|
| Accept Cookies | Customize | Refuse Cookies |
The following opinions have been automatically translated with Google Translate.  | sent on December 15, 2016 Pros: Focal thrust, sharpness from f11 to f16, colors, ability to mount the screw filters, price, dimensions. Cons: Dim, bad front cap but I have resolved with an original cap nikon. The rest is really good! Opinion: My first wide angle for aps-c. What about .. cheaply made so much! Color and sharpness really good. Lightweight and comfortable. The focal thrust I like a lot. To make landscapes is perfect. It suffers when there is little light and six freehand. Then you have to raise the ISO and rely only to the body and its resistance to high ISO. Maximum sharpness is obtained by f11 up: the edges clearly improved. A TA is not too bad. I have it for 3 and a half years and I was tempted to change it, then I never thought about it. Taken anywhere: safari, sea, mountain, city. Robust and very good materials come (not to the current levels sigma ART but still very good). Coupled with the d7000 is exceptional! I recommend it to everybody! |
  | sent on May 15, 2016 Pros: Price to be used, general soundness, good sharpness at all focal lengths, especially at 10 mm, already at full aperture, lens hood and carry bag included, hsm engine. Cons: Paid at a very attractive price to be used and in excellent condition, against which we want to find! Opinion: Bought used at a great price for the non-use of the previous owner, I had some doubts about the quality of reproduction, but as soon as I started to do some test shots I could verify the good optical performance at all focal lengths, but above 10 mm, focal length for which it seems optimized. The equipment is complete, so after the purchase you have to think possibly only to the protective filter (diam. 77). Construction is bomb-proof, robust and equipped with the engine fairly quiet and fast. Maybe if you really want to find a mole could be the fact that it is not very bright, but for the use to which it is voted on and given the differences from other manufacturers is not a problem in both exterior and interior applications, just lift a little the iso and that's it. Used indoors with the aid of external flash (550EX) with wide-angle diffuser lowered is not felt loss of brightness at the periphery of the frame also the focal 10. Inclined purchase of a 8-16 sigma used, at the end for the stessi money I took this and a Tamron 70-300 usd vr and I must say that I am not absolutely regretted, considering the lack of focal difference and especially the yield with the sun in the frame. The absence of the stabilizer is not a drama, which is always shots with the safety times from 1/15 to 1/30. |
 | sent on February 11, 2016 Pros: F8 sharpness on, the price of used, ability to mount 77mm filters without vignetting even at 10mm. Cons: bokeh, and a little dark, but on this objective it is not relevant Opinion: For me it is a great lens, very sharp f8 up, I took some pictures of us truly remarkable. Some people when I say that I used the lens does not believe in it, as if the sharpness was the prerogative of only f2.8 lenses. I use it for landscapes and architecture and almost always between F8 and F13, and almost always on the stand and for these uses is almost perfect, it would be perfect if it were a fixed 10mm f2.8 with 77mm filter because it could be fully exploited for the stars but do not know if it is mechanically possible to make a lens like that! |
 | sent on August 29, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, construction, AF, quality / price ratio, standard equipment Cons: Dark, soft edges, sensitive wheel, front cap Opinion: I have the Sigma for about a month and a half, so my review is leaving things as they are. Used a lot in my last trip to London, I was more than satisfied: it is a good ergonomics, apparently plasticky but is very robust, between f / 8 and f / 16 the sharpness is scary (but still soft at the edges) and the ' AF is always quick and precissisimo. Not to mention the fact that Sigma offers in the package hood and drawstring bag, although not a top of the line (learning, Canon mom!). RnDi against talk of a target dark enough, seen running from f / 4, but d ' Besides, about 300 € you can not expect much. Another flaw is the focal ring that is a bit 'too sensitive, just touch it and it all goes bust, but everything is resolved with a bit' of foresight and patience. The front cap is not very good, it difficult to engage especially with the lens hood attached, and you live with the constant risk of perderlo.rnAC, vignetting and distortionoverall acceptable, and even if it is correct to perfection with profiles Lightroom. To have a little 'flare you must desire strongly, because the files are almost always quite clean, despite taking in controluce.rnSarà I've been very lucky, but my copy is almost perfect. Quality / price ratio outstanding. |
