Does anyone know if the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM is compatible with the Canon 400D. I am getting conflicting answers from people. Thanks

I need a good wide angle lens for taking architecture and landscapes. This one was recommended and is a good price but I have doubts as to whether it will fit the 400D.

Sigma Zoom Wide Angle 10-20mm f/4-5.6 EX DC HSM Autofocus Lens for Canon Digital EOS
S4L #: SG1020F4CA | Mfr. #: 201101 Price: $ 439.95

I'm going to have to disagree with that. Even though the lens will fit on to the camera its reverse engineered.

The lense fits and works good. There are other products that have been reverse engineered also and they work too.

http://www.pbase.com/lightrules/uwatest
Jan 27, 2006. Tested here are the only two UWA lenses available in Canon mount (for APS-C sensors) that begin at 10mm (16mm FOV). Both are obviously popular choices that, by and far, receive high praises and excellent reviews. The 10-20 comes equipped with HSM and is a part of Sigma's "EX" pro-grade series; the 10-22 comes with Canon's USM and is not designated as an "L" pro-grade lens. There are a good number of crops to view in this test, so please take your time.

Quick comments:
*Sigma 10-20 $480, Canon 10-22 $690 [BH Pricing]. The Sigma is 70% the cost of the Canon (and includes an EX petal-type hood and EX black carry pouch).
*The Sigma renders a warmer tint (with the Canon being cooler); not a big deal, especially if shooting RAW.
*Under harsh lighting conditions (see Test3), the Canon fares better.
*The Canon tends to have slightly more "pop" out of the camera.
*Both yield solid center and edge resolution performance with the Sigma slightly better.
*The Canon has better flare-resistance characteristics.
*Distortion is present (especially at 10mm wide open) for both lenses but very acceptable being UWAs.
*CA is extremely well managed by both, with the Canon (arguably) being slightly better.
*Light fall-off is "acceptable" for both lenses at 10mm wide open; by f8 it's "negligible."
*The Sigma's AF is swift and silent (due to the HSM unit); it is also very accurate.
*The Canon's AF is "swifter" and also silent (due to its USM unit); it is also very accurate.
*The focus ring on the Canon is small, gritty, tight, and less refined than the Sigma (which is buttery smooth).
*While the Sigma is "only" 3 ounces heavier than the Canon, when each lens is "in hand" you can actually feel the difference. The Canon "feels" much lighter.
*Overall, these are 2 impressive UWA lenses with the Canon being IMO slightly better optically, though the build advantage goes to the Sigma. FWIW, I've reviewed countless full-frame captures of each lens both on screen (and printed out some comparison 11x14's), and by and far, it's EXTREMELY HARD to see any meaningful difference, save for the difference in color tone. If you shoot in RAW, it isn't an issue at all. Both lenses will satisfy as your UWA lens in your bag. And if you don't mind starting at 12mm, the Tokie is a VERY good one too.
*Note to D60/D30/10D owners that the Canon is an EFS mount and will NOT fit your body.

http://www.seaoptic.com/products/slr/nexus_400d.html
Notes: For your wide angle work with this Canon EOS camera we recommend this excellent Sigma 10-20mm 102 degree ultra wide lens over the Canon 10-22mm lens. A dedicated ultra wide angle lens for digital SLR cameras. It has a super wide coverage up to 102.4 degrees. Silent drive, compact and superb construction. The optics on this 'digital only' ultra wide lens are superb and especially considering for the bucks. An outstanding lens and in my view a superior lens to the Canon 10-22mm lens. Personally I own this outstanding lens, (with Nikon mount) and it works very well underwater. Includes Sigma lens case and petal type lens hood.

http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?p=5351313
http://www.flickr.com/photos/86954076@N00/
Unless you're adamant about owning the same brand as your camera, ie: Canon, Nikon, etc, you will not go wrong with the Sigma.The build and image quality of the Sigma 10-20mm is just as acceptable as a super-wide lens with Nikon or Canon stamped on it. Just my opinion!! See sample images at above links.

I would love to drive a BMW740 I , I cannot afford it i have a toyota corolla which takes me "where i want to go with no problems".I mean not in style or luxury but i reach my destination on time and safe.

Whether it's rebuilding a car engine or diagramming a sentence, people can learn about many things simply by taking them apart and putting them back together again. That, in a nutshell, is the concept behind reverse-engineering—breaking something down in order to understand it, build a copy or improve it.
A process that was originally applied only to hardware, reverse-engineering is now applied to software, databases and even human DNA. Reverse-engineering is especially important with computer hardware and software.

Example of reverse-engineering involves San Jose-based Phoenix Technologies Ltd,Cyrix Corp. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc,

Few operating systems have been reverse-engineered. With their millions of lines of code—compared with the roughly 32KB of modern BIOSs—reverse-engineering them would be an expensive option.

