Sigma 10-20 or 12-24?

btw, correct me if im wrong, but you'd be getting 20degrees more view out of the 10-20mm if i calculated it properly, which now i think about it is quite conciderable
 
Oh heck - that price drop on the 12-24mm isn't helping my decision any!

The ONE thing putting me off just buying that one now is the issue of filters. I'm expecting to mainly use the lens for landscapey-type stuff, so how does one get around the issue of filters?

*edit* the 10-20 is available for £269.99 from OneStop.
 
Oh heck - that price drop on the 12-24mm isn't helping my decision any!

The ONE thing putting me off just buying that one now is the issue of filters. I'm expecting to mainly use the lens for landscapey-type stuff, so how does one get around the issue of filters?

*edit* the 10-20 is available for £269.99 from OneStop.

the 12-24 has a 2 part lens cap. There is a filter thread on the tubular section that can accommodate a screw in filter (or Lee / Cokin with adapter). On your 30d this will probably not obscure any of fov....
 
the 12-24 has a 2 part lens cap. There is a filter thread on the tubular section that can accommodate a screw in filter (or Lee / Cokin with adapter). On your 30d this will probably not obscure any of fov....

UPDATE: just checked - no vignetting leaving the tubular section on, on the 30d. Horror story on the 5d but there you go.
 
To complicate matters further, the Sigma 10-20mm is only £271.34 with free next day delivery from jessops.com if you use one of the 10% off codes (Camera Price Buster's code of CPB10PC or Quidco's code of QUIDCOTEN). And if you go through quidco.com you will qualify for roughly £7 cashback too.

For those who do not know, quidco.com is a co-operative type site which offers cashback via selected retailers. It is just like using affiliate links except that instead of the site owner keeping all the money earned it is shared back with their users.

They do charge a £5 annual fee, but this is taken from your earnings with them so if you make less than £5 then you just get nothing but are no worse off than had you not used their links. It can also take quite a while for the payment to be made to Quidco by the retailer.

As Jessops offer 3% back on the ex-VAT price, if you buy the 10-20mm lens from them this way then you will still get just under £2 back even after paying the admin fee.

More details here:
http://quidco.com/jessops/

Michael.
 
UPDATE: just checked - no vignetting leaving the tubular section on, on the 30d. Horror story on the 5d but there you go.

Hmmm...now I have a quandary then.

My reason for getting the 12-24 over the other was an aim in the long term to end up heading along the 1-series route. I guess the question I have to ask myself is whether there will be vignetting on a 1.3x sensor or not. :thinking:

On the filter front - I'd be looking at having to invest in the Cokin x-pro range
presumably?

I think I'm closer than I was to a decision!
 
Hmmm...now I have a quandary then.

My reason for getting the 12-24 over the other was an aim in the long term to end up heading along the 1-series route. I guess the question I have to ask myself is whether there will be vignetting on a 1.3x sensor or not. :thinking:

On the filter front - I'd be looking at having to invest in the Cokin x-pro range
presumably?

I think I'm closer than I was to a decision!

You'd certainly need the x over the p range. I really couldn't tell you how a 1.3 crop may be affected but i suspect that there could be some vignetting at 12mm.

I believe Joe suggested earlier in this thread that there was an alternative 12-24 to the Sigma - whether that was Nikon only i can't remember.

What i can say is that lens flare is incredibly well controlled and on the 5d i've been combining shots in CS2 for the ND grad effect.......
 
Yes it was Nikon only Jon.

Right - decision made - 12-24. I'll ring cameraworld tomorrow and see if they can get me one into Chelmsford for Saturday! (y)
 
Hope it works out for you - I'm still thoroughly enjoying mine! Good luck and happy shooting (y)
 
Cheers! I was determined to get the lens before we go away at Easter and at that price I can't justify waiting! Might have to take the EOS500 and some film along for the ride now, don't you think!
 
Definately - a whole visual feast coming your way :clap:
 
Good stuff matey.

Post some pictures that you have taken with it at some point as well, would be nice to see some results of your shiney new purchase :D
 
Yes it was Nikon only Jon.

Right - decision made - 12-24. I'll ring cameraworld tomorrow and see if they can get me one into Chelmsford for Saturday! (y)

They don't have any left in Nikon fit, hope you're not too late on Canon fit too :(
 
To complicate matters further, the Sigma 10-20mm is only £271.34 with free next day delivery from jessops.com if you use one of the 10% off codes (Camera Price Buster's code of CPB10PC or Quidco's code of QUIDCOTEN).

Michael.

The 10-20 is £370 on Jessops site though :shrug:
 
Good choice, if you still use film then a lens which can cover full frame without serious vignetting is a good investment.
 
I have been following this thread as I have a EOS5D and three 35mm EOS bodies and was wanting to go wider than my current 15mm widest lens.

Can I give some nods first;

Mij - great posts explaining focal lengths and their meanings. Although I knew most of this you also expanded on some technical differences that I was not aware of and did so in interesting and educational style. Thanks!

