Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mestre" data-source="post: 207343" data-attributes="member: 6032">Just to help the Sigma side <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" />You can check some pics in this thread <a href="http://nikonites.com/wide-angle/7690-sigma-10-20-f-3-5-pics.html#axzz2hY4XCwa3" target="_blank">http://nikonites.com/wide-angle/7690-sigma-10-20-f-3-5-pics.html#axzz2hY4XCwa3</a>I used a Sigma 10-20 f/3,5 and I only sold the lens when I jumped to FX. My sigma is a bit more expensive than the f4-5,6 and, honestly, if you can get the f4-5,6 you'll win on the filter thread (82mm CPL are quiet costly).I checked the Tokina and the best pro vs the Sigma is the constant 2.8 and better MTF wide open. The 10-20 gives a much more flexible lens and for landscape, which was the main reason for me to buy the ultra wide, i always shoot from f8 to f14.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mestre, post: 207343, member: 6032"] Just to help the Sigma side :) You can check some pics in this thread [url]http://nikonites.com/wide-angle/7690-sigma-10-20-f-3-5-pics.html#axzz2hY4XCwa3[/url] I used a Sigma 10-20 f/3,5 and I only sold the lens when I jumped to FX. My sigma is a bit more expensive than the f4-5,6 and, honestly, if you can get the f4-5,6 you'll win on the filter thread (82mm CPL are quiet costly). I checked the Tokina and the best pro vs the Sigma is the constant 2.8 and better MTF wide open. The 10-20 gives a much more flexible lens and for landscape, which was the main reason for me to buy the ultra wide, i always shoot from f8 to f14. [/QUOTE]

Verification