Sigma 10-20mm f/2.5 EX Nikon Compare, Reviews, Discounts

Thursday, November 26th, 2009 at 3:03 am

Sigma 10-20mm f/2.5 EX Nikon Compare, Reviews, Discounts.

Product: Sigma 10-20mm f/2.5 EX Nikon

List Price: $950.00
Average customer review:

Amazon Price: Too low to display
Click Here To See Amazon Sale Price
Add to cart to see low price@

Availability: In Stock
Usually ships in 24 Hours
Free Shipping Available

Compare Prices on Sigma 10-20mm f/2.5 EX Nikon

When I bought the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras 14 months ago, I didn't know what to demand. I never traditional a 3rd party lens or an ultra wide-angle, but I swiftly learned to like the lens and the opportunities it created. Having said goodbye to the lens a week ago (tranquil kicking), I decided to give this recent slightly faster model for a trek.

Currently reviews or even sample photos are sparse, and even some details seem elusive, so lets inaugurate in the beginning:

* Like the predecessor, this model features HSM, so all Nikon DSLR users can wait on from this lens (D700, D3, and D3x users will only accept a cropped notion)

* Also like its predecessor, its a hefty well-built lens that's made in Japan

* It's comparable in size and weight to the modern, but the 82mm front threads remove some getting musty to

* While the older model did not extend at 10mm and extended barely at the "long" ruin, the modern one is flush from 16-13mm, and extends slightly at both the wide and the long ruin.

* the EX enact is a tad more refined, and it now features an AF/MF switch (corpulent time override is available in AF) . The focus ring is somewhat stiff, but has a nice movement to it. AF is blazing!

* Sigma seems to have revised the rear element a bit with an added section of plastic to minimize reflections

* You also gather an extra aperture blade for better bokeh and considerable better sunstars

* Unbiased in case you are wondering, this lens works objective like a Nikon lens with beefy functionality

I'll post photos, but in general its the equal or better to the earlier lens. At the wide ruin the extra 1/3 halt is barely worth mentioning, but at the wide kill, you salvage 1 1/3 discontinuance more light. The changes do go beyond that, as there now is ELD glass as well as SLD (in the previous version), and there is more aspheric glass. If this doesn't mean anything to you, unbiased know this all helps it be a broad lens!

This is a very arresting focal length to do for, especially if cost and size are a inconvenience, so there is no perfect lens in this range. That being said, Sigma seemed to have conventional their experience with a previous 10-20mm to produce a highly refined and very helpful lens. If shooting at f/3.5 you will ogle some softness in the corners, but frankly it's not that limiting. Stopping down to f/5.6 helps a lot with gains in between, and it peeks at f/8-11 (maybe f/13 on a 6mp sensor) .

Coming from an 18-## zoom? You'll accumulate a whole unique perspective, an opportunity to inspect a novel world of photography, and catch to work with a lens of considerable better construction than a kit lens.

Coming from another ultra-wide angle? It may not be worth the switch (I sold my other one for a variety of reasons), but you almost secure the run of the Tokina AT-X116PRDXN AT-X PRO DX 11-16mm Ultra-wide Angle Lens for Nikon and you earn a faster aperture and more useful zoom range than first gen ultra-wides such as the Nikon 12-24mm f/4G ED IF Autofocus DX Nikkor Zoom Lens or Tokina AT-XAF124DXN 12-24mm Wide-Angle Lens for Nikon.

Bought this lens with the notion that if it didn't accomplish to a professional standard, I'd return it. I Esteem the security I win from Amazon with the 30 day return policy.

Long narrative short, I've shot about 200 floral shots stop up and macro equivalent. Virtually all are keepers--and I've already committed a number to gallery wrap canvas in 16x24 prints from Mpix. Got them today and they are, in short, phenomenal.

I am level-headed debating the Nikon 12-24 2.8 as I expend both a D90 and D700 to maximize my focal lengths given I have 20 or so Nikon lenses ranging in age from 2009 vintage to 1975 glass.

All are tall and I have three other Sigma lenses as well--none is as fun and factual as this one. When time permits and budget allows, I'll do a comparison of the Nikon 12-24 but let's face it--it cost three times as considerable and is generally considered Nikon's tour de force.

If you assume this f3.5 Sigma, I cannot imagine you will be anything but cheerful.

Good luck--I will be looking for additional feedback.

I compared performance and test images taken with the Sigma 10-20 f/3.5 against my Nikon 16-85 VRII, which I mediate to be my sharpest lens. The photos were taken with a Nikon D5000, tripod mounted, no digital sharpening, of fixed targets on my living room wall at about six feet. The targets consisted of newspaper at the corners and a spacious US contrivance in the center, with a variety of detail and some color. Illumination was provided by house lamps and a photo flood light. The photos were compared side by side at 200% enlargement.

The Sigma 10-20 was not as arresting as the Nikon 16-85 in the very center of the image at comparable focal lengths (16mm and 20mm) and apertures, although was very terminate by f/5 and nearly the same at f/8. At the edges of the image however, the Sigma 10-20 was as provocative or sharper and had better incompatibility at all f-stops tested (3.5-8) . I have no lens to compare the Sigma 10-20 to at shorter focal lengths but Imaging Resource tests exhibit salubrious to very estimable sharpness, similar to the older Sigma 10-20.

Focus hasten with the Sigma 10-20 is very rapidly and composed, similar to the Nikon 16-85. There is some variation in auto focus reproducibility but seems to be within a reasonable margin of error and will likely not be noticable in most photographs. The zoom action of the Sigma is smoother than the Nikon. The lens is somewhat larger and heavier than the Nikon.

Chromatic aberration/color fringing has been reported as being an explain with many wide angle lenses, including this lens. I will comment on this after shooting some high disagreement scenes outdoors if I feel it is primary.

This is my second copy of the lens. The first copy appeared to have a small assist focus spot at 10mm at short focal distances as indicated by variations in auto focus performance vs manual focus to enact optimal sharpness. Optically, the first copy appeared as enchanting as this one and likely would have been acceptable to most users.

First edit 9-30-09: Outdoor shots posted in the gallery. The lens performed well in the field yielding fine color and dissimilarity. Flaring is visible as the lens is tilted towards the sun. I primitive my baseball cap to shade the lens and would also recommend the lens hood in most situations. At 10mm, sharpness is acceptable at f3.5 in the center and quite soft at the edges. Sharpness at the edges seems fairly satisfactory by f4.5. Color fringing is quite evident in high difference areas approach the edges of the image however it was not so incandescent as to apppear in uncorrected 8x10 prints. Also it was quite easy to slit the fringing to a non-issue with CA correction using Adobe CS4. Auto focus was legal. Overall I'm quite blissful with this lens and I'd say it outperforms my expectations for sharpness and vignetting but I wish the CA was better controlled. I will support this lens, however the older version (f4-5.6) is reported to be as favorable or perhaps better in some respects so I'd recommend the f3.5 lens only if the constant aperature is of interest to you.

Share and Enjoy: