Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6

Hi all,

This may be a long shot for my first post but I was wondering if anyone had tried the Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM for Four Thirds. It was released quite recently I believe. My local camera shop says when their stock arrives, it will be less than one third the price of the Zuiko 7-14mm. Does this sound correct? (being in Australia we have to wait longer than others for new toys) I realise my choice in equipment has put me in a minority group but if anyone has any useful knowledge or experience with this lens I would appreciate it very much. I have intentions to use it underwater if it's any good, as most of my other (very wide angle) options come at prohibitive prices.

Greg

Hi Greg,

You are going to have two problems, first the lens diameter is smaller than the Olympus 7 to 14 zoom and larger than the 11 to 22 zoom, which means you will need a custom or altered zoom gear to move the lens. Second the shorter lens length may not work well or at all with the 7 to 14 zoom lens dome port extension tube that moves the dome port away from the housing to accommodate the long lens. You may be better off looking for a used Olympus 11 to 22 zoom or a fisheye which does not require the extension tube.

Be aware that the fisheye is a harder lens to master than the narrower zoom lenses.

Phil Rudin

Thanks Phil,

Seems like the Sigma is more trouble than it's worth. Is it possible to successfully put the Zuiko 11-22 behind a dome port? According to Olympus' website, it requires the PPO-E02 flat port. I checked the Athena site and had no luck there either. What is the physical limitation preventing me from using a dome port with this lens?

Thanks for your help,

Greg

Greg,

I have used this lens (11 to 22) underwater many time with great results. The lens was stolen during a trip to Spain and I have replaced it (along with the 14 to 54) with the 12 to 60 zoom which is my prime above water lens. I use the 12 to 60 about 90% of the time above water and I have also used it underwater with the same port and extension tube. At this time no gear has been made for this lens but it has a great range of coverage, focuses down to eight inches across the entire zoom range and at the long end is about 1:2.5 or about two and a half times life-size.

The 11 to 22 works quite well with the Olympus dome port and the 7 to 14 zoom extension tube. The problem here is the the extension tube comes with the zoom gear for the 7 to 14 and you will need to buy the 11 to 22 gear as an extra item. The extension tube is around $300.00 and the gear is around $80.00 for the Olympus housing. With Iklite the port, extension and gear will be less.

Phil

iam thinking about replacing my nikon 12-24 with this one.

some more ppl did the same ???

anymore comments about this lense over and under water !!??

TIA

iam thinking about replacing my nikon 12-24 with this one.

some more ppl did the same ???

 

anymore comments about this lense over and under water !!??

 

TIA

While this thread started as relating the lens on the Four Thirds format, n@utilus' question relates to DX on the Nikon I guess.

I have the 10-20mm Sigma on a d200, and I have found it excellent. It is quite a bit wider than the 12-24 nikkor and focuses closer too. I tested them both, and sharpness-wise, on balance I found nothing in it.. certainly nothing that made me want to buy the nikkor. You just need to make sure your housing manufacturer makes a zoom gear for it.

Lots of folks seem to like the 10-17 Tokina fisheye zoom, but I haven't tried it.

hmmm,seems some ppl (kenrockwell) say its too soft /not so sharp at the corners and i read in another forum that many ppl had it send back to sigma for correction but after that it was ok.

hmmm,seems some ppl (kenrockwell) say its too soft /not so sharp at the corners and i read in another forum that many ppl had it send back to sigma for correction but after that it was ok.

I think you can find all sorts of opinions regarding a specific lens, depending on what kind of photography people use it for and what they value.

Personally, I like the Sigma a lot for UW use, but perhaps I got a good one... Don't make the common mistake of thinking that reccomended lenses for topside automatically will be great UW. Sometimes they are, sometimes not. And it's not only the lens you have to consider. The housing and especially the port must be put into the equation.

With my Hugy FE dome, the 10-20 produces sharper corners than the Nikon 12-24 do. To get acceptable results with the Nikon lens I needed to add an extension to the port and a dioptre to the lens. So for me the choice was pretty simple.

If it was for land-use only, I might have gotten the the Nikon 12-24 instead. But I'm not sure, because I didn't really compare them for topside use.

BTW. Why are you unhappy with your 12-24?

cheers

/christian

no iam not unhappy with my 12-24. but i got it for a very good price and i could sell it again for a good price.

that would give me some extra money cause the sigma is cheaper and i would get 2mm more with it.

...and i would get 2mm more with it....

and in this case 2mm=about 9degrees extra...the nikon at 12 is 99 degrees, the Sigma on a nikon chip = 108 degrees.

post number 6 on this thread has links to a number of wetpixel discussions on the 10-20.