 | sent on August 29, 2015 Pros: Value for money very favorable, good sharpness and detail, chromatic aberration really contained, good materials and construction appreciable. Normal weight, fast autofocus and preciso.rn Cons: Brightness, the front cap is really outrageous, you go off very easily with the risk of losing it, I solved the problem with a ten euro, by buying one universal! Use it at the maximum aperture is so problematic that the stand is indispensable. Opinion: I purchased this light on the web, like new 300 euro not without some concern, given that Sigma is known for the diversity of performance and construction of its products. Evidently I came across a copy almost perfect. In fact, the field test, this lens has returned images from all over, even in the hands of a "duffer" like myself. Colors and details of all respect, vignetting nonexistent or acceptable, normal flare even with full backlighting and still solved in post-production. I did test shots of subjects with a strong architectural and I noted with surprise that even at the edges, the deformation of the lines and the prospect was more than acceptable levels. I read reviews of this perspective very discordant with each other, but as far as I'm concerned it's really a goal of all respect, with which you can "indulge" in the original shooting. Probably, as already mentioned, I found a copy precise and well-tarato. |
 | sent on July 03, 2015 Pros: Price, weight, color, clarity (only middle), distortion, reduced flare Cons: brightness, unusable below f / 8, details rough at the edges, Opinion: Purchased for needs "wide-angle" I have found since the first shots some unique aspects. For those without much expectation he proves without doubt a sufficient compromise in the quality / price, but all the positives are concentrated in those listed above in the "pro". When night falls the low light it makes all feel. Highly recommended tripod for those without a very firm hand. A TA is embarrassing as may be blurred at the edges with vignetting visible in particular conditions of light. As it is said to depend on the "games", it is very likely that I have come across that does not particularly performance. |
 | sent on January 30, 2015 Pros: Sharpness, Color, Construction, Price Cons: No One Opinion: I used this lens for landscapes on a camera body Canon APS-C. Is solid, built with quality materials. The focus ring is very pleasant to use. Also resistant to weather, water and sand. The picture quality is great for color rendering and sharpness. Also good resistance to flare. If used in the street can be a bit 'dark and objects disappear (!), The angle of view is very ampio.rnRitengo the quality / price ratio excellent. 7.5 rating. |
 | sent on November 27, 2014 Pros: Construction, made on DX format, quality / price ratio, autofocus Cons: Maybe the weight Opinion: Shooting for the past 1 ½ years with this lens sigma, I immediately felt, quite crisp, excellent autofocus, even in low light (eg in churches etc.), Performs well even against light, with some minor disorder flare, has an excellent viewing angle and an excellent yield deicolori.rnPesicchia a little, but given the results I can not complain. |
 | sent on November 16, 2014 Pros: excellent workmanship, weight, versatility, performance wide angle Cons: regulator focal length too sensitive Opinion: tried some time ago and it was love at first sight. I got online recently and I must say that the first trials held up very well. the bill is in my opinion very good. nice ring to operate and very light. nititido is nice and really surprised me on two points. color rendering really surprising against the light. you can pretty much take pictures of everything and he did not bat an eyelid, with flair drastically reduced. no vignetting. Moreover, another remarkable thing, in the long exposures (two seconds) does not suffer at all out of focus, even by hand. really versatile also under this point of view. compared to the Nikon 18-140 which is my other goal, has made more uniform, some in all openings, no great deviations from highest to lowest. I honestly do not feel the need to stop in more than half (compared to the other version) .rnl'autofocus (on Nikon ultrasound) is a very very fast. struggling a bit in low light conditions and in cases of foreground subjects. nothing that can not be overcome by changing mildly angolazione.rnil defectgreatest, in my opinion, lies in the focus ring. on the one hand is very soft and pleasant to use, but maybe even too soft. the result is that it may move inadvertently, with the result to shorten or lengthen the focal without noticing. a sin, snap case. |
 | sent on September 22, 2014 Pros: Sharpness, Quality, Price, Durability, Cons: Diaphragm is not very open Opinion: Very good lens, the use of 90% in all the shots that I make. The only flaw is that the diaphragm is 4, so if you plan to photograph the Milky Way and various things we can give up, because you have overcome sometimes even the 6400 ISO.rnQuesta lens has endured everything, including volcanic sand and water and it still works 100% .rnNon change it for no for now. |
