Sigma 10-20 vs. Nikkor 18-105 @18mm

[SlimPaul]

Hey,

I'm planning to buy the Sigma 10-20mm for my D90 soon. I know this might sound like a stupid question, but I'm curious how the kit Nikon lens compares to the ultra-wide sigma at their common 18mm. I'd be grateful for some samples.

Thanks, Paul

edit: I might reconsider and buy the Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 which is said to be better than the Sigma. What do you think?

 

[timethief]

This is something i took not so long ago with my D90 at 18mm. have a look and tell me what you think.

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/landscape-cityscape/159183-tower.html?highlight=tower

http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/black-white-gallery/161997-infrared.html

 

[bdavis]

I dont think you can effectively compare these two lenses, they are for two different purposes. The 18-105 is a walk around kit lens, the 10-20 is a an ultra wide angle.

I own the sigma and it's a fantastic lens. Very sharp and produces nice colors/contrast. I would definitely say it's worth getting.

 

[Garbz]

Pincushion distortion vs barrel distortion. This is not a good comparison. Either you need the 10-20 range or you need the 18-105 range. Decide what you want more, then you'll know which lens to buy.

 

[SlimPaul]

Pincushion distortion vs barrel distortion. This is not a good comparison. Either you need the 10-20 range or you need the 18-105 range. Decide what you want more, then you'll know which lens to buy.

I already own the 18-105mm lens. I'm just curious how they both perform at the 18-20mm.
I'm probably gonna buy the sigma since it's over $200 cheaper.

 

[Garbz]

Well as I basically said, the exact opposite of each other. One has pincushion distortion and the other barrel distortion. Both are otherwise sharp. Vignetting is a bit of a problem on the 18-105 at wide apertures too.

The real question should be how it performs at 10mm though. Since if you're not interested in the 10-12mm angle of view then the lens is a waste of your money.