Sigma 10mm F2.8 Fisheye EX DC HSM A-mount lens reviews
reviews found: 13
 NIKO#44368 date: Sep-3-2019 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 10-20 f4.5-5.6 EX DC wide angle zoom lens. |
| price paid: | $250 Used/Like New |
| positive: | 180 degree angle of view from corner to corner. Reasonably sharp for a fisheye. Good flare control. Fast focus. |
| negative: | None really that I can think of. |
| comment: | What can I say? It's a 180 degree fisheye lens. It captures what it was designed to capture quite well. It is quite sharp and yes there is distortion. What fisheye lens doesn't have distortion? Great for those wide angle shots that, well, only a fisheye lens can capture. |
| Myst#42979 date: Jan-12-2018 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Samyang 12mm f/2 |
| price paid: | 350 Euro - Used |
| positive: | - MFD - Sharpness - Build-in hood - HSM |
| negative: | - Exposed front bulb |
| comment: | Fisheye lenses have always been interesting, they can make some really great shots, but most of the time you would be better off using a Ultra Wide Angle rectilinear lens. I chose to buy the Sigma fisheye because it has a maximum reproduction ratio of 0.3X, to give you an idea how large that actually is, some lenses are marked "macro" at 0.5X maximum magnification. First time using it to take Wide angle macro shots was quite disappointing, the distortion was really distracting, and the reproduction ration although really large wasn't quite large enough. The solution came quite simple, a 60 Euro Kenko 1.4x TC, since the TC magnifies the center portion of the image, the distortion wasn't as massive, and the maximum magnification became 0.42X. Using this combination the results were vastly improved, the distortion, although still present isn't as distracting, the sharpness is really good starting from F/4 all the way to F/11. Because the front element is exposed the flare control is not that great, and you really have to be careful when working close to the MFD. On the A200 it was really difficult to use, since the camera didn't have live-view and the focusing was sub par, I mostly used the full time manual focusing thanks to the HSM motor. on the A77II with it's versatile live-view the lens is much easier to use and the focusing is improved. I use this lens only for Wide angle macro shots, where the distortion it offers gives the photos a "bug eye view" feeling. For anything else where a UWA is needed I prefer the Samyang 12mm, which is just as sharp, smaller, and if needed you can add filters. |
| Atom Ant#40958 date: Nov-4-2017 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Samyang 8mm fisheye |
| price paid: | $220USD (used) |
| positive: | 180 degrees of fisheye fun Great build Pretty sharp Nice colours |
| negative: | CA Price |
| comment: | Does what it says on the tin. I'm had mine over 1 year & remain happy with it. I cannot imagine a reason to switch to a different A-mount fisheye. I'm a fan of the build quality based upon an incident that involved a tiled floor. All good. Before buying mine I vacillated for ages about the Sigma vs the Samyang 8mm. I have used a borrowed Samyang for a couple of days so I'll lay out my conclusions fwiw. The Sigma has most of the advantages: - Auto focus - And therefore SteadyShot works - A little faster (F2.8 vs 3.5) - Tiny minimum focal distance As well, the Sigma seems higher contrast to me but I could be wrong. I see no difference in sharpness. On the other hand, it loses to the Samyang in some areas: - CA. The Sigma has significant CA but, strangely, it seems a lot worse in RAWs processed from DxO than in camera JPEGs. The CA correction in DxO doesn't touch it. - Price. Yes, the elephant in the room! So, despite being very happy with my Sigma, I couldn't recommend it over the Samyang. |
| balacau#9153 date: Jun-18-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 4.5mm F2.8 fisheye Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 UWA |
| price paid: | 500GBP (new) |
| positive: | Fast & silent focusing Low distortion when used for landscapes Produces sharp images at centre F2.8, suitable for low light conditions |
| negative: | Hard to get hold of lens gelatin filters. A bight on the heavy side. |
| comment: | I was always thinking about getting Sony's 16mm F2.8 fisheye at some point but as I have no real intention of going Full Frame at any point, I went with this little corker of a lens and I have never regretted making that choice. I've used the lens mostly for extreme wide angle shots, where even the 100+ deg FoV of my Sigma 10-20mm UWA just couldn't hack it. The low distortion when used in this way makes the lens ideal for a city panoramic shot or something along those lines. |
| Eml#9143 date: Jun-16-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 600€ -> 845 USD |
| positive: | sharp F2.8 Great angle |
| negative: | no filter some CAs but they can easily removed in Lightroom expensive |
| comment: | Great sharpness! Would buy it again, of course! |
| Maddogg#7524 date: Jun-2-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3 color: 3 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 1 overall: 3.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 835 USD |
| positive: | +Sharp at close distance (center only). +Can produce very creative pictures |
| negative: | -Chromatic Aberration is very bad with this lens :( -Price -Too heavy |
| comment: | I love to play with this lens, since the distortion is amazing. Though I hate the chromatic aberration and lack of sharpness compared to my classic Minolta lenses. Still I manage to get some very cool pictures with this lens. For landscape, I would not recommend this lens. Not sharp enough! Price is also a killer. |
| Flubbe#7505 date: May-28-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | tamron 11-18mm |
| price paid: | 555 Euro (new) |
