Sigma 10-20 Initial Impressions and Shots
Well, I was all ready to get my 10-20 after seeing that it was "in stock" at B&H last night and was more than a bit teed off when I double-check this morning and it's now listed as "out of stock"
Before I walk over, I call B&H to double-check. Yup. Out of stock. Damn.
However, all is not lost - there's Willoughbys down the street from me. I walk in and they have them in stock, but haven't updated their website.
Andy, my favorite salesman, gives me the Sigma 10-20 and a Canon 10-22 for comparison before the purchase. I think I've financed his son's college ...
Initial thoughts:
Build quality - lovely EX finish, built like a tank, included petal hood. Doesn't have the cheap plasticky feel of the 10-22. Comes with a nice heavily padded leatherette case with urethane foam core. Works on my 300D and my D30. Andy also let me test on a 20D and a 350D
AF Speed - subjectively, no difference between the 10-20 and the 10-22. HSM is a *little* louder than USM - but that's about it.
Quality - superb. One of the reasons I wanted to get one of the early units was that the QA should be more stringent during the first run than later. Cynical? yes - accurate? unfortunately yes.
And the thing you've been waiting for ... sample shots! OK, these were quickies of my workroom taken at 10mm, 12mm, 14mm and 20mm. No touchup, all taken with a 580EX, no FEC and using a bounce flash from a white ceiling.
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/1020.htm
Tomorrow, I'll be taking some outside shots ... keep posted!!
Before I walk over, I call B&H to double-check. Yup. Out of stock. Damn.
However, all is not lost - there's Willoughbys down the street from me. I walk in and they have them in stock, but haven't updated their website.
Andy, my favorite salesman, gives me the Sigma 10-20 and a Canon 10-22 for comparison before the purchase. I think I've financed his son's college ...
Initial thoughts:
Build quality - lovely EX finish, built like a tank, included petal hood. Doesn't have the cheap plasticky feel of the 10-22. Comes with a nice heavily padded leatherette case with urethane foam core. Works on my 300D and my D30. Andy also let me test on a 20D and a 350D
AF Speed - subjectively, no difference between the 10-20 and the 10-22. HSM is a *little* louder than USM - but that's about it.
Quality - superb. One of the reasons I wanted to get one of the early units was that the QA should be more stringent during the first run than later. Cynical? yes - accurate? unfortunately yes.
And the thing you've been waiting for ... sample shots! OK, these were quickies of my workroom taken at 10mm, 12mm, 14mm and 20mm. No touchup, all taken with a 580EX, no FEC and using a bounce flash from a white ceiling.
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/1020.htm
Tomorrow, I'll be taking some outside shots ... keep posted!!
0
Comments
What is the price difference?
Looking forward to the outside pics.
Thanks
Cincinnati Smug Leader
I got a B&H price match - once they update their site, it may be higher.
Cincinnati Smug Leader
"Important Notice!
Not compatible with 35mm or digital full-size image sensor cameras"
So it's not built for full frame bodies.
This lens is only $469? That seems like a really good price seeing that the Canon 10-22 is $799
http://redbull.smugmug.com
"Money can't buy happiness...But it can buy expensive posessions that make other people envious, and that feels just as good.":D
Canon 20D, Canon 50 1.8 II, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 17-40 f/4 L, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Canon 430ex.
OK - nothing spectacular - shots as I was walking to get my paper, coffee and bagel this morning. Everything shot at 10mm, no CPL, no lens hood.
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/IMG_0397.JPG
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/IMG_0398.JPG
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/IMG_0399.JPG
http://www.stroberts.org/images/test/IMG_0400.JPG
http://redbull.smugmug.com
"Money can't buy happiness...But it can buy expensive posessions that make other people envious, and that feels just as good.":D
Canon 20D, Canon 50 1.8 II, Canon 70-200 f/4L, Canon 17-40 f/4 L, Canon 100mm 2.8 Macro, Canon 430ex.
What strikes me is that it does not seem to have the normal barrel distortion... Congrats on your new lens.
http://photocatseyes.net
http://www.zazzle.com/photocatseyes
I called wiloughbys and they said they dont have it.