JohnnyReb - As you are on the same system your posts have answered some of my queries regarding Sigma lenses. Thanks also.

I had considered all of the following lenses:
Sigma's 10-20mm f/4-5.6
Sigma’s 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX
Canon’s 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5
Tamron’s 11-18mm f/4.5-5.6
Tokina AT-X 124 AF Pro DX 12-24mm f/4

And as far as I am aware they are all designed for smaller sensor sizes and some won't even fit a full frame sensor Canon. The exception being the Sigma’s 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 EX which seems to be the only one that will fit a full frame Canon DSLR and will provide a (fairly) unencumbered view.

Am I correct? Are there others that I have missed? Has anyone used a mount convertor and added another make? If so was it successful?
 
All contributors,

many thanks for the insights. I has originally logged on to ask a similar question....does anyone have the nikon 12-24? I wanted to know if there are any filter issues i need to worry about before buying. I currently use Cokin p filters.

Jas
 
Am I correct? Are there others that I have missed?

That's pretty much it I think. I looked around back in the middle of last year and the sigma 12-24 was the only option for a 1.3x's or full frame canon.

It's not a bad lens but it does fall way shot of something like a canon 17-40 in terms of resolution. Also, it's huge, rather heavy and slowish if you're wanting to use the auto focus. Not that slow AF is much of an issue at the wide lens. Shoot at f8 and the DoF will go from the edge of the world right into about 14 inches.
 
They don't have any left in Nikon fit, hope you're not too late on Canon fit too :(

I hope so too - e-mailed them this morning but no response. I'll call tomorrow.

*edit*

Dirty rats - the price has now gone back to £438 - not too impressed as when I mailed this morning it was still at £299.00

That complicates things a bit. Not so sure again now.
 
The thing to remember about focal length is that it is only a measurement of one aspect of the lens, the effect it has on the image you record is down to the sensor or film size, not the focal length. A 10-20mm lens is always going to be a 10-20mm lens whatever sized sensor or film is behind it, and whether the image it casts is larger or smaller than it can record.

On medium and large format systems 50mm is considered a wide, on a 35mm camera it is "normal", for a DSLR with an APS-C sensor it is a short telephoto, while on a digital compact camera it was would be a very long telephoto. The one thing they all have in common is that they the focal length is 50mm regardless.

I think the biggest sources of confusion about focal length comes from DSLR cameras being a successor to 35mm film, and in most cases retaining the same lens mounts and so lens compatibility, that people try to relate the focal length to a 35mm system giving it two meanings. This is why there was never confusion about the different effects of a focal length between other systems, because they were treated as separate and not compared in the same way.

It also does not help that even amongst DSLR cameras there is not one standard sensor size: Nikon ones are 2/3rds the size of a 35mm frame, Canon uses 5/8ths the size, while Four-Thirds system sensors are half the size. And that is just a rounded average. The 35mm equivalent field of view for Sigma's 10-20mm lens is 15-30mm on a Nikon, 16-32mm on a Canon, and 20-40mm on a Four-Thirds camera.

It would be confusing enough to consumers to have to understand two different systems of measuring lenses if Nikon and Canon used the 35mm equivalent figures for their DX and EF-S lens ranges. For companies like Sigma they would need to use different names for each mount they support.

Thankfully that manufacturers always giving the correct focal length is something that actually helps us because we do not have to worry about such things. A 50mm lens on a D80, for example, will give the same view whether it is a DX or DC lens or not. It would be a lot more confusing if you had two 50mm lensed and had to start wondering whether one is normal and the other a telephoto.

As far as I am aware the Sigma 12-24mm lens is the largest rectilinear (non-fisheye) lens you can get for a 35mm frame camera. A 10mm lens on this format would, as Joe said, be extremely expensive and suffer distortion problems.

Unless you need to work in both APS-C and 35mm systems the best advice is to ignore the 35mm equivalent numbers and just learn what the difference is between different focal lengths on your camera. Then if you do need to relate to a 35mm size, say while reading an article talking about film camera, you can convert in the other direction from that into the system you know and use by dividing the focal length by 2/3rds (for Nikon).

35mm is not in anyway "normal" or "right" that everything else should be considered a variant of, it is just one of many different sized systems used in photography, and there is no need to always think and relate in 35mm terms.

Michael.



thanks michael, very well explained, after reading it several times i think it's finally sunk in now :bonk: :D
 
Hi all, first ever comment...

If you're using the best possible quality camera (here by Nikon) you need to buy the best quality lens too - this is a game of 'weakest-link' and I found my D2Xs really punished what had been perfectly good lenses on my D100. So it's no option IMO it has to be the Nikon 12-24 as it's the best.

Canon people I know with the 5D or higher had the same problem and now only use L lenses

The 12-24 is a '18-36' equivalent on the D2x BTW even though it's a DX lens. The DX bit simply means as the image size produced can be smaller than for 'full frame' cameras, the lens itself is smaller/lighter than it otherwise would be
 
Back
Top