 | sent on August 11, 2014 Pros: Construction - Quality / Price - Autofocus - Lens hood and pouch Cons: Weight Opinion: I've been around a long time on forums and websites I finally decided to take it because I found an offer of € 220 in used (although in reality it is like new). I do not think I've got 2 times over, and I bought it. I believe that it is not to the levels of Nikon (of course!) Otherwise we could not explain the nearly 1000 € cost, but if you want to enlarge the view for those who love the landscapes and the 18mm DX (ie 27mm) should be a little tight, this' optics is perfect because it is the focal length of 10mm on 15mm, I would say perfect for landscapes, especially for landscape shots together in PP vertical shots. It was what I was looking for at a reasonable price without selling a kidney. |
 | sent on August 09, 2014 Pros: Good construction and performance, crisp, precise AF, Weight, Color Cons: For what it costs just a few flare in backlit but nothing outrageous Opinion: A good optics, I used the Nikon D7100 for paesaggi.rnOttima sharpness even at the edges, especially if prepunched a bit ', lightweight, accurate AF, solid construction and excellent performance of colori.rnQualche chromatic aberration but nothing unsolvable in post-production. rnSi is used on the 350, but even less, and it is up for grabs if you look at a wide angle. |
user40316  | sent on February 25, 2014 Pros: Quite sharp. Great value for money. Amazing colors. Cons: For me none. Opinion: The brand Sigma for me it was a real find. As per tradition, the colors of this objective are fantastic, as well as the impeccable management of light and shadow. The flare is minimized even in full light, and at least I do, I decided to abbinargli a filter Hoya HD and I am very satisfied. The thing I like best 'of this objective, as well as the undoubted quality of construction, and color rendering that puts him, at least in my opinion, head and shoulders above competitors at a good level. Sure, it gets better, but to have "the best" you have to pay a lot more '. Great therefore also the value for money. My copy then do not suffer from excessive flare or particular aberrazioni.Lo advice really. |
 | sent on February 09, 2014 Pros: Sharpness even at room temperature, distortion, short focal length construction, af, focus 10 cm Cons: None Opinion: Amazing sharpness and fantastic colors. Optics very creative thanks to the 10mm distortion and focus on macro lens. Despite the convex lens aberrations and you have a few reflections. Goal of building a professional comparable to the Nikon 14-24 2.8 which makes it heavier than the small size. You get what you pay for. Fantastic ... Sigma, what a surprise! RnPrimo Nikon lens does not ... excellent ... Rating: 10 |
 | sent on February 06, 2014 Pros: Fantastic view, very few distortions in the bubble, robustness, fast and quiet autofocusing Cons: Some chromatic aberration and reduced brightness Opinion: I could not do without this perspective. In conjunction with my Fuji S5 Pro is unbeatable. I use it for architectural photography for which seems made. Opens perspectives thrill. Held in bubble makes me useless even the expensive Canon L-series 24mm shift lens that I had to buy along with its full frame, in fact, just keep it leveled and cut off the inevitable soil on the bottom of the frame. rnPer the story, then, is truly amazing, allowing you to enter the event and who makes street photography know what I mean. rnUnico Neo, brightness, but considered that the circle of confusion of a 10mm is very small, you can also take a long time with no visible blur, something unthinkable for higher brightness. |
user579 | sent on January 29, 2014 Pros: Quality / price ratio, size, ability to mount filters, distortion well controlled, a few AC, manner / good resistance to flare, satisfactory quality at the center even at room temperature, 2x zoom (unwrapped the tokina 11-16 prior to its too small focal length), a minimum distance of maf (very handy for macros "acclimatized"), autofocus quickly and accurately, no dominant color and quite well balanced. Cons: Dark, only acceptable quality at the edges to TA, we must pay attention to the distorting close-up shots, not the best due to radial diaphragm with only six slats. Opinion: I bought this lens used and immaculate with still over a year of warranty for about 300 € shipped and after trying it a little bit in different areas (mostly landscape, but also at a wedding) I'm quite happy with the purchase. In addition to price factors that made me opt for this lens were good hike (better than the tokina 11-16 and not compromising on the wide side as the 12-24), but above all the ability to mount filters. The quality is excellent, although a bit by closing the diaphragm, the results are more than good even at the edges. I consider it a lens suitable for those who want to own an ultra wide without fainting. The next to a Tamron 17-50 with which it forms a pairing of quality at a sustainable cost altogether. |
 | sent on January 29, 2014 Pros: Solid, Well built, fast focus and accurate, balanced, lens hood (very important) and bag included, cheap, resistance to flare very very good: for the money it costs is definitely valid. Cons: The sharpness in the center is really good, the sides unfortunately tends to go down quickly, it is not a very fast lens and is almost unusable indoors if not with a tripod. Opinion: It 'a lens without great pretensions, which returns a more than good quality for those who want to get closer to landscape photography or want to dial creative photographs. Its low cost (especially in used) allows almost anyone to be able to photograph landscapes. It can mount filters, which is important given that few landscapes that I shot without a ND filter. It 's small and not too heavy and always finds space in my bag. The quality leaves much to be desired at the edges, closing the aperture already af/13 quality salt greatly and is almost comparable to levels well in excess of wide-angle, whereas the landscapes are almost always triggered at least f/10 lens makes this all too well his duty. |
| sent on January 28, 2014 Pros: Price, robustness Cons: only for APSC, dark, aberrations Opinion: is certainly not a bright lens, I use it for landscapes, it is not crystal clear, moreover, however for the price it is certainly a good prodotto.rnutilizzabile even to street, leaving a 8-16 interessanti.rnSinceramente things I was not interested, already 10 I use little, I would say that as money is certainly worth the expense! rnsu 650D I also found a sharpness not excellent, it is also true that it is more than accettabile.rnSe I had ambitions in the short term to move to FF I would certainly have considered the 12-24, utilizzabilissimo on APSC edestremo on FF. |
 | sent on September 22, 2013 Pros: well built, solid, quality and price. Cons: no Opinion: I wanted a wide angle on which to mount filters (which I already had) 77mm, and this is what I found on the basis of excursion, price and quality! for now I have not noticed defects. the rings are smooth and hard enough to not be moved involuntarily but not overly harsh. is not it one of the most wide-angle lenses pushed, it among the brightest, but I think it is a lens to be recommended for those looking for a good lens without spending a fortune. |
 | sent on August 29, 2013 Pros: Compact lens with an excellent quality / price ratio, good performance and image quality; weight among the lowest among the ultra grandagolari Cons: Chromatic aberrations at the focal low, low brightness. Opinion: Objective on the market for several years but still holds very well compared with other wide-angle lenses including his most recent successor 10-20 f/3.5rnOttimo the ultrasonic motor ring very fast and silent lens with an opportunity to correct the in manual focus in any situation and momento.rnBuona alternative to the Nikon 10-24 definitely more powerful but much more costoso.rnConsigliato those who want to try this photographic genre without investing exaggerated. |
 | sent on August 20, 2013 Pros: construction (sturdy metal clasps, lenses), quality / price ratio Cons: sharpness Opinion: I do not know if it's my copy, but with my 7D I just can not get a sharp picture even with treppiede/ISO100/f16!! I will have my limits but ... with these parameters .... I should pull a decent picture, or not? I have several "old" photos taken with the old 400D .... nitidie / "wonderful." How about trying with fine adjustment? |
 | sent on July 17, 2013 Pros: Build quality. Ratio Q / P Angular field. Central sharpness. HSM. Saturated colors and natural. Housing and lens hood included. More than one Editor's Pick show that those who are not satisfied with the photos that churns out probably more than buying a new lens, it needs a good book ... :) Cons: Normal brightness, sharpness and lateral deformation. Opinion: The feeling is that you are holding a Canon L-series lens, without being gutted. I do not regret the two mm difference in the sigma 8-16 simply because in real life you do not often drops below 12mm. As for the image rendering is superb, I find it amazing the colori.la lateral deformation is marked, this must be remembered when you position your subject. The excursion 10-20, is convenient because it is unable to move from a superwide (with the typical defects of nasoni) to a lens that handles well also persone.rnL 'only lens that may be more desirable is the tokina 11-16 f2.8 because the two stop advantage determinanti.rnrnNel can be complex, considering the price, it is one of the choices migliori.rnrn |
