Review - Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG Art

[Canon Rumors]

Discuss our review of the Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG Art here.

 

[jeffa4444]

Its interesting to note the view on "weather sealing". Many professional lenses for cinematography which run many hundreds of thousands of $$$ more do not have weather sealing and nor do most motion picture cameras. They are used in hostile conditions and by & large with the exception of very fine dust remain OK because crew take precautions to protect the equipment.
Any sensible photographer is not going to leave even weather sealed lenses or cameras out in the rain they are not completely weather proof and its not ideal operating wet equipment. Humidity doesnt respect weather sealing and fine dust is almost impossible to eliminate getting into a lens given lenses rack in & out or are exposed at the rear when dismounted from cameras.
Weather sealing limits the effects of the environment but we should never assume it eliminates those effects.

 

[AWR]

That's right. This "review" is a really a cliche.
In photography those "cons" will be overtaken by good photographer in a millisecond.
I think this "review" has more to do with marketing Canon's new 16-35mm launch.

 

[Larsskv]

Another great review from Dustin, although I don't think the need for weather sealing is that important, for what I do.

I bought the 20mm ART mainly for northern lights shooting. It is amazing and unparalleled for that purpose. For good shoots of the northern lights, the shutter speed shouldn't be longer than 3-4 seconds. Having 2 stops advantage over an f/2.8 lens makes a very big difference, especially when shooting the 5Ds, when I want to keep the ISO low.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

That's right. This "review" is a really a cliche.
In photography those "cons" will be overtaken by good photographer in a millisecond.
I think this "review" has more to do with Canon's coming 16-35mm launch.

Seriously? There's not even a real release date nor price on that lens (16-35mm), but it will surely cost probably close to 3 times as much. I doubt too many photographers will be cross shopping those lenses.

In your opinion those cons may not be a big deal, but I have had dozens of photographers write me about gear recommendations but refuse to buy a lens without the ability to do traditional filters, or weather sealing, or because of poor coma control. They may not matter to you...but do matter to a lot of photographers.

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

Its interesting to note the view on "weather sealing". Many professional lenses for cinematography which run many hundreds of thousands of $$$ more do not have weather sealing and nor do most motion picture cameras. They are used in hostile conditions and by & large with the exception of very fine dust remain OK because crew take precautions to protect the equipment.
Any sensible photographer is not going to leave even weather sealed lenses or cameras out in the rain they are not completely weather proof and its not ideal operating wet equipment. