Sigma or Tamron UWA - Canon mount

[mikew09]

OK, I am about 2 3rds saved for my UWA lens and have been looking at the Sigma 10-20 (a very popilar lens) and the new Tamron SP AF 10-24 UWA lens. I have read the dpreview site reveiw on the Tamron against the sigma and the review ranks it favourable but I have also read a couple of forum threads with not such glowing reports mostly around sharpness although barrell distortion is considered much better controlled on the Tamron.

Have spokem to quite a few others who swear by the sigma but as the Tamron is a realtively new release in comparison I have not spoken to anyone in person who has used the Tamron.

Team, any members out there that have physically compared these to lens.

Thanks, Mike

[Gollum]

Check them out for yourself!

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/R...4&SampleComp=0

If I have the correct lenses (if not just select them from the list) you can see the difference between each lens. While this configuration is with them opened up wide (worst case) you should also check them out at f8.

PS: I would recommend you look at the Canon 10-22, which I have, and love.

Hope this helps.

[Tatts]

If you do go for the Sigma you can get C R Kennedy to price match a grey price. I bought one from them last month for $518 (delivered grey price + GST) delivered in the post the day after i ordered it.

Also, this site has a comparison between a heap of UWA lenses, including the two you are considering
http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...ron_tokina.htm

[mikew09]

If you do go for the Sigma you can get C R Kennedy to price match a grey price. I bought one from them last month for $518 (delivered grey price + GST) delivered in the post the day after i ordered it.

Also, this site has a comparison between a heap of UWA lenses, including the two you are considering
http://www.juzaphoto.com/eng/article...ron_tokina.htm

Thanks Tatts, interesting review and shows the more common comments on the Tammy and that is it is a bit softer than the Sigma. One thing I did not know was there are two versions of the Segma 10-20. Thanks - helpful.

[R1titan]

Ive used many UWAs and the one ive settled on for APS-C is the Siggy 8-16, its a lens worth checking out

[mikew09]

Ok, so I have decided it will be the sigma 10-20. Thanks to tatts, this thread made me aware there are now two versions of the Sigma 10-20 the 10-20mm EX DC HSM f/4-5.6 and the new version released last yr Sigm 10-20 EX DC HSM f/3.5. Have read mixed reviews on whether the new build is better than the former 10-20 lens.

Any experience out there on the difference versions would be much appreciated. My reason for purshcaind a UWA is usage mostly for landscapes and the like - I really do not do much portrait or architecture, well at this point.

Any feed back greatly appreciated.

[mikew09]

Ive used many UWAs and the one ive settled on for APS-C is the Siggy 8-16, its a lens worth checking out

Thanks for the suggestion. Was quite interested in this lens when I started reseaching it. Problem is I am looking for specifically at a UWA for landscapes type photography and the 8-16 design does not allow for adaptor rings for filters etc such as GND style filters. Pity as the lens is highly regarded.

[Scotty72]

I can't really comment on the Tamron but, after comparing the siggy 10-20 (f3.5 version) and the canon 10-22, I opted for the siggy and I am very happy with it.

Scotty

[mikew09]

I can't really comment on the Tamron but, after comparing the siggy 10-20 (f3.5 version) and the canon 10-22, I opted for the siggy and I am very happy with it.

Scotty

Thanks Scotty - Read a cople more reviews and they put the new f3.5 a tab in front the ealier version and of course then you have the benefit of the larger aperture which goes without saying. Thanks again for the info mate.

[mikew09]

Just a bit of a bump to see if there is anyone with some comparison on the 10-20mm EX DC HSM f/4-5.6 and the new version released last yr Sigm 10-20 EX DC HSM f/3.5 ????

Feedback appreciated.

Mike

[kiwi]

Yes, they are both 10-20, ex dc hsm but the latter Is faster then the former by 1/2 stop.

No problem thank me later

[davearnold]

I would thank Kiwi twice for that post if I could.

Looking at the F3.5 myself ( amongst a heap of other stuff I would like )

[William]

I have the older Siggy 10-20 f4/5.6 , I hear the new one is a lot more expensive and I'm wondering why you would need a fast Widey Especially seeing most times it's used on a Tripod anyway At or around the Golden hours PS: Anyway who takes Landscapes at 3.5, PPS, Please correct me if I'm wrong or I'm missing something - Bill

[PH005]

I agree with William. Go the f4/5.6. I did, great lens.

[mikew09]

Yes, they are both 10-20, ex dc hsm but the latter Is faster then the former by 1/2 stop.

No problem thank me later

Thanks Kiwi :-). But is one better than the other IQ wise etc. I want it mostly for landscape so the wider aperture may not influence my decision a great deal in view of price difference.

[kiwi]

Im not sure, I dont have either lens, but you'd hope so, certainly Sigma's overall quality has improved over the last year or so.

Im sure DPReview etc have done the analysis

[William]

From what I'm led to believe , No difference in IQ , This is coming from another forum on the subject a while ago when the new one was released , Cant remember the forum now tho, But it made me think , They were of the opinion of Why !! have a 3.5 widey , Mind you from experience with mine it would be hard to beat for the price and IQ (The older one ) You are going to get some drop off in IQ on the edges at full wide , Just trying to help Mike

[davearnold]

I saw a really good review and compared the 2 sigma's with the canon and another 10-20 range lens., just had a look for the review but could not find it.

From memory, overall the canon was marginally better then the 3.5, which was marginally better then sigma 4/5.6 with the other one coming in 4th.

Why would I go 3.5 over the others .... althought landscape would be main purpose, could see some use for people photos, outside under shade etc, and lower F, would have some benefits.... plus you can always go up in F stops if you want, just gives a few more options.

Cheers

[kiwi]

4-5% with a bullet though - next year it might hit 10%, the year after 20%

[William]

I've taken people shots with the widey , It's not a good idea , The distortion at the wrong angle can give a very big distorted bum etc