 | sent on May 11, 2013 Pros: Price, robustness and HSM. Distortions subsidiaries and color rendition. Ability to mount filters. Cons: No pull not to purchase due to the characteristics of the lens, you will notice a drop in sharpness at the edges, but given the wide field of view captured can be there. Painting and finishing sigma a little delicate. Opinion: This lens I was immediately won over because of its wide field of vision. Compared to competitors in the market is the cheapest (excluding the tamron) and I have always carried with me during all my travels. Robust and compact, I took in the mountains and in the desert without ever buckled under adverse weather conditions. It has excellent color rendering with saturated colors and faithful, also controls discreetly distortions. Of course it is not free from defects, in fact I have always noticed a drop in sharpness at the edges, but I think it's also a fair compromise seen the extreme focal manages to reach. It is not the brightest lens in the world but it is fully usable unless they are indispensable Aperture 3.5 or 2.8. I sold it after years of loyal service, with the understanding that it is a great goal, to go to the sigma 12-24, hoping to get the same results. Ideal introduction to the use of wide-angle recommend it as a travel companion, is able to give great satisfaction. |
 | sent on March 26, 2013 Pros: Sharp, sharp, sharp (my copy at least), strong, good resistance to flare, it features filters, 10mm fantastic! Cons: Focal length of 10mm (10-20), brightness, only to aps-c Opinion: I've had it for a while and what impressed me was the sharpness across the frame. I sold it because the 20 mm maximum forced me to change lens often when I was around. I was looking for a wide angle a bit brighter and with a focal best suits my needs (tokina 12-24 f4 II). If used exclusively for landscape has few rivals on aps-c. |
 | sent on January 07, 2013 Pros: Autofocus immediate, excellent field of view, very good quality / price Cons: Maybe a little dark Opinion: Great lens that makes it the right time and costs. The materials are great, autofocus is a chip and also the sharpness on the first floor offers beautiful emotions. IMHO that creates the flare in backlit situations is not the best, but it remains contained and easy to remove with a simple touch in post production if you do not want him. For the rest, nothing to say, I'm happy with the choice fatta.rnUnica precaution in the days when I bought it (about a year ago) I read it, and unfortunately I read here that some models have problems related to lack of sharpness at the edges of but fortunately I have not encountered this problem in my view, but before buying I did a test in the store to see the results. Council then to anyone who wants to buy at least one test before leaving to beat the ticket seller! In this case provatene more than one (if they are available in store). Rn |
 | sent on January 07, 2013 Pros: Excellent value for money, to start taking pictures with a wide angle pushed is ideal. RnBen assemblato.rn Cons: Difference in sharpness from one model to another, my example is a little on the edge nitido.rnTappo that will not stay closed very well, with a breath salta.rnPresenza considerable flare in backlit. Opinion: The lens itself is a well-built, robust and fast focus, but all in all makes his dovere.rnLo advice to those who want to start taking pictures with a wide angle pushed without spending follie.rnAnche if it was not used so excessive, we can say that it is well built, in fact I have it for five years and it seems nuovo.rnConsigliato to those who are beginners. |
 | sent on October 29, 2012 Pros: Quality / price ratio, resistance to flare, construction, speed autofocus. Cons: Dark. Opinion: Great value prezzo.rnL 'objective is dark and therefore not one of the most suitable, for example, for night shots to the stars / Milky Way (it should still be usable!). RnCostruzione good and excellent resistance to flare and focus speed. rnParagonato objectives as the 10-22 has the disadvantage of being dark, but the advantage of costing almost half! rnObiettivo highly recommended if you are interested in broad perspectives such as landscape photographs. |
 | sent on September 06, 2012 Pros: sturdy, good overall construction. like all sigma is affordable. optimal range for indoor use. Cons: chromatic aberrations, poor sharpness and brightness, distortion, vignetting heavy. Opinion: is a lens that I never particularly loved. I have always found the dull colors and little overall sharpness and also working hard in post production have never been able to get the desired result. In landscape photography are often left disappointed. with this objective in the sky seen and photographed that are just two different things! other things are different with the interior architecture. working on a tripod with this lens I was fine. So for those in the photograph is a lover of sharpness and general cleaning advice more ... and if we prefer the composition and more importance to the subject then it is advisable. Finally I read other negative comments sull'autofocus: on my copy is perfect and repeat the drop in sharpness in different areas of the visual field. |