To protect against charges of having simply (and illegally) copied IBM's BIOS, Phoenix reverse-engineered it using what's called a "clean room," or "Chinese wall," approach.

First, a team of engineers studied the IBM BIOS—about 8KB of code—and described everything it did as completely as possible without using or referencing any actual code.

Then Phoenix brought in a second team of programmers who had no prior knowledge of the IBM BIOS and had never seen its code. Working only from the first team's functional specifications, the second team wrote a new BIOS that operated as specified.

The resulting Phoenix BIOS was different from the IBM code, but for all intents and purposes, it operated identically. Using the clean-room approach, even if some sections of code did happen to be identical, there was no copyright infringement. Phoenix began selling its BIOS to companies that then used it to create the first IBM-compatible PCs.

Question: What are the different uses of reverse engineering?

Answer: A common misperception regarding reverse engineering is that it is used for the sake of stealing or copying someone else's work. Reverse engineering is not only used to figure out how something works, but also the ways in which it does not work.

Some examples of the different uses of reverse engineering include:


Understanding how a product works more comprehensively than by merely observing it

Investigating and correcting errors and limitations in existing programs

Studying the design principles of a product as part of an education in engineering

Making products and systems compatible so they can work together or share data

Evaluating one's own product to understand its limitations

Determining whether someone else has literally copied elements of one's own technology

Creating documentation for the operation of a product whose manufacturer is unresponsive to customer service requests

Transforming obsolete products into useful ones by adapting them to new systems and platforms

Pardon me if the comment rubbed you the wrong way. I use a variety of camera systems from canon, minolta, sony, and nikon, its not all about canon. Reverse engineering is'nt always seen as a way of trying to "steal" another companies idea... But if that company makes that product or something comparable why not use it? A friend of mine that works at Canon constantly has to deal with customers calling in with third party equipment and his hands are tied. It's not that he does'nt want to help but since the other companies equipment are not made to spec and you have an amateur taking online advice it gets hairy because they don't understand the inner workings of shooting manually and can't understand why they get an error 99 when they have a sigma lens on but when they put on their canon lens all is well.

The other part of that equation is also that if you are using a product along with your camera that is not made by the manufacturer and something goes wrong warranty go bye-bye. Thats every major Slr camera maker. Also you comparing lens prices is not really a good idea especially if they are not made the same way. Comparisons will always have their pros and cons. I will definitely have to agree with you that picture by picture comparisons are very hard to find discrepancies in the pictures. Raw is definitley the kicker in most situations. Now for a person like yourself (meaning you sound like you know what you're doing and have an idea of whats going on =) Things like this will probably provide no problem for you. But the average joe that runs out and gets a slr camera it can be overwhelming.

For most people photography is a hobby, not a career.A professional does not come looking for help in choosing his professional tools.Most people have to compare prices because they are not rich.The people who have the money to play with always go for a Rolls-royce or a Beamer they dont care probably have more than one most of the time parked in the garage.

For a common man if and when he can afford to buy one and find the time to use it(working man 6 day job).Maybe on a sunday or a yearly vacation.I also feel that on the camera forums the camera companies have some of their own guys posting discussions and pictures favouring their respected companies.We were all amateurs at one time.As for online advise it depends on the source good examples cnet, fred miranda etc.

If sensors and camera lenses were perfect... you would need only one lens!

In a perfect world, you would leave the house with only a Canon 14 super-wide lens. You would worry only about camera position, secure in the knowledge that the 14mm lens was wide enough to capture the entire subject under 99% of conditions. Then if you wanted a picture of just a friend in the middle of the frame, you'd crop down to just the center and use that. The result would be the same as if you'd used a 100mm portrait lens.

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00Noxk

Canon is probably no worse or no better than any other camera as far as quality control goes... BUT... does that make it right? I have brought this very same subject up on the EOS mailing list, that I seem to see lots more problems from Canon cameras in the last couple of years than in years past. On this very list it seems to me there are lots of 40D issues, but also, I suppose it is a very small percentage of how many are sold. The same old argument comes up... well it is no better or worse than Nikon, Olympus, Pentax, etc, etc. Nothing made by man is ever going to be 100% perfect 100% of the time. Personally, I will NOT buy any newly introduced camera until it has been in production for about a year and had time to get all the bugs worked out, and even then things can still happen. I have never been one with my panties all in a wad having to have the "latest and greatest" .... "upgrade". I'm still using, quite successfully, my original 1Ds and D60. I will say neither of them has ever given me any problems.

Has anyone had any error 99 problems with the sigma 10-20 on both the canon 10d and 50d (i have both and the problem happens with both) Anyone have any solutions, i went into a shop and it worked fine with their 50d and ive only had my 50d for 3 months.