and the distortion and vignetting are on a hardly noticeable level, which quite surprised me. The lens is so good in fact, that since I have it, I hardly even touched my superbe Pentax 15 f3.5 anymore, which says something...

Ben

[Okami]

Thanks for the reply guys, been looking aroun for the Tamron you mentioned. Is it out yet?

[clawhammer]

No, it's not out yet. I don't think there's a release date set yet, though i could be wrong...

1) Yes, the difference between 12 and 16 is significant. If you want wider, that's the way to go.
2) The 10-20 is not compatible with Full-frame sensors, but sigma does/did make a 12-24 that IS compatible with 35mm film cameras.
3) As for size, from what I've seen the 12-24 is roughly the same size as your 16-50.

[kenyee]

10-20 unless you don't need the UWA until next year (the Tamron 70-200/2.8 was "announced" early last year...was supposed to be shipped before x-mas...and still isn't out yet and current ETA is August). Don't hold your breath and just get what you need for now.

The Pentax 12-24 is nearly 2x the cost of the 10-20 so that made the decision for me...

[cooldude14es]

This is not available for Pentax mount yet but I think it is a good rival:

Tokina 11-16mm

[jmdeegan]

No regrets from the 10-20mm here. I bought it to try since I already had a 10-17 fisheye, and I figured worst case, i'd return the 10-20.

its a keeper. Just a fun lens. the not-yet-released 10-24 sounds like a nice lens too, but the key there is not-yet-released.

And as someone else mentioned, the sigma is a lot cheaper, which also made it easy for me to pick

[Confused]

Hi Okami

Here's a genuine 'real-life' scenario for you to contemplate ! I was attending a wedding yesterday (Tuesday) and there was a 'semi-official' photographer taking photos using a C***n DSLR of some description with a 24mm - 105mm zoom attached. The only problem came at the end of the proceedings, when he was attempting to shoot the group-photo, but couldn't manage to include everybody in the picture. I casually handed him a K10D body with the Sigma 10 - 20mm HSM attached and said
"you need one of these, sunshine !". He looked approvingly through the viewfinder for a moment and then uttered the immortal words: "Pity this lens isn't a C***n mount, I could REALLY have used that this afternoon" ! KUDOS, or WHAT.......
I only wish you could have seen the stupid grin on my face as I casually continued taking group-photos, whilst he grabbed a chair on which to stand before cursing quietly under his breath in a vain attempt to capture the assembled throng.....AIN'T VICTORY SWEET.....Oh Lordy Lord, yesiree.....lol !

Best regards
Richard

P.S. At the price for which it retails, IMHO there really is nothing to touch the Sigma 10-20mm rectilinear wide-zoom for landscape or architectural photography.

[yenemy]

Unless I'm mistaken, the Sig 10-20 IS available in Canon mount...? They also have a great Canon 10-20 EF-S that reportedly is even better optically.

Really, the only way you 'win' is in the K10's 1.5x crop factor as opposed to canon's 1.6x... so you gain an extra mm at the wide end

[Confused]

Hi yenemy

Unless I'm mistaken, the Sig 10-20 IS available in Canon mount...?

Very true, but he didn't have one, which was entirely my point ! And furthermore...

They also have a great Canon 10-20 EF-S that reportedly is even better optically.

That's quite possible, but NOT at the Sigma's price-point !

Best regards
Richard

[flyer]

The Pentax 12-24 is a 5 star performer. It goes to 2 stars when you look at the price though. And the filters are expensive, being 77mm. I wouldn't trade it (O.K., I'd seriouly think about trading IF Pentax would come out with it's own version of the Tokina 11-16).

[Mechan1k]

Wish I had the cash for the 10-20 at the moment ... I have handled someoen elses K10D with the 10-20 attached and it was a great lens to use ... very wide and fitted everything in. I'll keep saving my pennies.

[kenyee]

Be aware that you do have to get used to the perspective distortion of a 10-20 UWA lens. You have to be square to your subject and keep stuff away from the edges or you'll get weird warped images. It took a while to get the hang of it and was pretty frustrating initially... :-P