 | sent on September 05, 2012 Pros: Angle of view, value for money, 77mm filter Cons: Low light, with only 6 aperture blades. Opinion: The focal range covered is very intriguing and interesting compositions allows especially in the countryside. The lens is not particularly bright, but the scenery is usually not a big problem, but the range of focal lengths today might not seem extreme, but over the competitors this perspective presents a great value for money. If I were to buy it today probably would estimate also the main competitors sigma 8-16 (focal extreme), sigma 10-20 f3.5 (brighter) or nikkor 10-24 (zoom largest and most noble brand), but these other cases would come to spend more to get more or less the same results. Interestingly, filter diameter 77mm to 82mm more common than the sigma 10-20 f3, 5, while I find a shame the diaphragm only 6 blades. Construction EX in my opinion qualitatively valid, but the optical quality can be easily verified by looking at all the photos taken with this lens are also on this site. |
 | sent on July 24, 2012 Pros: Build quality, weight, size, durability, price Cons: clarity rather disappointing Opinion: I've had this lens for a few months, bought new and fitted to Canon 50d, but I was never satisfied. In particular, I noticed drops rather obvious and disastrous of sharpness, especially at the edges, but also at the heart in some cases. Initially I thought I had a defective copy, but after several tests and comparisons with others, I realized that this lens has limitations. Of course, if used between f11 and f13, iso 100 with tripod to the situation improves, but this makes it very flexible and versatile. If it can be useful on my website I did some test http://www.soulwomanphoto.com/blog/obiettivi/test-nitidezza-sigma-10-20-f45-6/ |
 | sent on June 15, 2012 Pros: Sharpness, ultrasonic motor, flare resistance, durability, price. Cons: Dim Opinion: Perspective that gives great satisfaction. I find it quite clearly, is equipped with an AF in my opinion well balanced and easy thanks to the ultrasonic motor. Generally gives a feeling of strength. I was impressed by the resistance to flare, also in relation to the price (much higher than the Canon 10-22) offers a lot. A nice wide angle which I highly recommend. |
user493 | sent on May 15, 2012 Pros: Value for money, good resistance to flare, sharpness Cons: Brightness Opinion: An optical council often has a favorable value for money, to take into account the fact that you can mount filters. Great alternative to the canon 10-22. A very good sharpness, further gains if you close one stop. I replaced it with the tokina 11-16 because I needed a wide bright, otherwise I would have kept. |
 | sent on February 08, 2012 Pros: Quality, size, angle of view, price Cons: Not excellent sharpness in the corners (at least my copy) Opinion: Excellent lens for those who do not need extreme quality is perfect for landscape photos with a very wide angle of view and why not, even for a little portraits' original. Does not suffer much distortion. My copy is very sharp in the corners, but I was able to try other, much better than mine. For those who want to get closer to grand'angolari pushed, this lens is certainly a good alternative and is used at a reasonable price .. I used it for 3 years and gave me a lot of satisfaction! Recommended! |
 | sent on January 17, 2012 Pros: sharpness, very good resistance to flare, ac non-existent distortions only in extreme cases Cons: dim Opinion: I use it for over a year with great satisfaction and it struck me very positively. At the time of purchase candidates were Tamron 10-24 (discarded because faint and not very resistant to flare), Sigma 8-16 (discarded because of the inability to mount filters) Sigma 10-20, Canon 10-22 and Tokina 11-16. I was very keen for the Tokina, its brightness made me very throat, especially for night photography, but eventually reading the various reviews I chose this lens. The only thing that really blame the poor is the maximum brightness of f4 ... for the rest only PRO! |
 | sent on October 21, 2011 Pros: Good sharpness, robust mechanics Cons: Problems with AF. Opinion: With my copy, I have the autofocus that locks up occasionally and for no apparent reason. It happens in the most varied conditions of focus. Moving the ring for manual focus, everything continues. This happens on both the Nikon D100 than on the D300. (Although I doubt the validity of the quality control of Sigma) I bought this light (new) in 2007. Using it for photos of paesaggo this problem is more of a "nuisance" so much is that they are holding me so. For all the rest are happy with this lens. I just wanted to report this problem to warn that he was going to buy optics used preriodo of that and put it on D300. (There will be only my fault with this?? Ho I am the loser!). |
