Sigma 10-20 F3.5 Has anyone got or used this lens ??

[Roosta]

Looking for any feedback on this lens.

I feel I've norrowed down my search to either the Tokina 12-24 F4, or the Sigma 10-20 either F4-5.5 or solid F3.5

All above lenses get the right ticks, i've got an aps-c camera, with no imediate need to go full frame, yes down the track maybe but at this stage not an issue.

An users of these lenses, your feeback would be greatly appreciated.

Will be used as a Low light landscape lens, "chasing the sunsets" and the other usual stuff. Tempted to stay with Sigma, as i'm extremely happy with the Sigma 18-50 F2.8 I use as an everydayer-warkaround lens.

[PH005]

Hi Roosta. Guess you will be useing your Tripod most of the time in your low light landscapes, so is 3.5 all that important. I'm not sure. Maybe someone else will know. It sure is hard with so much on offer, isn't it ?

[Roosta]

To right, I still like the 10-20 4-5.6 (did you get yours), but just feeling the water, Yeap the tripod is my firend for landscapes. That tokina 12-24 F4 ??? like the focus system for hand held, so I don't bloody know which way to go. Probally wouldn't be that bad either way... I hate to make decessions about lenses. Next is a bigger tele, thats killing me aswell, ONE POWERBALL< and I'll be right >

[I @ M]

You will find that there are quite a few users of the 4-5.6 on AP (us included) and I really don't remember reading many complaints over the years.
Ours has been a perfect performer from day one.

[PH005]

To right, I still like the 10-20 4-5.6 (did you get yours), but just feeling the water, Yeap the tripod is my firend for landscapes. That tokina 12-24 F4 ??? like the focus system for hand held, so I don't bloody know which way to go. Probally wouldn't be that bad either way... I hate to make decessions about lenses. Next is a bigger tele, thats killing me aswell, ONE POWERBALL< and I'll be right >

Not yet Roosta. Hopefully this week. I have read, but cant remember where a comparo between the 10-20 and 12-24. There is quite a bit of difference in that 2mm .

[Roosta]

Not yet Roosta. Hopefully this week. I have read, but cant remember where a comparo between the 10-20 and 12-24. There is quite a bit of difference in that 2mm .

Yeap, DPreview have compare the older Sigma and the Tokina in the 12-24 also the Sigma 12-24, it looses it larger angle of view (102 - 63 Deg to about 99 - 61 Deg) I think, but states the Tokina has better CA and Vigetting in the corners, not that you cant fix that easily with PP any way. The Tokina 11-16 doesn't get a great right up either.

I do like the MF/AF switch on the Tokina 12-24, very cool idea. Don't like the fact that the Sigma is an 82mm lens in the F3.5 but 77mm in the F4-5.6, means new filters, Tokina is 77mm, same as my other two main lens. But I can get over that if need be.

I just gets down to the feel on the body and what my eye thinks really. will be going to my local on Thursday coming, they have all in stock. Which will work out well, I've booked a night shot course with them on the following Monday, can put it to the test.

[dredi1975]

As a sigma 10-20 4-5.6 user I can say thats my best landscape lens Ive used for last 2 years, and as mentioned above dont really think f/3.5 is so important in this type of photography and its cheaper than 3.5, few of my mates use sigma 4-5.6 and are very happy with it too!!