Which Sigma 10-20
Posted 08/10/2009 - 11:18
Link
Well I got two reviews for you link link
resolution of the lens seems to be better and the HSM really makes a difference with the lower F-number to get a solid AF results but the rest isn't so good it seems.
If you need the fast AF, higher resolutions and will use it on the long ends instead of the wide ends then get the new version, if not then get the older one, it's better at wide end.
Just a thought but have you looked at the Tamron 10-24 already?
resolution of the lens seems to be better and the HSM really makes a difference with the lower F-number to get a solid AF results but the rest isn't so good it seems.
If you need the fast AF, higher resolutions and will use it on the long ends instead of the wide ends then get the new version, if not then get the older one, it's better at wide end.
Just a thought but have you looked at the Tamron 10-24 already?
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Posted 08/10/2009 - 12:31
Link
Luke_ wrote:
Now the new sigma 10-20 offers HSM for pentax models and also f3.5 throughout the zoom range.
Do we need HSM as pentax owners? I cant see why we would and although f3.5 is very nice, I won't really need it for landscape shots.
So my question is, as a Pentax user, is it worth paying the extra for the new 10-20 for shooting landscapes?
You need to be a bit careful focusing with the old 10-20, as I commented here.Now the new sigma 10-20 offers HSM for pentax models and also f3.5 throughout the zoom range.
Do we need HSM as pentax owners? I cant see why we would and although f3.5 is very nice, I won't really need it for landscape shots.
So my question is, as a Pentax user, is it worth paying the extra for the new 10-20 for shooting landscapes?
Not sure whether there'd be a difference with HSM - it's still the AF detectors in the body that decide whether there's any work to do.
Personally, I find the old 10-20 focuses pretty fast. The barrelling below 12mm, and the need for AF care aside, I find it very good - at least given its price. I'm not planning to change.
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Pentax K-3, DA18-135, DA35 F2.4, DA17-70, DA55-300, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.
Posted 08/10/2009 - 12:51
Link
Very happy with my copy of the old lens and wouldn't pay extra for constant f3.5 - I agree that I don't see it being particularly necessary for a landscape lens.
Not sure that the difference in IQ (as mentioned above, it's a mixed picture) is worth paying extra for either.
Not sure that the difference in IQ (as mentioned above, it's a mixed picture) is worth paying extra for either.
Posted 08/10/2009 - 14:13
Link
I'm also very happy with my older version. I wouldn't pay the extra for slightly faster lens but mixed results as far as improved IQ is concerned. If it was clearly better in every respect, then maybe, but it isn't.
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!
Posted 08/10/2009 - 15:23
Link
jackitec wrote:
I have the older one don't need HSM the focusing is so short it's fast enough for me, as for IQ well could I get better, here link
you tell me,
Jack.
Yes of course but at what price?I have the older one don't need HSM the focusing is so short it's fast enough for me, as for IQ well could I get better, here link
you tell me,
Jack.
For ban of bucks the older Sigma 10-20 is very good but also the Tamron 10-24 is very good, maybe even a tiny bit better. It's cheaper (here at least) and it has the edge in most things except CA and is a bit soft wide open but no one is perfect right?
Some Tamron 10-24 shots link
Stefan
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
K10D, K5
DA* 16-50, DA* 50-135, D-FA 100 Macro, DA 40 Ltd, DA 18-55
AF-540FGZ
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
44 posts
17 years
Do we need HSM as pentax owners? I cant see why we would and although f3.5 is very nice, I won't really need it for landscape shots.
So my question is, as a Pentax user, is it worth paying the extra for the new 10-20 for shooting landscapes?
Lenses: Samsung 12-24 f4 | Pentax 18-55 Kit | 28mm Prime | 50mm Prime | Vivitar Series 1 70-210