swldstn wrote:
I would often travel with the Loxia 21, 35, 50 and take filters I could easily use on all three and stay real small.
Or if I needed auto focus take the Batis 18, 25, 40 even though the filter size for the 18mm wasn't the same. 77mm filters I had for other reasons
Now I am seeing me take the 20 G, 24 GM, and Batis 40 with a set of 67mm filters maybe and it really won't be much bigger.
To many options though and two much gear for sure. Never thought the Sony system would get here. For me the only prime I desire now (I say that knowing better) is a 14 or 15 that stays relatively small.
To think I used to carry a TS-E 17mm f/4L and 24mm f/3.5L II
Almost forgot. Fred, thanks for all the images with the side by side comparisons....Show more →
Step up / down rings work fine if you have different filter sizes. I wouldn't let the filter size dictate the lenses.
I have the Sigma 14-24 which is my main lens in that range and in most cases the weight and bulk don’t bother me a ton. Just took it to NY and did street work and was not bad at all but I’m going to build a small travel kit. This might be a contender, how is it at manual focus. I’ve had just about all the choices here both CV21, Loxia 21, Tamron 20, Sony 18. This looks pretty nice. I’ll probably just go 2 or 3 small travel. I’ll wait till things settle down and see how free we really are to travel
GMPhotography wrote:
I have the Sigma 14-24 which is my main lens in that range and in most cases the weight and bulk don’t bother me a ton. Just took it to NY and did street work and was not bad at all but I’m going to build a small travel kit. This might be a contender, how is it at manual focus. I’ve had just about all the choices here both CV21, Loxia 21, Tamron 20, Sony 18. This looks pretty nice. I’ll probably just go 2 or 3 small travel. I’ll wait till things settle down and see how free we really are to travel...Show more →
Have you tried the Samyang 18/2.8 and 24/2.8. They are so tiny and could work well for travel.
GMPhotography wrote:
Have not tried them but the 18 would be fun to have
I've only tried the Rokinon 24mm and thought that flare resistance and corner sharpness were weak for today's standards. However, I'd say they are great for their size and weight. Tried three copies and they were all asymmetric though. Gave up on it.
It would be great to compare the Samyang 18 vs Sony 20.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Have you tried the Samyang 18/2.8 and 24/2.8. They are so tiny and could work well for travel.
I tried 2 copies of the 18 but despite it getting some good reviews my copy's were not very good across the board (sharpness wise) at 2.8. Which was a bummer because for a small 2 lens AF kit I wanted to pair it with my 45mm 1.8 which is excellent even at 1.8. My 20mm comes on Thursday so hopefully I'll have better luck with that. Never tried the 24 since I had the GM.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Just like the Sigma 14-24, the new Sony 20/1.8 G has very low LoCA and LoCA for such lens. (Noticeably lower than the Loxia 21's).
It looks like its extreme corners are sharper than the 24/1.4 GM starting at f/4 all the way to f/8. The center area is ridiculously sharp and the best I've seen for a 20-24mm lens. (sharper than the 24GM when both are set to f/1.8!)
That's really impressive for the price.
Yes, I immediately noticed the crispness and lack of CA as well after about 20 minutes of shooting with it and posted that in my initial impression before I even tested it at all.
And you don’t have to convince me! I owned and shot the Sigma 14-24 briefly, it’s impressive. It really is an optical achievement. We are in total agreement about that, I don’t think you could really disagree if you have a well centered copy just looking at most major tested optical parameters.
My issue, and a good issue, is that we have so many hyper competent lenses now for wides (28mm...not so much, or at all...), I’m not seeing enough differentiation to justify some of the optical excellence’s drawbacks—and that comment extends beyond the Sigma 14-24’s size/filters. The other thing you don’t hear mention much about the Sigma is how reasonably priced it is. It’s crazy.
But I could pick six wide angle primes that have come out recently in this range that are just absolutely awesome, lenses that five and six years ago we were pining for.
They all make fabulous prints and at 99% of viewing situations, even enlarged considerably you can’t fault the technical IQ.
At this point, for me, it’s not about chasing ultimate corner sharpness at 42 or 60 megapixels when looking at crops. It’s about usability, size and rendering. Or extending the shooting envelope by offering something special, like the Sigma 14-24 does with the Astro correction, like the GM 24 does with its sensational color and focus transitions, like my Contax g21 with its minute size and and apex Zeiss contrast/color (for me).