| positive: | Very sharp center from f/2.8 Wonderfull color and contrast at least from f/3.5 fantastic, solid build |
| negative: | expensive |
| comment: | You can use this great lens so creative! The content of your images will be enormous. Although its a very special lens an for that very expensive. But that does not matter if you know how to use it. Fantastic sharp in center, the corners are soft. Who wonders when you look at that (typical) distortion. The sigma answers my needs, so i just can rate it nearly perfect. It is the best 180 degree fisheye for APS-C. Perfect on APS-C its almost useless on FullFrame in my opinion... The autofocus is great: silent and accurate. Prefocus is not a problem at this focal length too. |
| Sk8r_AD#6851 date: Feb-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sony 18-70 Minolta 50 f/1.7 Tamron 90 f/2.8 Macro Minolta 100 - 300 xi f/4.5-5.6 |
| price paid: | 650 USD (amazon) |
| positive: | APS-C Very sharp in center Great Colors HSM Lens Quality minimum focus distance |
| negative: | Price umm nothing important to say |
| comment: | What a Fabulous Lens :D The World is going to be so damn interesting with this Lens it's so fun to use .. I'm so happy with it :) worth its Price |
| falconsusi#5944 date: Aug-30-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 15 fisheye (FF) Sigma 10-20 |
| price paid: | 700 (new) |
| positive: | 180 degree for ASP-C, sharp, QUIET, well made |
| negative: | price CA |
| comment: | This lens is so quiet that at first I thought the autofocus was broken since I didn't hear it moving. Now I am wanting more HSM lenses because of this. I am mostly a landscape photographer and I love this lens for nature shots, especially when looking down towards the ground. There is a lot of CA when taking landscape photos. I originally had bought a Sigma 15 fisheye which was for full-frame cameras. At the time I didn't understand the difference. I wasn't happy with it on the A700. When the Sigma 10 fisheye was announced for ASP-C cameras, I thought and thought and thought and finally acted and bought one. I am so glad I did. The distortion is amazing and so far I have not seen any flare. I highly recommend this lens to anyone thinking about a fisheye. |
| Aleq#5652 date: Jul-6-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - Sigma 10-20/4.5-5.6 - Minolta 17-35/2.8-4 - Minolta 28/2 - Minolta 85/1.4 |
| price paid: | 656 EUR (new) |
| positive: | * 2.8 * Sharp (above expectations, very good even at 2.8) * Flare (impressive) * Macro * Bokeh |
| negative: | * Built-in (not removable) hood (casts shadows when shooting close-ups, limits FF capture) * HSM (I guess it would be louder but lighter with screw-driven focus) = not really an issue :) * Gelatin filters |
| comment: | Short use results so far. I'm VERY pleased with this lens so far. Great sharpness, macro ability (you can almost touch the subject with the hood), perfect flare handling. One of my best lenses whatsoever. Works fine even on A900 when cropped. I really hate the non-removable sunshade, it would work like a circular fish-eye on A900 without that :-( |
| defi90#5639 date: Jul-3-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 1 flare control: 5 overall: 3.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony AF DT 18-70 F3.5-5.6 SAL-1870 F-717 (L shaped camera) |
| price paid: | 1020 USD |
| positive: | Fast focus Sharp Min focus distance |
| negative: | Price "It Does not zoom?" (by girlfriend:)) |
| comment: | This is my first not kit lens. Compared to them are really good. I like the new perspective, it makes some people sick. It is really interesting to see people get out of the photo (they think...) My previous camera the F717 was not a dslr but had a zeiss lens, and made really good pics. The pics quality is closer to this than to the kit lens. It really distortion, but it suppose to do it... I'll try to post some photos after I select some. |
| ggerbenn#5587 date: Jun-24-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | km 17-35 2.8-4 m 28-135 4-4.5 m 50 1.4 sig 90 2.8 macro sig 70-200 2.8 II sig 12-24 4.5-5.6 |
| price paid: | 599Euro |
| positive: | Sharp Ultra wide angle Min focus distance f2.8 Fast and silent AF Built Good bokeh Good flare controle |
| negative: | Price APS-C |
| comment: | A realy good fisheye, ultra wide, 180 degrees view. Did not like the sigma 12-24. The 12-24 was not as sharp as the 10mm. But the 10mm has far more distortion. I sold the 12-24. Now I was looking for a good ultawide lens for 360-180 foto's and the 10mm does a great job. I like the min focus distance aspecialy at 2.8! This is a keeper. |
| voets#5119 date: Mar-29-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 16mm fisheye |
| price paid: | 460 euro (new) |
| positive: | Ultra wide Fast & silent AF |
| negative: | Distortion, but that is inherent to fisheye lens |
| comment: | This is the only available rectilinear AF fisheye lens for APS-C sensors. It will give you an ultra wide 180 degrees field of view. At the edges you will have a good amount of distortion, but that is something too expect from a fisheye lens. The 16mm minolta fisheye is slightly sharper on the A900, but the 10mm sigma is a good competitor on the A100. The build is very solid, with fixed hoods to prevent flaring. These fixed hoods work against me in my case, since I want to put the lens in an under water housing behind a dome port. The hood is slightly too large to put it behind a 6" ikelite dome, it needs to go behind the large 8" one. The lens itself is 10% larger than the 16mm minolta. Some examples shots compared to the 16mm fisheye on A900 can be found in my photobook at: http://www.fotoboek.biz/gallery2/main.php/v/fisheye/ |
reviews found: 13
rating summary
- total reviews: 13
- sharpness: 4.54
- color: 4.77
- build: 4.77
- distortion: 4.31
- flare control: 4.15
- overall: 4.51
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login