Mind adding a bit more here-- even if it's just your basic conclusions/impressions? I'd rather discuss on the board than the blog.
Sorry, on my phone atm, the Sigma is a great lens but does have coma wide open, does go away and it's only in extreme corners. For stitching it's really good.
Better overall lens than the samyang 24 but I wouldn't swap for just astro if you have a good copy
Since I'm a night shooter and been wanting to add astro/landscapes to my capabilities, I've been wondering how well this lens performs for a hard core astro guy. I own the Sigma 35 & 50mm f1.4 and consider them the best small format lenses I've ever owned. A few months before the Sigma 20mm was announced I bought a Nikon 20mm f1.8G. This seems to be a great little lens--light, compact, sharp, FAST! I've been happy with it so far. At this time I don't have any intention of getting into stitched shots but will probably do some focus stacking (sky plus landscape.) Now for my question. Do you consider the Sigma 20mm f1.4 to be enough of an improvement that I would be better off with it instead of the Nikon? I'm not worried about the few hundred extra dollars I'd be out, but do want to see an improvement for the money spent. I'll admit the Nikon fits very well in my crowded bag.
cameron12x wrote:
Have you had an opportunity to compare this lens to the Rokinon 24mm f/1.4 lens?
That lens is supposed to be slightly superior to the same Samyang release--at least as far as coma is concerned at wide apertures.
I thought these two are the same lens with different branding; any differences are probably the result of copy-to-copy variation.
Well, there's no doubt that both are optically identical and both are made by Samyang, but maybe someone is cherry picking the units that will be branded Rokinon. There's like half a dozen different brands slapped on Samyang stuff here and there. Can't be bothered to remember all of 'em. cameron12x wrote:
That's what I thought, too, but others have begged to differ. I'm still not sure, but everyone seems to like the Rokinon better.
Snopchenko wrote:
Well, there's no doubt that both are optically identical and both are made by Samyang, but maybe someone is cherry picking the units that will be branded Rokinon. There's like half a dozen different brands slapped on Samyang stuff here and there. Can't be bothered to remember all of 'em.
That's certainly a possibility; Samyang seems to be pushing the Rokinon brand in the States as the primary, but there's still Samyang and Bower varieties of just about every Samyang lens made available. My 14/2.8 is a Bower bought at retail (Fry's), for example.
Snopchenko wrote:
Right, and makes me wonder if I should put my 24/1.4 L on the chopping block and get the Sigma 20 instead.
I have a Zeiss 21mm f/2.8. It works great wide open and takes filters. As much as I like this new Sigma and its extra light gathering ability, the lack of a filter ring prevents it from replacing the Zeiss. I don't do enough astro photography to justify owning both.
From Lenstip tests the Samyang does not look radically better wrt coma, and lags behind on other significant metrics, most importantly center sharpness. Lenstip has also found that it's not a f/1.4 lens but closer to f/1.8 - that or the sample they got had miscalibrated aperture.
By the way, the Photozone review indirectly confirms this: the difference in resolution between f/1.4 and f/2 is almost nonexistent: http://www.photozone.de/canon_eos_ff/769-samyang24f14eosff?start=1 leftcoastlefty wrote:
I have a Zeiss 21mm f/2.8. It works great wide open and takes filters. As much as I like this new Sigma and its extra light gathering ability, the lack of a filter ring prevents it from replacing the Zeiss. I don't do enough astro photography to justify owning both.
I've been using the Sigma 14mm f/2.8 for years, and it has no filter thread either. I was always wary of damaging the front element, but in the (almost) six years of regular use, that hasn't come to pass yet. YMMV.
I love my Siggy 20mm f1.4 Art to bits. Admittedly, I do not care about astro, but this thing is sharp, i.e. as sharp or sharper than my 35 1.4 Art and 50 1.4 Art. Love them all, but the 20 is now my new favourite. It is something special about this focal length and f1.4 makes it unique and gives a lot of shooting options.
An example (of things I do not normally do), f1.4 at ISO 10.000 handheld:
As I said in the review it shot a stunning pano at f1.6, even f1.4 for a single frame it isnt that bad for coma and ahead of the rest for most other things.
No doubt these are great results Rob.
Goes to show test charts and other metrics are just that.
Getting out there and taking great photos is what matters!
There's like half a dozen different brands slapped on Samyang stuff here and there. Can't be bothered to remember all of 'em. 