 | sent on October 11, 2011 Pros: Value for money, construction, ultrasonic motor, good image quality, lens hood and pouch included, possibility to use filters Cons: Yield variability from specimen to specimen, lower yield on the edge at room temperature Opinion: Considering the price, this is an ultrawide attractive: the construction is solid and consistent, the fast AF, good sharpness (which improves closing of a stop), and finally gives the possibility to use filters. Compared to Canon, less saturated colors and them "warm" a little 'more, but to have a beautiful sky saturated, however, is just close to two-thirds of third-stop during the trip (otherwise go towards the heavens white). Fair held at the flare. In terms of sharpness, we are close to 10-22, but here it is also variability in performance from specimen to specimen and it is often necessary to send everything in assistance for the calibration of the lens. My though was perfect and did not need the Micro. The equipment is complete and offers hood and leather bag. In conclusion: the Canon has its yield better overall (saturation, micro-contrast, greater consistency between the center and edges), and certainly requires fewer interventions in PP, but compared to 10-20 also costs twice as much and still the Sigma certainly his front looks good. |
 | sent on September 25, 2011 Pros: -Excellent value for money. -Lens hood and pouch included. -Well built. Cons: With my model reflected a drop in sharpness at the edges with diaphragms aperti.In especially the right edge. I am forced to shoot with small apertures to achieve good uniformity of sharpness between the center and edges. Opinion: -The difference in sharpness between the center and edges is a known problem on this goal, but there are marketing models that do not have this problem. (I have some doubts on how to face Sigma quality control.) For the rest of the lens is well built, presiso autofocus is quick and can be mounted filters. Do not suffer in the low light lens as I use it mostly for landscapes and shooting with tripod |
 | sent on September 25, 2011 Pros: Price, robustness, good sharpness Cons: low light Opinion: It 'a good target, good for landscapes, the best if you consider the price. And 'quite sharp even at the edges, not like the Sigma 8-16, but on the other hand can mount filters, is more compact and pleasant to look at. It 'a lens that does not suffer from front-back focus because it has a considerable depth of field even at maximum aperture that starts at f / 4. I recommend it and prefer it to Canon 10-22 that has great benefits, but comes at a higher price. |
 | sent on September 24, 2011 Pros: Excellent value for money, the initial endowment with bag and lens hood, nuts resistant, minimum distortion, flare resistance Cons: Sharpness contained, not very fast AF motor Opinion: was my first lens, maybe not perfect, I took him in and found him an offer enough solid content for both size and weight. The sharpness is not the best: like the center with the Canon or the Sigma 8-16 decade while the edges. F/11 to perform well in landscapes, especially if wide-ranging but requires a minimum of work in PP following the shooting. Clicking backlight shows a good resistance to flare and a more than acceptable color fidelity. Overall I would consider it a good lens for the neophyte of the landscapes in which training and approach to this area of ??the photograph without major economic efforts. |
 | sent on September 24, 2011 Pros: Angle of view, contained distortions, sharpen, good construction, good value for money Cons: No Opinion: For those who love landscapes this is a good lens has an angle of view spectacular, when the bubble distortions are minimal, the sharpness is not his forte but with a good sharpening in PP can be improved, the flare I'm pretty content. The objective is well built, solid, good rings, with the hood already supplied. Of course makes the most with the largest depth of field and focus on infinity, I often use it in manual and F11 for landscapes, but he also enjoys taking pictures "alternative" on the most disparate AF (not fast but good) . I've got it used, so I found a good lens that does not suffer from front / back focus, a defect that sometimes the Sigma lenses have. |
 | sent on September 24, 2011 Pros: excellent value for money and ultrasonic motor Cons: no one in particular Opinion: is an excellent optics, one of the highest optical thrusts on which it is possible to mount filters. valid alternative to the canon 10-22. if you do not have special needs diaphragm type 2.8 or an angle of extreme as the sigma 8-16 is the ideal wide angle, much cheaper than the canon but as quality is a worthy opponent. I highly recommend it |
JuzaPhoto contains affiliate links from Amazon and Ebay and JuzaPhoto earn a commission in case of purchase through affiliate links.May Beauty Be Everywhere Around Me
