New Sigma UWA 8-16mm for APS-C

[Patrick Martin]

Anyone else see that Sigma announced the introduction of the new 8-16mm f4.5-5.6 specifically for APS-C (crop) sensors?! This will give an equivalent 12-24mm true UWA for crop body shooters. I'll be really curious on the pricing, but if the image quality is good, it will sure make the choice to get this over a Canon 10-22 really really difficult. The upshot as well is that it will likely bring down prices of used Sigma 10-20 copies.

 

[Andrew Ryan]

This looks like an awesome lens on paper but I like to see how it performs once it comes out. I still probably won't buy it because I have the 10-20mm version. I don't know if it's worth the trouble of selling the 10-20mm version to get this one.

 

[Tyler Burg]

Dang, it will be interesting to see some shots from photogs. Gotta be some distortion at 8mm, I mean I can see distortion at 10mm. 121 degree FOV sounds pretty awesome for storm structure. Definitely going to consider this wider lens if the test shots are good and sell my 10-20. Too bad its a f/4.5

 

[Darren Addy]

While this new lens is interesting, I'm afraid it will be a while before it will be available for actual purchase. No word on the price tag yet, either, but since it has the "space" currently to itself I would expect it to be priced at a premium. In any event, I always prefer to read multiple reviews and see some "real world" shots from buyers before jumping on a lens. The 8mm will give you a 35mm-effective 12mm on a APS-C (12.8mm on a 1.6x Canon).

I recently picked up a the Sigma 10-20mm (f4-5.6 version). I plan on using it on my Pentax K200D. This lens was designed for digital, but I was pleasantly surprised to read that it can cover a full 35mm frame (at least down to 13mm). So if I really need wider than the effective 15mm that I get on my K200D with the 10-20mm, I will just put it on a film body and get the wide capabilities of the new 8-16mm for free (and at f4 instead of f4.5).

 

[Jim Saueressig]

I would still be cautious of the QC problems that plague Sigma. They have good stuff but it's more of a hit and miss each year about whether or not you get a good copy.

Also consider that the 8-16 mm f 4.5-5.6 is still slower that the original Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC and a yet a bit more slow than the newer Sigma 10-20mm f/3.5 EX DC HSM ELD SLD which retains the 3.5 from 10-20mm

 

[Darren Addy]

I've also heard of the spotty QC of Sigma, but believe that most of the complaints I've heard are from some time ago. Of more concern to me is the reports of sharpness issues with the f3.5 lens. From the little bit I've seen and read (like: http://www.flickr.com/groups/sigma10-20/discuss/72157623480438084/
I think the f4-5.6 version provides the most bang for the buck. (If I was a Canon owner I'd ignore the Sigma and get the Canon lens). If you want to spend f3.5 money, then I'd recommend getting the Tokina 11-16mm f2.8 (assuming it is available in your camera's mount... it ISN'T for Pentax.)

Keep in mind that wider isn't always necessarily better. The 8mm is gonna make that tube look significantly smaller/farther away than the 10mm.