I bought this lens because I love a really wide angle of view, both because of the opportunities it allows for landscapes and because of the fun effects of the perspective at the wide end. I chose the Sigma over its Nikon counterpart because: a) it goes 2mm wider (10 vs. 12); b) it's half the price of the Nikon (~$500 vs. ~$900); and c) because it's sharper in the center than the Nikon, and not so soft in the corners that it's not worth it. I also looked at the Tamron 12-24, but didn't like the feel of it (also had to flip a lock on the barrel to MF, unlike the Nikon and Sigma, both of which have manual focus override).

The Sigma is their top line (indicated by a gold band on the barrel), and seems pretty sturdily made. One of the things that sold me on it over the Tamron was the focus and zoom rings--they are both very smooth and viscous. Unlike some UWA lenses, this one does have filter threads (77mm, which is the Nikon pro-lens standard), and I use a regular Hoya circular polarizer (not a really thin one), and have had no issues with vignetting, even at 10mm. If you stacked filters at all, though, I'm sure it would vignette.

The lens features HSM (SWM for Nikon), which means it has a silent, quick AF motor, which makes it fit in well with my other lenses, featurewise.

I have found other reviews of this lens to be generally true--wide open it's a little soft in the corners, and there's noticeable light falloff (but pretty minor), as well. There are so many other challenges with shooting well with a UWA lens, though, that these aren't big issues for me.

The on-camera flash can't be used at ANY focal length on this camera without vignetting.

Overall, I think it was the right choice for me, and it's a great product. I LOVE to shoot with it, and usually I carry it and my 17-55 on my walkarounds, and those are all I need.

Sample Images:

nice Mark! Those are on the Nikon 1.5 crop correct?

Originally Posted by subimatt

nice Mark! Those are on the Nikon 1.5 crop correct?

yup.

awesome, How far away were you standing from the rocket?

Not far enough that a passerby would think I was taking a photo of the whole rocket... maybe 5 ft? Maybe 10?

For that self-portrait photo, I was probably about 12" from the lens... maybe closer (can't remember the min. focusing distance).

I love the distortion on that lens, its like a linear fisheye or at least the best I can describe it.

Nice to see more reviews. Excellent write up Mark!

Originally Posted by Markitos

The Sigma is their top line (indicated by a gold band on the barrel), and seems pretty sturdily made.

Just to add to that what some of their lettering means:
EX also is their designation for their "top of the line" lenses. Just adding that as that's easier to go by when shopping online.
DC means it's specifically made for cropped sensors, the 1.5/1.6 size, NOT the 1.3 size in the canon sports 1 series, but they will mount, just expect vignetting.
DG means (and this lens IS NOT A DG) means it's "optimized for digital" meaning it has Sigma's newer coatings, but DGs cover full frame, so they'll work on a FF digital on a 35mm film body as well as on the smaller sensors. It will just be bigger and heavier than a DC lens in the same specs to make the image circle big enough to cover FF.

Originally Posted by subimatt

I love the distortion on that lens, its like a linear fisheye or at least the best I can describe it.

How about a rectilinear wide angle zoom... Fisheyes by definition have non linear distortion. This lens will keep straight lines straight if they're parallel to the sensor (ie power poles will be vertical and not leaning if the camera is level). If you angle the sensor, you then get distortion, but it's much different than a fisheye.

It's just the extremely wide perspective that's unnatural, the lens should have as little distortion as possible since it's designed to be rectilinear, not a fisheye.

This is one of the lenses on my dream team.

Good writeup, I love mine too!

Sweeeet.

Just ordered this lens.

You'll love it. Here's a recent fav:

Awesome. I splurged on it because I'm taking a trip to Amsterdam, Switzerland and Scotland in two and a half weeks!

The lens is frickin perfect for city stuff, I love it.

It'll be really cool in Amsterdam, I need to go back there for sure!

Here's 2 more, sorry for filling the thread if they're not good examples:

Originally Posted by ride5000

both rectilinear and fisheye have distortion(s): you can't really say that one has more or less than the other.

Thanks for expanding on my brief comment. Rectilinear lenses have little to no fisheye distortion.

It's the exaggeration and distortion of perspective, proportions and sizes that make photos from wide angle rectilinear lenses look unnatural or unusual.


edit: and additionally, the reason I kept it simple is what does the average joe see usually as distortion? Wide angle distortion from a rectilinear lens is pretty commonplace, fisheyes are rather novel and unusual to most people. Granted, we're seeing more rectilinear perspective distortion now with wider and wider lenses being put on cameras at or near the traditional 35mm frame size.

A couple more example photos, and a bump since Shawn was looking for photos taken with this lens:

THESE WERE ALL SHOT WITH A REGULAR (NON-SLIM) HOYA CIRCULAR POLARIZER ON THE LENS--NO VIGNETTING!

Ive been considering purchasing a lens similar to this and after reading up here and on other sites i think i will be investing in this lens. Thanks for the examples and the write up. Very useful.

Anyone else have that same problem with this lense?

Had mine since May, no problems.

Originally Posted by Robert Vassallo

Anyone else have that same problem with this lense?

Nope... had mine for over a year and used it constantly. Now Todd (Tizzle on the forum) has it, and I don't think he's having any issues with it, either.

ok, thanks very much, looking forward to purchasing the lense, lets just hope i can get it shipped to an APO/AE address

i apologize for double posting but i wanted to let yall know i ordered this lense and should get it in 10-14 days.

Actually came in 5-6 days. I'm thoroughly enjoying the lens. Thanks.

I have to get one of these.

i was actually looking at the tokina 10-17mm, but this will now be one of the choices to choose from!

Originally Posted by riderofbmx4130

i was actually looking at the tokina 10-17mm, but this will now be one of the choices to choose from!

Keep in mind, The tokina is a Fish eye at 10mm the Sigma is not.

i am keeping that in mind, chances are i'd use the fish eye more than the extreme wide angle though. so i think i'm still stuck with the tokina

I've had the Sigma 10-20 for a few months now. Love it!



I kinda like the distortion at 10mm For the price, it's an awesome lens!

so does everyone on the forum own this lens now or what?

I have one! It gives a great perspective.

<---------has one

I had one, but I don't know. I'm not in the cool kids club anymore....

:shrug:

Originally Posted by user errors

so does everyone on the forum own this lens now or what?

....you don't?

Ordered this lens last week... should be here in a few days. I can't wait, as I've been wanting one since like the 3rd grade.

Now that the majority of my lenses will have 77mm filter threads, I have no choice but to save for the 17-55 f/2.8 next and replace my 18-70.

I will make a prediction: This lens might as well be a 10mm prime.

you'll love it todd. 10mm is so nice

I can't wait to finally get mine *drool*

man, i've been thinking of getting a wider angle lens, this looks perfect!

I just got this for my birthday and can't wait to use it more!!! This is a sweet piece of glass

Looking through this thread has convinced me to make this my next lens.

Lets see some shots Damon!

excited for my hug eh?

and thanks!

Has anyone tried using P-size GNDs using the wide angle holder on this guy? Having to buy new grads is the biggest thing holding me back from buying this puppy, or any UWA for that matter.
Reed