sigma 10-20 or pentax 10-17


whatsthisbuttondo

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 15:13
Have both of these just bought the pentax new but the mrs says one has to go so which is the keeper not sure about fish eye effect , so whats the opinion of others

miles500

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 15:38
Why not keep them both and let the wife go? Seriously I suspect that the fish eye effect is a novelty which will soon wear off and I think the sigma would be much more useful long term.
Miles

Stuey

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 15:42
Different propositions - not really directly comparable - I suppose it will depend which one suits your requirements best

The sigma if you lowish distortion the Pentax for fisheye etc - I have the sigma and have played with a 10-17 - both make/made me smile
K10D, K5 plus plenty of clueless enthusiasm.

My Flickr site link

Mike-P

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 16:11
I have a Sigma 12-24mm and Pentax 10-17mm.

Both get little use but the Sigma gets a lot more than the Pentax.
No equipment list here but thanks for taking an interest. My Flickr

Conqueror

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 17:44
Sell both in favour of the Pentax DA 15mm f4
K-3ii

johnriley

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 17:50
The trouble is once they are gone then you'll have lost the chance to try them out properly. They are totally different lenses, so really they need using for a while to see which one suits you best to keep.
Best regards, John

stu62

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 18:34
iI have the perfect awnser buy another lens that you want and tell her you traded one of the lenses in for it and keep them both

just dont let them be around in view at the same time for a while

regards stu

Kseries

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 19:06
I tried the Sigma but liked the Pentax 10-17mm more, simply because I like the fish eye images. I ended up with neither. As much as I would like to own the lens, I could see me using it a lot to begin with and then struggling to find a regular need for it. Anything new coming in has got to justify its acquisition. I'm still working on a good long term reason to get the 10-17mm though!

thingsthatihaveseen

Link Posted 28/12/2014 - 22:11
Have both of these... As has been said above, they're both great, but they're very different... The 10 17 is predominantly a fisheye lens which becomes more fishy the closer you head to 10mm... The 10 20 is a wide angle lens, which becomes wider the closer you get to 10mm... Depends what you're after...

You can defish the 10 17 in software, but there's a trade off with softness at the edges... It behaves more like a wide angle at 17mm, but these days that's not very wide for a wide angle... As a travel lens though, its versatility can be pretty useful... As an out and out landscape lens, less so... The 10 20 takes filters, the 10 17 doesn't... Pretty similar in terms of IQ IMHO...

If I could only have one it would be the 10 20... No question... But I essentially use it as a 10mm prime, predominantly for landscape... If you're specifically interested in the fisheye effect, worth considering the Samyang 8mm... Manual, but first rate IQ, wider and fishier than the 10 17, and (if you're patient/lucky/happy to buy the older version) about 100 cheaper on eBay... Trade the 10 17 for the Samyang 8mm and keep the 10 20?

Best
Bill

BillWardPhotography
Instagram
Facebook

Helpful

redbusa99

Link Posted 29/12/2014 - 00:05
had the 10-17 and Sigma 10-20 let them both go , have bought them both again . neither of them a lens you will use often but great fun when you do which you seem to find opportunities for when you don't have them. lightroom de fishes the fish eye very well. buy the wife something nice and keep both your lenses

10-17 fisheye



10-17 fisheye



10-20 Sigma


K3 II and the odd lens or 2

Flickr
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.