Sigma 10-20mm & 70-300mm APO

[ryosae]

helloo,

was wondering if you guys have any inputs on the abovementioned lenses?
do you think they can manage adequately? or are better lenses out there?

been to dyxum, but the reviews are giving headaches. one says one thing, the other says a different thing. and cant get an across the line comparison..

anw, appreciate any pointers..

ps. just a thought, wouldnt it be useful for us to have lens review corners? or sampe images.. like dyxum..

thanks again.. tgif

 

[zcf]

Both lenses seem good, I have the Sigma 10-20mm also.

Sigma 10-20mm is soft with distortion at the corner, and you can't expect much from a ultra wide lens like this, focusing sometime not correct also.

Sigma 70-300mm APO may be not very sharp at 300mm though, for zoom lens at 300mm, the sharpest should be Minolta 100-300mm APO or 100-400 APO or Sigma 100-300mm f/4.

There are rumour saying there will be a Sony 75-300mm APO coming out soon. :think:

There are some minolta/alpha lens samples in these two thread.
Images Samples from Lens for KM (Casual Shoots Welcome)
KMOS / Sony Membership Drive (Submitting of contacts)

 

[ryosae]

oops..
my bad
didnt read the thread title properly
ha ha ha

thanks zcf
which one are you using for the 70 - 300mm range?

 

[zcf]

oops..
my bad
didnt read the thread title properly
ha ha ha

thanks zcf
which one are you using for the 70 - 300mm range?

initially I got the Minolta 100-300mm (non-APO), then now have the 100-400mm APO.

 

[ryosae]

initially I got the Minolta 100-300mm (non-APO), then now have the 100-400mm APO.

erm which is considerably more ex than the sigma right? :cry:
hehe thanks zcf

hoping to take horses and landscapes with those two lenses
i hope they're good enough..
just worry abt their speed, sharpness, and color..
(wait a minute.. that's everything.. )

 

[zcf]

erm which is considerably more ex than the sigma right? :cry:
hehe thanks zcf

hoping to take horses and landscapes with those two lenses
i hope they're good enough..
just worry abt their speed, sharpness, and color..
(wait a minute.. that's everything.. )

Don't worry about image quality that much, unless you want to zoom in 100% pixel peeping, usually you can't tell as much different before zoom in. The more important thing on tele lens is how steady you can hold the lens though, AS/SSS help a lot, but good holding techinique or using monopod/tripod will help even more. Even how sharp a lens can be, if image blurred due to shake, any good lens also become useless :sweat: . Happy shooting.

 

[Trigger Happy]

i have the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO II Macro Super. haven't used it in a while, its a good lens, colour and sharpness good at all ranges BUT... AF is slow... thats also what i find with all my other Sigma lenses (28-70, 135-400, 28-200, 50 macro)

 

[ryosae]

Don't worry about image quality that much, unless you want to zoom in 100% pixel peeping, usually you can't tell as much different before zoom in. The more important thing on tele lens is how steady you can hold the lens though, AS/SSS help a lot, but good holding techinique or using monopod/tripod will help even more. Even how sharp a lens can be, if image blurred due to shake, any good lens also become useless :sweat: . Happy shooting.

true true.. so it's like if u wanna save, then better invest in a monopod and learn the techniques better, aye?

i have the Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO II Macro Super. haven't used it in a while, its a good lens, colour and sharpness good at all ranges BUT... AF is slow... thats also what i find with all my other Sigma lenses (28-70, 135-400, 28-200, 50 macro)

has it ever get to you? the slowness? makes you wanna go to the atm and buy a new lens str. away..

 

[DewaKarma]

true true.. so it's like if u wanna save, then better invest in a monopod and learn the techniques better, aye?



has it ever get to you? the slowness? makes you wanna go to the atm and buy a new lens str. away..

ahaks..get 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 lor.. hehehe...sure fast enough

 

[ryosae]

ahaks..get 70-200 2.8 and 24-70 2.8 lor.. hehehe...sure fast enough

haha my bank balance fast enough go down :bsmilie:

 

[DewaKarma]

haha my bank balance fast enough go down :bsmilie:

better lenses bah since u wan it 'faster' than the rest... if wan 'Fastest' of all G lens lahhhhh...;p ..white to be precise..

