p.3 #2 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
I love the nikon 20 1.8g and will likely skip this. I shoot at 20mm all the time so i was curious about this lens but i doubt the improvements will be enough for me to switch.
A big reason is size and filters. I love the size of the nikon on my 810. I also use the 20 as my goto WA filter lens. I use it combined with the zeiss 15mm and typically stay away from filters on the zeiss.
I am still interested in the sigma at 1.4 for astro work. Thats the biggest temptation with this lens for me.
p.3 #4 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
m.sommers00 wrote:
Mysh, do you find the Nikon 1.8 just doesn't do that well with astro stuff?
I don't have a lot of complaints for the 20mm 1.8G and astro work but I have really gotten into nightscapes and light painting lately so I am always looking for a better lens.
The biggest weakness of the 20G is coma in the corners near wide open. Its not terrible but it is noticeable.
Also I can always hope for a faster and sharper lens wide open. I typically bump the 20G up to 2.2 just for the extra sharpness in the corners. Its not a huge jump but it helps.
The other lens I use for night is the Zeiss 15mm and this also has some coma in the corners so I think its just part of WA and wide open shooting.
p.3 #5 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
OK, here is a 1.4 - 2.8 aperture series of the Sigma 20 f/1.4 on a D810 testing for coma. Thoughts on the Sigma tested on the D810: coma 1.4 - 2 or so pretty bad, center pretty great, corners will need stopping down to be acceptable in many situations (but not those other than astro when you'd be using it wide open or nearly so), my copy seems a bit worse on the right side of the image than the left - may send it back and hope for a better copy. Hope that's useful to someone...
p.3 #6 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
Some newer reviews are coming up and vignetting wide open is almost ridiculous.
Thanks for the coma test!
Overall still seems pretty good. I just don't know if it's much better than the Nikon. Hmmmmmm
Dec 05, 2015 at 09:06 PM
Guest
Guest
p.3 #7 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
Lenstip has found 3 stops of vignetting at f/1.4 which is pretty ordinary for a lens this fast. Canon 24/1.4 L II had over 4 stops in their test, the Sigma 24/1.4 was a bit better at just under 3 stops. The Nikon 20/1.8 was better by 1 stop but then again, it's a little slower, and Nikon 24/1.4 was still better (2.25 stops) than the Sigma and especially the Canon.
p.3 #9 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
RoyC wrote:
But when I compare it to their score for a Cannon 300mm IS II with a sharpness of 45 P-mix the 20mm would appear to be quite dull.
Or is it that these test need to be taken with a large grain of salt?
Wide lenses that perform well are very very hard to make and even harder if they are very fast. Longer telephotos are much easier to make and rarely faster than f/2.8 or even f/4.
p.3 #10 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
RoyC wrote:
But when I compare it to their score for a Cannon 300mm IS II with a sharpness of 45 P-mix the 20mm would appear to be quite dull.
Or is it that these test need to be taken with a large grain of salt?
The Canon 300 f/2.8IS II is in a league by itself even when compared to other super telephotos that Canon makes. It was the only lens that resolved all of the 5D3's pixels if you believe the DXO P-MP scores. No wide angle will ever come close to the optics of a super telephoto. Compare the Sigma to other wides and that is where it should be compared.
p.3 #11 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
arbitrage wrote:
The Canon 300 f/2.8IS II is in a league by itself even when compared to other super telephotos that Canon makes. It was the only lens that resolved all of the 5D3's pixels if you believe the DXO P-MP scores. No wide angle will ever come close to the optics of a super telephoto. Compare the Sigma to other wides and that is where it should be compared.
I know this every bit as well as you do, the point is that lens performance is much more than the often debated and referenced highest number on an evaluation site.
p.3 #12 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
Just sold my Zeiss 15mm f/2.8ZE and Canon 24mm f/1.4L II and purchased this wonderful new lens. Looking forward to using this wedding season. I mostly use this FL for reception dancing and landscape shots of the venue-the only potential issue I'm worried about is focus speed in low light. I'm sure on the new 1DX2 it will be blazing fast but we shall see Merry Christmas everyone!
p.3 #13 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
cameron12x wrote:
This is a VERY interesting and unique lens. Some amazing images will be made with it.
However, the inability to use standard filters is a show-stopper for me. That, plus the coma when shooting wide-open.
The Rokinon 24mm f/1.4 lens is probably the best available for wide-field astrophotography because it handles coma the best out of all lens tested at that focal length and maximum aperture.
In fact, I just bought the Rokinon (while on sale for $429 at B&H) for that dedicated purpose. And I also just bought the Sigma 24mm f/1.4 Art because it's an absolute peach of a lens (better overall than both Canon and Nikon equivalents). Especially while it was just briefly on sale for $699 at Adorama. ...Show more →
ARrrgh!
I have a Roki 14mm. I shoot meteorites in a suburban area. I'm thinking I need an 18mm f1.4 lens - Brighter, so I can avoid all the nasty light pollution and still pick up dim meteors, and 18mm because 14mm makes the trails too small, and 24mm doesn't cover enough sky.
The 20 1.4 has so much coma, and it's a lot of money. I don't feel I can justify it for my dozen hours a year of hobby shooting. I'm torn.
p.3 #14 · DXOMark Review: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 high score
I just got the Sigma 20mm f/1.4.
A few quick points...
Fantastic contrast. Shadows are much darker than my 24-70ii. I'm assuming the zoom suffers from light reflecting around the lens interior more than this prime?
Sharp, sharp, sharp. AF is consistent from shot-to-shot on test charts.
I'm going to use this for meteorites, where that huge clear-aperture will give me many, many more captures than did the Roki 14mm. I actually went back to the 24-70ii from the Roki, after I could barely see meteorite trails that were bright to my eyes...
If coma is really bad, it's easy enough to correct on the few bright stars that will be in the far corners.
