- This topic is empty.
Resolution of the sigma 10-20
-
Hi all! I bought a sigma 10-20 this weekend and took a few test shots around the city and at home. I’m a bit disappointed with the resolution of this glass. I compared it to my nikkor 50/1.4 (OK, that’s a bit cruel) and to my nikkor 18-70 (should be similar) and even if the images look sharp, the resolution is just awful I think. Does anyone have some experience with this lens and could you tell me if it’s normal or I got a bad example of the lens?
Sorry for using the postimage, I don’t really want to bother with uploading these anywhere…
I got one of these last week and I find it painfully sharp-
There are a couple of things I notice from your 100% crop, and your EXIF-
The first is that the backround appears sharp-
you were shooting at 1/320 sec,
maybe not fast enough to stop the action?What does the rest of the frame look like,
and have you tested it on a tripod,
so as to eliminate shake altogether?Second, were you shooting NEF or jpeg?
You have the sharpening set to high,
and if CS3 used the camera settings,
then maybe its too much for this lens-it hardly needs sharpening at all,
or at least, my one doesn’t-More of an issue for me is the waveform distortion which is apparent in the long wall in the backround-
it is possible to remove most of it in filter/distort/lens correction,
but there is usually some residual distortion at the edges of the frame-not so bad if you’re doing landscapes,
but not good for buildings-Maybe another detail of a static part of the subject would be better?
j
I agree with JB7 on the latter points regarding buildings and distortion. I don’t have enough experience on cropping, speeds, etc to comment but I do own one of these babies. I did a lot of research before buying one and what I took from the reviews were that this is a fun lens, for landscapes but can complicate buildings and all things known to be straight. They are pin sharp but Sigma lens quality is always questionable. I’ve only used mine a couple of times and the one time I used it for a building shot I had to do some serious work with the transition tool to correct.
Personally I can’t se a reason why the resolution of an image can be affected by the lens so maybe have a look a little deeper into your settings and methods?
Alan
Thanks, JB7. I tested it on tripod, but only in my room. I was shooting a map and tried to figure out, why is the text unreadable from 1m distance, where the 18-70 or the 50mm produced clear images…
You’re right, it’s always something else looking sharp that I’m aiming at, but even the sharp objects are not really impressing. I might be just too greedy wanting an ultra-wide lens with the sharpness of a normal prime.Here’s another example, where the light were not that awful and maybe my hands were steadier… I start to think that I will only shoot from a tripod with this lens.
You might be right that I applied too much sharpening in-camera and it ruined the already sharp images… I have to test this lens a bit more I think. Would I be able to go outdoors once!
So maybe I was a little hasty saying it needed no sharpening-
I haven’t used this lens a lot,
so the areas that was apparent on were usually higher contrast areas-This is a detail from a recent post,
https://photographyireland.net/viewtopic.php?t=7499Usual sharpening applied,
which isn’t much-This looks tack sharp. Why is the grain at iso 200? I think, this noise is what I’m talking about… I don’t know why is it there? Is it an ultra-wide lens thing?
I think the grain is as a result of my processing,
as much as anything else-I exposed for the sky,
and developed for the shadows-Just like the old days, really-
but in reverse-j
I have a 10-20 and it is pin sharp
i am just struggling to get to grips with the perspective and how not to through it all out with the lens
SteveD did a test using PTlens on one of the images coming out of the sigma, he reckons the distortions with minimal almost not worth worrying about
I have the 10-20 and find it MUCH sharper than the Nikkor 18-70 Kits lens (which is a nice lens).. It does show distortion at the extreme end ..which for landscapes generally is fine but if its a building or structure your likely to be closer to it and will have to correct it – but I think it could also be a case of getting used to the lens and learning to frame with it and figuring our the “characteristics”.
Here’s an example of a shot where I had minor correction to do
BEFORE
AFTER
Here’s another taken at the wide end.. with little more than a crop / some sharpening and a border added
I usually do a little sharpening in PP – but normally nothing corrective and have never found it an issue… I think JB’s points about your set-up seem to be quite logical.
L
These shots rock, Gill. As far as I can see, only the edges are curving a bit, which is still very good at this wide angle.
I was thinking and experimenting a bit today. I think, on one hand, I was expecting too much, on the other hand, I will need to use a tripod. The wide angle really means that I have to be very careful not to smudge the image with movements. At 20mm it’s quite easy to take tack sharp shots, but the 10mm is something I have to get used to. I bought the sigma, because the 18-70 was not wide enough and there is a terrible barrel distortion at 18mm. I have to use it for a while and try it in various situations to be able to tell, whether I’m happy with it or not. Seeing my credit card statement, I’m not too happy at the moment :)Thanks for the comments and opinions! It’s good to have a helpful bunch of people on your side.
Just reading the comments made me think about how this lens performs. I have two Sigma lenses in my collection, this the 10mm-20mm, and the 105mm Macro. I know that Nikon purists dismiss anything that is not a Nikor as second-best, but I have always found both Sigma lenses to be razor sharp on both the Nikon D70 and the D200.
The 105 f2.8 Macro is perfect. I can find no fault with it what-so-ever and I defy anyone to prove me wrong.
The 10-20 is not as fast, does not have a constant aperture and has barrel distortion at 10mm, but what fisheye lens doesn?t. However the barrel distortion is linear and very predictable and careful framing of the shot can make it less intrusive. By that I mean that if you look carefully through the viewfinder you can see how the straight lines distort at different angles. Changing one?s viewpoint can often produce a shot that is relatively easy to correct it in Photoshop without losing much of the frame due to cropping. As to sharpness, I find that shooting at f8 or above usually produces an image where just about everything from the lens hood to the horizon is in focus. For buildings I might sharpen just a little, but landscapes usually stay as they come out of the camera.
A couple of years ago I borrowed a Nikor 10.5 fisheye for a few days from a much richer friend; (You have to be fairly well-off to afford the Nikor 10.5). Anyhow, to cut an already long story short, I checked some of my old shots with the Nikor against more recent shots with the Sigma. What I found was that the Sigma shots were sharper and less distorted than those older shots from the Nikor. I don?t believe that the Nikor was faulty, nor that the Sigma is a superior lens, I just think that getting used to the lenses? characteristics improves one?s technique and produces sharper images.
So, work with your lens for a few weeks and I think you will grow to love it, I did!Les
Actually I wasn’t saying that it’s not a good lens, I was only concerned that I got a bad copy of it. Now that I was using it couple of times, it looks like I won’t like using it in harsh light, but for all other times it’s perfect. It’s very impressive at interior work and I think, this will be my new favourite for night shots as well.
http://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma10-20/pool/
Seems like a fantastic lens to me!It’s so fantastic that I’m not using my (excellent) Nikkor 18-70 any more for landscapes, only the Sigma. It really needs a tripod and careful setup to avoid blur and get the most out of it, but I shoot handheld in many cases.
Just for fun I’ll insert 100% crops of a recent shot just to compare with the earlier ones…
This is a handheld shot..
Yes, I agree, this is a great lens for landscape.
As they say on Blue Peter, here is one I made earlier
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
