A Site for Photographers by Photographers

Community > Forums > Nikon > Third-party Lenses > Nikon 10-24 VS: Sigma 10-20

Nikon 10-24 VS: Sigma 10-20

Joe Dempsey , Sep 17, 2009; 08:57 p.m.

I have been a Nikon man for a long time and generally prefer Nikon glass unless my budget forbids. Back before Nikon offered anything in the 10mm range, I bought a Sigma 10-20 and have been generally satisfied with the results. Now the Nippon brethren have thrust the Nikkor 10-24 on the market. Does anyone have any experience or information comparing these two lenses.


    1   |   2     Next    Last

Matt Laur , Sep 17, 2009; 08:59 p.m.

And while you're comparing, make some brain space for Sigma's new 10-20 with the constant f/3.5. I'm looking forward to sorting them all out when there's more to go on.

Zeeshan Ahmed , Sep 18, 2009; 12:14 a.m.

I am in the same boat Joe, Bought the Sigma about 2 years ago, not that there is anything wrong with it...I did not get a chance to play with Nikon 10-20, However Nikon quality should be much better...

Hamish Gray , Sep 18, 2009; 02:49 a.m.

I borrowed a couple of Sigmas before investing in the new Nikkor (I have also owned the Nikkor 12-24 and the Tokina 11-16).

My conclusion is that for my needs, the 10-24 Nikkor is the best. Going all the way to 24mm makes it slightly more versatile than the Sigma of course, but I also preferred the pics I took with the Nikkor. However if I already had the Sigma (like you do) I doubt I'd swap it for the Nikkor unless I really needed to go all the way to 24mm. And as Matt already pointed out, the new Sigma may be even better. I'd definitely wait for it before I bought the 10-24.

I posted a little test I did of the 10-24 a while back. If you do a search in PN I'm sure it'll pop up. The majority of my wednesday pics are taken with the 10-24 and here are a couple more examples. No doubt the Sigma will probably perform much the same, although I have noticed the Nikkor is quite resistant to flare.

example 1

Hamish Gray , Sep 18, 2009; 02:49 a.m.

2nd example

example 2

Hamish Gray , Sep 18, 2009; 04:28 a.m.

100% crop from example 1


Dave Lee , Sep 18, 2009; 10:59 a.m.

I too bought the Nikon 10-24 after having owned the Tokina 12-24 and the Sigma 10-20. The Nikon is very sharp across the zoom range, and handles flare well as can be seen in the above example. It is capable of professional results too.

Ryan Hamilton , Sep 18, 2009; 02:31 p.m.

well I don't have any test shots but I'd go the other way. I Like Hamish shoot real estate to the amount of 500+ shots a day and found the nikon's barrel distortion a lot harder to correct in PS than the 10-20 all the way through. I also find that the sigma has little distortion at 12mm and over where the nikon showed through 16-17mm and most of my shots are 14mm and under. I guess it comes down to what you're using it for and what your work flow is.


Chris Court , Sep 18, 2009; 06:18 p.m.

I've had the Sigma for a couple of years now, and what a fun little lens it is. Last weekend I took a demo Nikon 10-24 for a spin from my local store, expecting to see perhaps marginally improved sharpness/distortion/CA than the Sigma. What I actually found was a quite shocking softness in the corners at 10mm. From other's comments however, I gather that this is not typical, and thus suspect that the example I tested may have had some issues.

John Hinkey , Sep 18, 2009; 06:35 p.m.

See this posting and discussion with pictures. I too found the 10-24 Nikon's corners quite soft even stopped down, unlike some of the reviews and lens tests, so it could have been a bad sample.
- John

    1   |   2     Next    Last

Back to top

Notify me of Responses