11-28-2011, 10:13 AM
[quote name='Rover' timestamp='1322461349' post='13294']
Sigma 20/1.8 doesn't seem to perform decently until stopped way, way down, and in this case even the not so hot Voigtländer seems like a deal (and much more compact).
Is Tokina 17/3.5 really that bad?
[/quote]
One usually uses 20mm on FF stopped down, the plus for the Sigma is that you CAN open it up where you can't open the others. And in the center it performs decently, borders being not important with a shallow DOF image. And you can shoot very close with it too.
So, sure, it is not perfect. But one should not really care about that, it is a lens with a lot of photographic potential.
I find the Voigtlander quite hot, actually. Owners always seem to love it. Even wide open.
The Tokina "that bad"? Bad as what? Lots of Tokina CA, of course. And quite a bit of barrel distortion, and very wide.
Sigma 20/1.8 doesn't seem to perform decently until stopped way, way down, and in this case even the not so hot Voigtländer seems like a deal (and much more compact).
Is Tokina 17/3.5 really that bad?
[/quote]
One usually uses 20mm on FF stopped down, the plus for the Sigma is that you CAN open it up where you can't open the others. And in the center it performs decently, borders being not important with a shallow DOF image. And you can shoot very close with it too.
So, sure, it is not perfect. But one should not really care about that, it is a lens with a lot of photographic potential.
I find the Voigtlander quite hot, actually. Owners always seem to love it. Even wide open.
The Tokina "that bad"? Bad as what? Lots of Tokina CA, of course. And quite a bit of barrel distortion, and very wide.