Sigma 10-20mm v Sigma 30mm

[Syd]

I have been asked to provide some 'Candid' photographs for a freind at their wedding in Ibiza in June this year. I figured that it was also a good excuse to get myself a new lens. Currently I have a D80 (which I am planning to change to a 200/300) with 18-200VR and a 50mm 1.8.

I was looking at the two sigmas as both seem to perform very well at their relative price points. My fear is that I think the 30mm would probably be a good bet for the wedding, BUT the 10-20 would be more useful for me overall - any thoughts 0r does anyone use either of these Sigmas?

[autopilot]

Not looked, but i would imagine the prime 30mm would be 'faster' (have a wider aperture) - better for low light, fast shutter speeds and nice shallow depth of field for portraits where the background is less than perfect?

I am think of getting a 50mm prime for my Sony - some bargains on ebay right now.

[this_is_gav]

They're 2 completely different lenses for 2 different tasks. The 30mm F1.4 is widely used as a portrait lens, while the 10-20mm has a less defined role, but can't be applied a lot of the time given the distortion such a wide lens gives.

I've got the 30mm F1.4 myself, and it's particularly excellent for full height portraits (the only thing I've used it for, but I've not had it a month yet). For closer, more personal portraits, the 50mm F1.8 won't be too far off, but you're going to have to stand a good way back to capture more of a person or miles back for a group.

Play with the zoom on that 18-200mm and see what sort of distance you're looking at.

I can't recommend the 30mm F1.4 enough, but it's value is lowered by the fact that you already own the 50mm F1.8 - it gives you more flexibility, but it all depends on how you intend to set yourself up.

[Syd]

Originally Posted by this_is_gav

They're 2 completely different lenses for 2 different tasks. The 30mm F1.4 is widely used as a portrait lens, while the 10-20mm has a less defined role, but can't be applied a lot of the time given the distortion such a wide lens gives.

I've got the 30mm F1.4 myself, and it's particularly excellent for full height portraits (the only thing I've used it for, but I've not had it a month yet). For closer, more personal portraits, the 50mm F1.8 won't be too far off, but you're going to have to stand a good way back to capture more of a person or miles back for a group.

Play with the zoom on that 18-200mm and see what sort of distance you're looking at.

I can't recommend the 30mm F1.4 enough, but it's value is lowered by the fact that you already own the 50mm F1.8 - it gives you more flexibility, but it all depends on how you intend to set yourself up.

Good to hear from a user. I find that the 50 is great for outside and indoor larger venues, but I tend to like taking candid indoor shots round the table at parties/gettogethers and find it too 'long' - sounds like the 30mm might be spot on for those uses too.

An obvious but good bit of advice though, I will look at the sort of focal legnths I use with my zoom.

Thanks for the advice

[Saracen]

I wouldn't have thought either were ideal for 'candids', though I guess it depends what you mean.

I've also had better luck with longer lenses than that for candids, because it's difficult to get truly candid shots if the people you're shooting see you pointing a camera at them. Most people either stiffen up or bolt. With those, you're either going to get a fairly wide shot, or you're going to be pretty much in their face with the camera .... which, incidentally, is likely to produce some unflattering perspectives on noses, especially with the 10-20.

I'd have thought your 18-200VR was perfect for candids. You can get in close if you need, but can hang back too, and it's a wide enough range that you shouldn't need to keep switching lenses (which means you'll miss half the candids while doing it).

My experience with wedding candids is that you need to be far enough away to be unobtrusive, while being close enough that you can see the action without the world and his wife wandering into shot. That suggests that a versatile zoom range is a huge boon.

Either lens may well be a good purchase, depending on what you need/want it for, but I think you'll need a better excuse.


Of course, it's just my opinion.

[Syd]

Perhaps candid was the wrong terminology, but I take your point. What I would like is pleasing DOF and sharpness like my 50, but a shorter focal legnth, so I guess I may have answered my own question, and the 30mm could be a good choice, I just fancied the 10-20

[Saracen]

Originally Posted by Syd

....., I just fancied the 10-20

Ah. I see.

