Sigma 10-20 F3.5 EX DC HSM vs Sigma 10-20 F4.5/5.6 EX DC HSM

TheNissanMan

TheNissanMan

Messages
4,189
Name
Ryan
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm looking at getting my first UWA next week and from recomendations think I have settled on the Sigma, but...

Looking around the web there are two models available, the 3.5 and 4.5-5.6. As there is only £100 between the two it's really down to which is the better lens, is the 3.5 that much better than the other?

Does anyone on here have real life experiences of the two side by side or which wuold you recommend...
 
No question, f/4-5.6 all the way :)

The f/3.5 isn't better than the f/4-5.6 in any way, and it amazes me that people ever actually buy them, especially considering they cost MORE.

Here's a couple I shot with the f/4-5.6



 
Ryan

I know that your looking at Sigma for a wide angle but have you considered the Tokin 12-24mm f/4 II AT-X124 AF PRO DX...

I've had one (Tokina) as well as the Siggie 10-20 & to be honest - I prefered the Tokina out of the two...

Althou mine was for a Nikon & not a Canon..

Tis just a thought....
 
Thanks for the comment, I did set my mind on either then Canon or the Siggy. As much as I like to keep everything with the Canon badge on it paying so much more seemed a bit daft so siggy it is...
 
TheNissanMan said:
As much as I like to keep everything with the Canon badge on it paying so much more seemed a bit daft so siggy it is...
Click to expand...
I felt the same way with Nikon lenses, but the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 is a pretty outstanding lens, and the only non-Nikon in my collection.
 
zeitghost said:
hey ryan
there's a thread here that had some info about the two versions:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=227544&highlight=10-20
Click to expand...

And sample pics of my very own with shagged out white balance to boot :D

All I can say is that my Siggy f/4-5.6 was sharp and a great performer. For the price it was a no brainer.

urbexers (mad folk that run around abandoned buildings) pee their pants over the Siggy f/4-5.6 because it's so good at the price point.
 
The older Sigma is actually a better performer that the newer one.

Its not worth paying any more for it.
 
Looks like my mind is almost made up then, thakns for the input. I'll be settling on the the f/4-5.6 although still tempted by the Canon lol...

Guess it will be what hits in the pay packet and see what I order when the price list comes through lol :D
 
Thanks for the input guys, the order has just been placed with Kerso, or rather a BT has just been sent so should shortly be the owner of a Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6
 
TheNissanMan said:
Thanks for the input guys, the order has just been placed with Kerso, or rather a BT has just been sent so should shortly be the owner of a Sigma 10-20 f4-5.6
Click to expand...

You won't regret it. I bought mine from a member of this forum and it is a fantastic lens. I can't see as .5 of an f/stop between both lenses is really going to make all that much difference. It is probably just a ploy to trick people into spending more money. Good choice NissanMan :thumbs:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top