Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 - £387?

[TomE]

I've been wanting to add a wide angle lens to my collection for a little while now and I've had my eye on both the Sigma 10-20mm F3.5 and F4-5.6.

I've come across the F3.5 for £387 here, which seems a little bit of a bargain:

http://panamoz.com/index.php/lens/sigma/sigma-10-2...

What are people’s thoughts? Does that seem a little too cheap and does anyone have any experience of buying from Panamoz?

I'm just a little worried I'm missing something obvious!

Thanks!

[MartinP]

It does sound rather cheap. I can't figure out where that's being shipped from. I'm guessing outside of the UK in which case you could well be hit for VAT and other import duties when it arrives,

[TomE]

That's what I had orginally thought too, but their FAQ section says:

Website said:

Will I have to pay Import taxes?

No, all import taxes/duties/VAT are covered by us. We are responsible for all additional tax charges. The price you see when you place an order with us, is all you have to pay. The price displayed for items sold by Panamoz Electronics are inclusive. You will be able to see your final price before you confirm your order, when you have completed your order information (including your delivery address).

Nothing else is jumping out at me about it being dodgy, there aren't new versions due out anytime soon are there?

[CivicMan]

http://www.photography-forum.org/showthread.php/51...

[TomE]

CivicMan said:

http://www.photography-forum.org/showthread.php/51...

Thanks for that, makes for interesting reading. Looks like I'll just have to carry on saving and buy from somewhere else!

[RobDickinson]

The f3.5 lens is actually a poorer lens than the slower one, unless you need the extra speed.

mine never sees anything other than f7.1

[TomE]

RobDickinson said:

The f3.5 lens is actually a poorer lens than the slower one, unless you need the extra speed.

mine never sees anything other than f7.1

I was thinking I'd be using it handheld indoors quite a bit though so thought the extra speed would be useful.

Is it inferior optically then? The reviews I've read seem to suggest there is less vignetting and light fall off etc. in the 3.5, but then, would I even notice it that much?

Do you have any example shots taken with yours by any chance Rob?

[RobDickinson]

I've used mine indoors in low light a bit, at 10mm you dont have to worry about too slow shutter speeds unless the subject is moving.

I dont think the f3.5 is that much different but in tests it seems to be just edged by the slower one, I dont think it makes much difference, you either need/want f3.5 or dont..

These are from a few years ago at an indoor clip n climb on my 350D.





These are some general shots. Mine is decentered a bit and soft on the rhs and in the corners even stopped down, its an early one and I dont think that is typical. I think if I had a good one I would keep it but looking to change to a canon 10-22 or the 11-16f2.8, unless I go full frame.


Taylors Seascape 2 by robjdickinson, on Flickr


Shagpile Seascape by robjdickinson, on Flickr


Sumner Sunrise by robjdickinson, on Flickr

[TomE]

Some fab shots there, thanks for sharing Rob.

Maybe I should just save myself some money, get the slower one and invest the difference in some filters for it....

[RobDickinson]

Depends what you want to shoot, you can always stop the faster one down, filers are tricky on uwa lenses to

[TomE]

I've read about the banding that becomes apparent with polarisers, but presumably ND grads don't cause too much of an issue?

Whilst on the subject does anyone have any experiences of these variable grads? Are they passable or will they be about as optically advanced as the welding glass I currently use?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Polaroid-77mm-Fader-Variab...

[RobDickinson]

The banding is an issue with CPL's, you can use them but you do need to be careful at wide angles with blue skies.

ND's/grads work fine but the issue I mean is that at 10mm you need a wide filter system to work, the normal cokin P type 85mm ones will start showing up in the frame at 12mm. So you need 100mm filters really.

The variable filters work on using two polarisers together and this causes issues with wide angles (similar to the blue skies) and you will get a dark X across the frame if you use it wide for more than about 3 stops - theres a handy table on faders website somewhere...