I am so appreciative for just how good are options really are in this segment. Once we get a compact coma corrected 14/15mm f2 or f2.8 I won’t even bother with the segment any longer.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Yes, I immediately noticed the crispness and lack of CA as well after about 20 minutes of shooting with it and posted that in my initial impression before I even tested it at all.
And you don’t have to convince me! I owned and shot the Sigma 12-24 briefly, it’s impressive. It really is an optical achievement. We are in total agreement about that, I don’t think you could really disagree if you have a well centered copy just looking at most major tested optical parameters.
My issue, and a good issue, is that we have so many hyper competent lenses now for wides (28mm...not so much, or at all...), I’m not seen enough differentiation to justify some of the optical excellence’s drawbacks—and that comment extends beyond the Sigma 14-24’s size/filters. The other thing you don’t hear mention much about the Sigma is how reasonably priced it is. It’s crazy.
But I could pick six wide angle primes that have come out recently in this range that are just absolutely awesome, lenses that five and six years ago we were pining for.
They all make fabulous prints and at 99% of viewing situations, even enlarged pretty large you can’t fault the technical IQ.
At this point, for me, it’s not about chasing ultimate corner sharpness at 42 or 60 megapixels when looking at crops. It’s about usability, size and rendering. Or extending the shooting envelope by offering something special, like the Sigma 14-24 does with the Astro correction, like the GM 24 does with its sensational color and focus transitions, like my Contax g21 with its minute size and and apex Zeiss contrast/color (for me).
I am so appreciative for just how good are options really are in this segment. Once we get a compact coma corrected 14/15mm f2 or f2.8 I won’t even bother with the segment any longer....Show more →
Both Sigma 14-24/2.8 and Sony 12-24 zoom lenses have the best 14-15mm for the E-mount. The former performs slightly better in resolution/contrast but it's much better in flare resistance and color rendering imo. We still don't have 14mm or 15mm prime that's is compact and challenge these zooms. This could change once Sony releases a 15mm G or GM prime.
p.3 #10 · Sony FE 20mm f/1.8 G Versus Other Lenses
From my initial tests, the 20/1.8 G has very good flare resistance.
Today the sun showed up and while pointing the camera at all angles to the sun I don't see much veiling flare and only small ghosting spots. It looks like the Loxia 21 does slightly better but they seem to be similar in this regard which is great news for the Sony.
Sunstars have good definition at f/11 and smaller apertures.
Sony 20/1.8G sunstar rendering from f/7.1 until f/22
Sony 20/1.8G sunstar rendering vs Loxia 21/2.8 (both at f/11)
Sony 20/1.8G @f/5.6 sunstar rendering vs Loxia 21/2.8 @f/3.2
I am confused on your flare test...did you try anything with the sun just outside the frame or off center or the subject near/not at infinite? I got these without too much trouble, which I don't think I could have induced with a Loxia 21.
p.3 #17 · Sony FE 20mm f/1.8 G Versus Other Lenses
I can make the Loxia flare like this though. The 20/1.8 seems to be resistant to veiling but I also see ghosting spots depending on the angle and intensity lighting hits the lens just like with the FE 24/1.4 GM. The Loxia seems to perform better but I still need to do more side by side tests whenever the weather cooperates here.
p.3 #18 · Sony FE 20mm f/1.8 G Versus Other Lenses
Fred Miranda wrote:
I can make the Loxia flare like this though. The 20/1.8 seems to be resistant to veiling but I also see ghosting spots depending on the angle and intensity lighting hits the lens just like with the FE 24/1.4 GM. The Loxia seems to perform better but I still need to do more side by side tests whenever the weather cooperates here.
This was my thinking. Loss of contrast not an issue so far, but ghosting seems worse. I recall my Loxia being better, but I can't test side by side.
p.3 #20 · Sony FE 20mm f/1.8 G Versus Other Lenses
I can't wait to see your comparison with the 24GM also. I own the 24 but sometimes wish it was a little bit wider, however from what I've seen so far there is a little bit less sharpness and contrast (very little) on the 20.
