Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Appears
- Thread starter Canon Rumors Guy
- Start date
It's big, heavy and pricey. If Canon had a lens like the latest Nikkor 20 1.8 the only thing that the Sigma could be better would be astrophotography.
Upvote
0
Zanken said:
Just get the 18-35 Art if you're using crop (I did), you get the same focal length and probably the same light gathering. Apparently the Sigma 24mm Art (and many other f1.4 lenses) have a T-stop (light transmission) that's much worse than the f-stop, the bokeh and such effects will be correct, but there is nearly a stop of light lost within the lens. So if you're after bokeh and background blur then the wider aperture is necessary, but the 18-35A has very good light transmission and is nearly equivalent in terms of low light performance.
An APS-C sensor is still much smaller so you're not getting around the problem of surface area, but at least it's a crop lens with light gathering equivalent to full frame at f2.8.
The image on the 18-35A is at its best between 20-24mm, so I still wouldn't jump on a 20mm f1.4 lens for crop. Maybe 18mm, but it would still have to be a fantastic performer to significantly out-do the 18-35A even at the wide end. For anything wider you're probably better off just looking to dedicated Ultrawide lenses like the new 10-18 STM.
Upvote
0
tron said:
I think Dilbert meant for a prime lens.
I would say the EF 14mm f/2.8 USM was 2007, so no, it's not the first 'modern' one to his definition.
...and let's not forget the 11-24 f/4L USM, which we all know is just being used an 11mm prime. C'mon, people.
- A
Upvote
0
I still laugh when people say they use the Canon 24L for astrophotography. For that matter, the 16-35 2.8 mk2 as well.
Canon is continuing to get spanked in the lens department any wider than 35mm, and/or faster than f/4. I really hope this stops soon!
Dear Canon, you've got enough trophy lenses for now; pat yourselves on the back for the incredible-but-still-$3,000 11-24 f/4, and deliver some wide, fast glass for mere mortals to use. Sigma and Rokinon (and now Tamron too it seems) are mopping the floor with you.
Canon is continuing to get spanked in the lens department any wider than 35mm, and/or faster than f/4. I really hope this stops soon!
Dear Canon, you've got enough trophy lenses for now; pat yourselves on the back for the incredible-but-still-$3,000 11-24 f/4, and deliver some wide, fast glass for mere mortals to use. Sigma and Rokinon (and now Tamron too it seems) are mopping the floor with you.
Upvote
0
I hate to say it (after reading the comments on how much Landscape shooters need filters) but one of my first thoughts looking at this lens was that it has a built in lens hood.
Sorry.
Hopefully that means it performs well enough for people to want to use it regardless.
Sorry.
Hopefully that means it performs well enough for people to want to use it regardless.
Upvote
0
9VIII said:
Yep. Daylight landscapers with CPL, ND and ND grad needs will (literally) have their hands full unless Lee or Wonderpana retrofit their systems to work with this lens.
The uses for this lens will be really specific without front-filtering: Astro, nighttime cityscapes, events, and maybe some environmental portraiture.
But let's be frank, I'm guessing 90% of the excitement in this forum is the hope of low coma for astro. A 20 f/1.4 with low coma is a dream lens for that camp.
- A
Upvote
0
ahsanford said:
I don't know of a single landscape shooter who would use a 20mm f1.4 lens for anything other than astro landscapes. It would be pretty silly to go around with a 20 f1.4 lens for shooting daytime landscapes even if it did take filters.
This lens may indeed be designed specifically for astro work. Considering how so many people complain about most fast and wide lenses and poor coma, Sigma probably saw an opportunity to dominate that market segment.
Looking at the lens design, it is pretty obvious it was designed to use the bulbous front element and special glass throughout in order to correct issues that would be found in doing astro work. Vignetting is just as big of an issue as coma, IMO. I would take something like the Nikon 14-24 over even the Sammy 14 f2.8 for my astro landscape work due to the insanely low vignetting of the Nikon, even though it has worse coma. If the new Sigma 20mm lens has less than 2 stops of vignetting in the extreme corners and low coma, it would be a huge advantage over any other lens used for similar use.
If the new 20 f1.4 isn't a rockstar for astro work, then it pretty much has little to no other market that will buy it up. Not great for daytime landscapes, and not great for portraits either. Astro landscape photography is actually a much larger market than some people may think. Just a couple of hours looking at landscape images on 500px will show proof of that.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