 

[ryosae]

fast enough ok, dont need the fastest.. hehe .. yet.. LOL

 

[ryosae]

I Think u should go all the way - 50-500mm or 170-500mm.

In terms of quality I'd say it is exceptional, but of course don't compare with telephotos that costs upto $12000 lah...

Those monsters has diameters that matches re-union dinner soup bowls!

:sweat: orh.. not a satellite dish yet..


500mm on a km5d will be like .. 750mm :what: *gulp
but basically i shud go for bust now?..
rather than buy from small time and in the end, will eventually buy big time?
oh no.. i wish life wasnt so full of choices..

..

 

[synapseman]

I've got both lenses. The 70-300mm APO is an excellent lens to use in bright conditions, and for the price, it's an absolute corker. Good contrast, and if you commonly print just 4R/5R, it's as good a lens as any out there. But when the light levels start to dip, there will be problems. Fully opened wide @ 300mm, images aren't sharp. Focusing will hunt (but not as bad as the older Sigmas, I feel). If they installed a focusing limiter, that would've been great. I've tried it for indoor fashion runway shoots, and the results were quite unspectacular (due in part of the small aperture, must pump up the ISO, which isn't the Alpha-100's strong point).

The 10-20mm is a great lens to have, especially if you need to shoot within very confined spaces. The distortion is definitely evident, but if you set the CCD plane parallel to your standing subjects, the image can still turn out to be acceptable. Edge softness is an issue though. Very bad when opened wide. Very, very bad. BUT again, with a little USM and printed on 4R/5R, ordinary folk will find the image quality acceptable.

When you stop down the lens (like for landscape), the results are like POW! Good enough to impress your friends.

Good or no good, I've actually used these lenses to shoot weddings and thus far, nobody has had issues with the final results.

 

[ryosae]

hey thanks..
think im quite set on 10 20 sigma
now considering the zoom
ya.. thinkg abt what everyone has said

 

[tokrot]

hey thanks..
think im quite set on 10 20 sigma
now considering the zoom
ya.. thinkg abt what everyone has said

I dun have 10-20mm sigma so no comments.. But as for zoom lens Sigma 70-300mm f/4-5.6 APO Macro Super II. You can check my Zoo Gallery for samples. All of them were taken with the sigma 70-300 zoom lens..

 

[Trash]

Also consider the KM 11-18, if you can find one. It's quite distortion free compared to the Sigma.

Comparatively, the build of the KM is quite close to the Sigma. But I don't really like that of the Tamron.

Also I have tried to use the KM100-400APO, Sigma 170-500. Focusing is not that easy at low light. Perhaps you should get a starter telezoom and save up for a 80-200G plus TC.

 

[ryosae]

hey trash.. i found one km 11-18,
but why do u think it's better than the 10-20?
umm.. i tot distortion comes with wide angle naturally

 

[Trash]

I am not referring to the natural distortion due to perspective. But barrel and pincushion type, this is a rectilinear and not a fisheye lens afterall!

Check out the review by Kenrockwell, use the Tamron as a guide. But just keep in mind that IMO the KM version has much better build than the Tamron and is probably on par with the Sigma.

My guess is that each has it's own beauty. Take your time to decide.

 

[TME]

I use the Minolta 100-400 APO... the colour is excellent, sharpness excellent... the only draw back is that the lens AF is very slow... and that's because the entire lens barrel moves when focussing... this makes it very heavy as the motor has to drive all the elements within.... also it's not quite so versatile cos at 100mm it's really too long to bring on a travel except when u anticipate very long distance shooting... a 70-300 or 75-300 would be a lot more versatile, not to mention a lot lighter and more compact... and much cheaper too... i've not made up my mind to get a 70-300 but it's darn tempting... especially when there are copies going for less than $300...

EDIT: Forgot to add that for the Minolta 100-400 APO, the minimum focus distance is a super long 1.8m... so it's really for telephoto and nothing else...