Any other suggestions on where to get one?
I just press the button and the camera goes CLICK. :dunno
Canon: gripped 20d and 30d, 10-22 3.5-4.5, 17-55 IS, 50mm f1.8, 70-200L IS, 85mm f1.8, 420ex
sigma: 10-20 4-5.6 (for sale), 24-70 2.8 (for sale), 120-300 2.8
Sigma4less.com by the end of the week - I've ordered from them before and they are excellent (and will be cheaper than B&H)
Then im off to kauai for 10 days. Guess 24mm will have to cut it as "wideangle". :cry
I just press the button and the camera goes CLICK. :dunno
Canon: gripped 20d and 30d, 10-22 3.5-4.5, 17-55 IS, 50mm f1.8, 70-200L IS, 85mm f1.8, 420ex
sigma: 10-20 4-5.6 (for sale), 24-70 2.8 (for sale), 120-300 2.8
I was curious as to why it was so much cheaper than even the Sigma 12-24. Was a little worried about the quality of the lens.
I'm sold though..just have to wait for one to be in stock.
My smugmug stuff
Herion, here's MY question:
Does the lens extend when zooming? I have recently concluded that I am too hard on my equipment to purchase any more "moving parts" lenses; so currently I'm highly considering the Sigma 24mm macro lens.
I'm torn because I really like the reproduction ratio of that lens (1:2.7) and the sweet f/1.8 apeture. But, I know all too well that 24mm very often doesn't cut it when shooting digitally.
So I have to decide:
If I get the 10-20, I'll have sweet 15mm digital, but NO 35mm compatibility. Furthermore, a sometimes cripplingly tight apeture (for me at least, f/4-5.6) and a very limiting reproduction ratio... (1:6.7)
If I get the 12-24mm, I'll have just-as-sweet 18mm digital, AND a full 12mm on my film body, although I suspect I won't shoot beyond 18mm for quality's sake. However I'll have the same tight apeture (f/4-5.6) and an even worse (1:7.1) reproduction ratio...
If I get the 24mm macro, I'll have 36mm digital (bleah!) and 24mm on my film body. The f/1.8 apeture and macro capability (1:2.7) really sweeten the deal, though.
A few other factors to consider for me are:
~The 24mm is a single (and therefore mechanically much stronger) focal length, while I am not sure about the zooms. It looks to me as if both of them do NOT extend when zooming, which would really make my day.
~HSM and it's full-time AF + Manual is quite near perfect on my 150mm macro; I'd love to have it on other Sigma bodies. I know that with non HSM lenses on Canon bodies, they're forced to actually manipulate TWO switches in order to go from AF to MF, which is wholly unacceptable in my opinion. I'm not sure if this will be the case on my Nikon, but if so then non-HSM is a no-go, right off the bat.
~Extension tubes are an easy alternative to drastically upping my macro ability, but I often like to have macro-to-infinity sharpness, which wouldn't happen if I slapped an extension tube on...
I'm so sorry to have totally hijacked your thread, Herion. For what it's worth, I think that in your "nothing spectacular" shots, the first one is definitely a spectacular shot. I'd love to see a 100% crop of any of those photos, BTW.
-Matt-
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Well, the lens extends 1/4" from its 10mm to 20mm lengths. I think (unless you are tossing the lenses like the barkeeps toss bottles in Coyote Ugly) that you should be fine with this lens - for this price, it's worth it!
Hi Matt,
Thanks again for the compliment on the "nothing spectacular" shots - I took a look at your gallery and I should be the one complimenting you!
Anyhoo, here's a 100% center crop from IMG_0397
and here's a edge crop from the same:
Thanks for your replies,
-Matt-
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Hi, do you by any chance have any shot at 10mm wide open at f/4? Thanks. Ben
http://sportspixel.com
Here it is - f/4 @ 1/60
Hi, Herion, thanks for posting the photo. It looked pretty good at f/4. What camera body did you use for this shot? Ben
http://sportspixel.com
I used a Canon 300D - handheld.