File :-(, x, )
Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 HSM EX DC Anonymous
Hi /p/, decision time for a wide angle lens.

I think the only 2 good options are the Canon EF-S 10-22 or the Sigma 10-20.

The Canon is 700$ and the Sigma is 500$ and comes with freebies like a neat little hood and a lens case.

According to reviews, HSM focus speed is fast, it's a premium EX lens so construction, finish and feel is great.

The Canon is 3.5-4.5 while the Sigma is 4-5.6 but the lowest I would go is 4.0 anyway. I think they're both sharp enough at the center, with the Canon leading a little bit at the borders.

Well aware about future compatibility issues with third party lenses, should I still get it?

Sounds like I'm just trying to convince myself the Sigma is good enough. Is it?
EXIF data available. Clickhereto show/hide.
Camera-Specific Properties:Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS2 WindowsImage-Specific Properties:Image OrientationTop, Left-HandHorizontal Resolution240 dpiVertical Resolution240 dpiImage Created2005:11:26 12:27:47Color Space InformationsRGBImage Width640Image Height296
>> Anonymous
Sigmas don't autofocus well on Canons.

How close will you be focusing? If not too close, this won't be a problem. Just lock it to infinity, or scale focus for other distances.
>> Vincent
The Sigma is awesome on Nikon bodies, (mostly because after crop its 15mm rather than 16mm) BUT i've only heard good things about the Canon 10-22

For 200$ i would go with the Canon (The lens hood is good for protecting the glass, thats about it)
>> Anonymous
>>113998

I'm not using it for landscapes, just indoors wide shots.

3 ft or so at my minimum?

Yeah, I heard about the AF issues with Canon when using Sigma or Tamron. Is it worth 200$? It's not like I'm shooting fast targets. Again, I feel like I'm just trying to justify getting the inferior lens.

Dammit.
>> Anonymous
I've played with and plan on buying the Canon 10-22. It's very nice.

BUY BUY BUY
>> Anonymous
Ah, shoot. Guess I'm saving up then.

200$ isn't worth the headache of a misfocusing lens.
>> Anonymous
This particular sigma was really built for Nikons (hell, I use one personally) because the only thing Nikon has to offer is 12-24 and ti costs more than the double of sigma. I do not shoot canon, but if I was in your situation I would try to get those 200 bucks or try to snatch used 10-22 (it should cost around the price of new sigma).

Now, if you were to shoot outside or in good light only (note, wide angle like 10mm was never for landscapes anyway) it wouldn't matter.
>> Anonymous
Save up and get the Canon one. You won't regret it.
>> Anonymous
>>114022

Off topic but do you mind posting some shots taken with it?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
Im thinking about a Sigma 10mm F2.8 EX DC Fisheye HSM.
Have you seen that? Its new.

Abort trap (core dumped)
>> Anonymous
>>114092

Doesn't the novely factor wear out fairly quickly?
>> Butterfly !xlgRMYva6s
>>114095
it does, he just doesnt know it yet.
>> Anonymous
Is the whole point of fisheye being able to capture 180 degrees? And then pull it back to "rectangle"?
>> Anonymous
>>114108
No, the whole point of a fisheye is to sell lenses to jackass skater kids so they can take pictures of other jackass skater kids.
>> Anonymous
>>114074
http://flickr.com/search/?q=sigma%2010-20&w=all

>>114108
indeedy. defishing can result in some very neat pictures imo, the basic distorted-as-hell-oh-wow-snowboardin'-cooldude look is just lame and overused. almost as rad as shooped lens flare.
>> Anonymous
I just bought a Sigma 17-70 HSM lens. The auto focuse isnt that fast (compared to my nikkors about-30% quicker imo) but it is smooth and quiet as hell.
>> beethy
I ordered the Canon 10-22mm today.
I used it in a store and it kicks butt.. can't wait to get it :]

Except some more TRUE HDR shots
>> Anonymous
Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Autofocus Lens, coupon code: PS1107G0L0G, price: $609.00

http://www.supercoupon.com/Coupons/Electronics/B%26H_Coupon_for_Canon/
>> Anonymous
What about the Sigma 12-24? It's nice too.
>> Anonymous
>>114109
Well, this, and I understand some scientists have some need for it.