March 06, 2015, 11:18:26 AM

Author Topic: Can I Save My Sigma 10-20mm?  (Read 2178 times)


  • Power Shot G7X
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Can I Save My Sigma 10-20mm?
« on: March 09, 2012, 10:20:47 PM »
Like a large continent of us opted for the new 5D3...I absolutely love my Sigma 10-20mm, she's served me well on many a  world trip...but now that FF is in my future what to replace her with...

A prime like the 14mm is nice but $$, the 17-40 and 16-35 don't get amazing reviews...

What would you do?

Would extension tubes solve my prob, let me keep my trusty 10-20mm or is this a bad idea?

All thoughts appreciated.
5D3 | G12 | 17-40 f4L | 50 f1.4 | 28-105 f3.5 | 580ex II

canon rumors FORUM

Can I Save My Sigma 10-20mm?
« on: March 09, 2012, 10:20:47 PM »

dr croubie

  • 1D X
  • *******
  • Posts: 1401
  • Too many photos, too little time.
    • View Profile
Re: Can I Save My Sigma 10-20mm?
« Reply #1 on: March 09, 2012, 11:31:25 PM »
Extension tubes won't save you, unless you like wide-angle bugs :)
Maybe you could pull off a portrait with it at 20mm, I think the thinnest extension tube around is the kenko 10mm.
But you're definitely not getting a landscape out of it, and it'll vignette at the wide angles anyway.

Thought about the Sigma 12-24 versions?
Mk1 is almost perfectly rectilinear the whole range, not the sharpest lens in the world, although it's not bad, and CA is rather high.
Mk2 is rather sharp in the centres, rather soft on the wide-angle corners, field curvature is a problem but if you MF you can get around it. Barrel distortion at 12mm is bordering on fisheye though. CA about the same as the Mk1.
Best part is their prices, $830 or $950 at B+H, a lot less used.

What's wrong with the 16-35 II? It's not the sharpest on wide-open corners, and vignetting isn't the best, but stopping down to f/8 for landscapes both of that disappears. 17-40 ditto, soft corners aren't so bad by f/8 (although they could both be better for the price).

If you're not afraid of fiddling around, the Nikon 14-24 G is, well, very nice. No aperture ring so you're either stuck wide-open (on that lens, not a bad place to be stuck), or you can get adapters that set the aperture. It'll set you back a pretty penny, almost as much as the EF 14 f/2.8, but wider and better IQ than the two canon zooms.

Thought about other primes?
Samyang 14mm is a nice buy, especially with that price-tag, as long as you keep straight-lines out of the picture, fields and hills should be fine. 21mm Zeiss Ditagon will cost you more than most L zooms, but from what I hear it's worth it. Not much else in the 'ultrawide' range unfortunately, at least, not that's any better than either canon L zoom.
Too much gear, too little space.
Gear Photos


  • Canon EF 300mm f/2.8L IS II
  • ********
  • Posts: 2029
    • View Profile
    • AW Photography
Re: Can I Save My Sigma 10-20mm?
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2012, 11:55:21 PM »
I've owned both the sigma 10-20 and the canon 17-40. I would say the 17-40 on my 5d2 was at least at a minimum as good as the 10-20 on my crop. The second 16-35 is very nice if u have the cash.
Canon 5d III, Canon 24-105L, Canon 17-40L, Canon 70-200 F4L, Canon 100L 2.8, Canon 85 1.8, 430EX 2's and a lot of bumps along the road to get to where I am.

canon rumors FORUM

Re: Can I Save My Sigma 10-20mm?
« Reply #2 on: March 09, 2012, 11:55:21 PM »