In that case, let's see if I can help.

Oh, yes, gottit.

The 10-20 is a perfect addition to your lens collection, especially for weddings. You see, for those outside 'large-group' shots, you'll sometimes find yourself constrained for space, and the 18mm end of your VR won't be wide enough to get everyone in, so you'll need to go wider.

And, of course, for getting shots of the right people on a busy dance floor, you'll need to get close because of all the other people, and then, the 10-20 gives you the ability to still get a wide shot from very close range.

So really, it's absolutely, completely and fundamentally essential that you have one for weddings. Honest.







Is that any help?



Or better yet, you need two (one Canon fit, which you send to me to look after for you).

[Rhyth]

The Sigma 30mm f1.4 is a great, sharp lens even wide open. There's just nothing quite like f1.4 speed which is a great asset at a wedding and on a crop body this lens gives a perfect walk-around Field of view.

The Sigma 10-20mm Wide angle is also a great value lens, though not that fast for a wedding, so a good flash (not the in-camera one) in low light would be essential. At 10m there will be distortion towards either end so use wisely and at 20mm your not far off the faster 30m sigma. For your singular "candid" portraits I'd go for le Sigma 30mm f1.4 personaly. But both lenses are great and I have both now.

[Syd]

Originally Posted by Saracen

Ah. I see.

In that case, let's see if I can help.

Oh, yes, gottit.

The 10-20 is a perfect addition to your lens collection, especially for weddings. You see, for those outside 'large-group' shots, you'll sometimes find yourself constrained for space, and the 18mm end of your VR won't be wide enough to get everyone in, so you'll need to go wider.

And, of course, for getting shots of the right people on a busy dance floor, you'll need to get close because of all the other people, and then, the 10-20 gives you the ability to still get a wide shot from very close range.

So really, it's absolutely, completely and fundamentally essential that you have one for weddings. Honest.

Is that any help?

Or better yet, you need two (one Canon fit, which you send to me to look after for you).

Thank you for brightening up my man flu striken evening - lens is in the post

Originally Posted by Rhyth

The Sigma 30mm f1.4 is a great, sharp lens even wide open. There's just nothing quite like f1.4 speed which is a great asset at a wedding and on a crop body this lens gives a perfect walk-around Field of view.

The Sigma 10-20mm Wide angle is also a great value lens, though not that fast for a wedding, so a good flash (not the in-camera one) in low light would be essential. At 10m there will be distortion towards either end so use wisely and at 20mm your not far off the faster 30m sigma. For your singular "candid" portraits I'd go for le Sigma 30mm f1.4 personaly. But both lenses are great and I have both now.

Think that completely answers my question, thanks Rhyth, if I am to treat myself it will be with the 30, and poss get the 10-20 in the future, esp as I am relying on onboard flash atm!

[Bobster]

so u want to shoot someones wedding using 1 body... interesting

[Syd]

Originally Posted by Bobster

so u want to shoot someones wedding using 1 body... interesting

As I said, it is just a 'freind' doing some shots, the wedding is a relaxed affair in Ibiza and my sister-in-law and her husband are very cool and laid back and just want some nice shots. Basically I hope to provide them with something a bit better than snapshots (I am by self description a hobbyist amateur)

If an experienced photographer like Bobster could offer any pearls of wisdom I would be most appreciative (unless he tells me I need two bodies )

[Bobster]

Saracen pretty much hit the nail on the head with his first post..

also remember IS/VR isn't going to save ur butt when you need shutter speed rather than stabilzed images

[Syd]

Understood, thanks, i'm trying to find a cheap Sigma 18-50 2.8 to use for the week and then keep/sell on afterwards depending on how I get on with it, I think this in tandem with my 18-200 should give me a good range.

[Bobster]

Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 is about 178 on ebay

[Bobster]

18-200 is about 500? could prolly find a sigma 70-200 2.8 for about that..

[Saracen]

Originally Posted by Bobster

Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 is about 178 on ebay

And pretty good (by which I mean extremely good) , especially for the money, according to a friend that had one to test.