Aug 1, 2005, 17:43
Hi everyone and Rufus ; )
Just a quick hello to all you nice people and apologies that am presently too busy to introduce myself properly in the correct forum...but I thought you'd be interested in my findings on the Sigma 10-20EXDC(Canon).
These are, I stress, purely subjective; additionally, I'm so pushed for time that I'm not posting any relevant shots for the time being...so if you're disappointed already read no further...
I took 40 tripod-mounted shots at 10, 14, 18 and 20mm at widest aperture, then f. 8, 11, 16 and 22. I then repeated the apertures at 18 and 20mm on the kit lens of the Canon 350D, the 18-55EF-S.
I can safely say that at 18-20mm, the Sigma outperforms the Canon throughout all apertures in terms of resolving power, though there is not much in it. The Sigma at 18mm lacks the puple fringeing that the Canon never quite loses even at f8/f11.
At f8 in the centre at 18mm the Canon equals the Sigma but the Canon's edges soften a tad...
By 20mm, the "tele" end of the Sigma shows signs of flagging a little by f16, but centre and edge pull ahead of the Canon, with f8 and 11 being very usable indeed.
However(gulp) at the wider end it all starts to sag at the edges, I'm afraid, though that 10mm end by f8 and especially f11 does a little better at the centre. The edges are pants, I'm afraid, and at f16 both centre and edge take a tumble. I have to say, however, that I saw no vignetting.
And here's the rub really: at that bit you definitely really really want, around 12-14mm, it does improve, giving its best at f16 in the edges, but those edges never sort themselves out really until around 18mm. Maddeningly, its performance at smaller apertures retains centre clarity well at 14mm.
I say "maddeningly", as this Sigma is a mixed bag: at 18-20mm it's better than the wide end of the Canon kit lens....but at 10-12mm its edge softness is even worse than the tele end of the Canon, and that's pretty soft...and yet again at 12-14mm, if you can put up with edges that never quite lose their fluff, the centre does well down to f16 at least.
Personally the tester for me was that all in all, the edges were overall slightly worse than the worse edges of the Canon, except at 18-22mm.
I've been wrestling with the pros and cons of this lens since Saturday; my (personal) view is that I find it not good enough to be good, yet not bad enough to be bad: it combines good control of vignetting, flare and resistance to fringeing with a(quite pleasing) tad of inherent "warm-up"... a feature I used to notice on a 24mm Sigma when I used to shoot Nikon 35mm. I'm guessing very warily that it's a "better lens" than Sigma's 12-24... its good bits are better than the 350D's kit lens' good bits but at the same 2mm "window"...
..and there's nothing else... I wish I had hands-on experience of the Tokina ATX Pro 12-24, but I don't .
I could bore you further with my options now, but chances are I'll be asking myself the same questions as everyone else who's seeking the "magic bullet" for sharp wide angledness!
Hope this lot has elucidated rather than exacerbated (look it up).
Any mistakes and non sequiturs are all my own and I won't be bothered to reply if anyone points them out anyway.
Thanks for a special forum by the way; forgive me if I don't drop in for a few days. I'll stick a monochrome landie I did with the wide end sometime soonish, for those(like me) who haven't seen many 16mm equivalent yawners.
For now,
Warmest,
Zig
Just a quick hello to all you nice people and apologies that am presently too busy to introduce myself properly in the correct forum...but I thought you'd be interested in my findings on the Sigma 10-20EXDC(Canon).
These are, I stress, purely subjective; additionally, I'm so pushed for time that I'm not posting any relevant shots for the time being...so if you're disappointed already read no further...
I took 40 tripod-mounted shots at 10, 14, 18 and 20mm at widest aperture, then f. 8, 11, 16 and 22. I then repeated the apertures at 18 and 20mm on the kit lens of the Canon 350D, the 18-55EF-S.
I can safely say that at 18-20mm, the Sigma outperforms the Canon throughout all apertures in terms of resolving power, though there is not much in it. The Sigma at 18mm lacks the puple fringeing that the Canon never quite loses even at f8/f11.
At f8 in the centre at 18mm the Canon equals the Sigma but the Canon's edges soften a tad...
By 20mm, the "tele" end of the Sigma shows signs of flagging a little by f16, but centre and edge pull ahead of the Canon, with f8 and 11 being very usable indeed.
However(gulp) at the wider end it all starts to sag at the edges, I'm afraid, though that 10mm end by f8 and especially f11 does a little better at the centre. The edges are pants, I'm afraid, and at f16 both centre and edge take a tumble. I have to say, however, that I saw no vignetting.
And here's the rub really: at that bit you definitely really really want, around 12-14mm, it does improve, giving its best at f16 in the edges, but those edges never sort themselves out really until around 18mm. Maddeningly, its performance at smaller apertures retains centre clarity well at 14mm.
I say "maddeningly", as this Sigma is a mixed bag: at 18-20mm it's better than the wide end of the Canon kit lens....but at 10-12mm its edge softness is even worse than the tele end of the Canon, and that's pretty soft...and yet again at 12-14mm, if you can put up with edges that never quite lose their fluff, the centre does well down to f16 at least.
Personally the tester for me was that all in all, the edges were overall slightly worse than the worse edges of the Canon, except at 18-22mm.
I've been wrestling with the pros and cons of this lens since Saturday; my (personal) view is that I find it not good enough to be good, yet not bad enough to be bad: it combines good control of vignetting, flare and resistance to fringeing with a(quite pleasing) tad of inherent "warm-up"... a feature I used to notice on a 24mm Sigma when I used to shoot Nikon 35mm. I'm guessing very warily that it's a "better lens" than Sigma's 12-24... its good bits are better than the 350D's kit lens' good bits but at the same 2mm "window"...
..and there's nothing else... I wish I had hands-on experience of the Tokina ATX Pro 12-24, but I don't .
I could bore you further with my options now, but chances are I'll be asking myself the same questions as everyone else who's seeking the "magic bullet" for sharp wide angledness!
Hope this lot has elucidated rather than exacerbated (look it up).
Any mistakes and non sequiturs are all my own and I won't be bothered to reply if anyone points them out anyway.
Thanks for a special forum by the way; forgive me if I don't drop in for a few days. I'll stick a monochrome landie I did with the wide end sometime soonish, for those(like me) who haven't seen many 16mm equivalent yawners.
For now,
Warmest,
Zig
All my stuff is here: www.doverow.com
(Just click on the TOP RIGHT buttons to take you to my Image Galleries or Music Rooms!)
My band TRASHVILLE, in which I'm lead guitarist: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6mU6qaNx08
