Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Nikon Lenses

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old May 18, 2010, 5:52 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by echinacea View Post
I am also concerned about the CA at f2.8. it seems to be high..

Out of curiosity, why is it that you need f2.8 for a superwide angle lens??
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2010, 5:54 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
pbjunkiee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Pensacola Fl
Posts: 914
Default

Even at 2.8 the thing is tack sharp.

__________________
SportsShooter
www.85zero.com
pbjunkiee is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2010, 5:56 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
shoturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Frankfurt AM
Posts: 11,348
Default

If you shoot at lower light like some of PJ's shots. 2.8 is helpful. Not always needed but helpful at times.
__________________
Super Frequent Flyer, no joke. Ex Patriot and loving it.
Canon Eos 60D, T1i/500D, Eos1, Eos 630, Olympus EPL-1, and a part time Pentax K-X shooter.
shoturtle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2010, 5:57 PM   #14
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

and with the short focal length you can usually keep much of the scene in focus even at 2.8.

but really the 2.8 is not the great thing about the 11-16, its the low distortion and optical quality, very sharp ultrawide.
__________________
MyFlickr
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2010, 7:27 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

I have the sigma 10-20 and have never even tried using it wide open. I'm typically at f5.6-f8. I never use the lens indoors, though.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 18, 2010, 7:48 PM   #16
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

which sigma 10-20 you have rj? the variable or constant aperture?
__________________
MyFlickr
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2010, 4:27 PM   #17
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by echinacea View Post
I am also concerned about the CA at f2.8. it seems to be high..
BTW CA is corrected inside some Nikon dSLR... automatically
NHL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2010, 7:50 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
rjseeney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Taylor Mill, Kentucky
Posts: 2,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hards80 View Post
which sigma 10-20 you have rj? the variable or constant aperture?
I have the older, variable aperture version. It is sharp, and I love the way it renders color. Nice deep blues, very punchy. I haven't used it much recently, as I've been mostly shooting sports.
rjseeney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 19, 2010, 8:17 PM   #19
Super Moderator
 
Hards80's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Cleveland, OH
Posts: 9,046
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rjseeney View Post
I have the older, variable aperture version. It is sharp, and I love the way it renders color. Nice deep blues, very punchy. I haven't used it much recently, as I've been mostly shooting sports.
yea, that one actually has a better reputation than the new constant aperture model.
__________________
MyFlickr
Hards80 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:24 PM.