Hey guy’s im back, here in forums im planning to buy wide angle lens which one you can recommend? Do I still need to buy a sigma brand or a canon? What are the differences
I’m interested to buy this lens when I saw this shoots that was posted below, kindly click the link..
I use the sigma 10-20mm on my Nikon D3. I recommend it as I have given mine a terrible beating over some pretty rough country and standing out in water and it still goes great
I've not used the Cannon but I highly recommend the Sigma 10-20mm. I also follow a few landscape photographers on flickr who have magazine covers to their credits and they have the sigma's as well. I think the big difference is costs. I researched the lens options quite well and in comparison tests the Sigma seemed equal but was near half the cost so ultimately better value.
I used to have a Sigma 10-20mm but I sold it because I didn't use it much. Right now I have a 28-135 and a 70-200 f/2.8. I am trying to sell the 28-135 in favor of a 17-50 f/2.8. Since 17 isn't much narrower than 10, I figure I can always do a panoramic shot since most wide angle stuff ends up being static subject such as landscape anyway. Take a pic, turn the camera a few degrees and take another. Then, stitch them in Photoshop. Seems reasonable to me but then again, I don't do a lot of wide angle stuff. In terms of the Sigma, it's a pretty good lens for the few times I used it.
I use a Tokina 12-24mm f/4 and absolutely love it. The original version runs $400 with free USA shipping from Adorama and the new Mark-II version (supposedly has better flare resistance) runs $500 with free USA shipping.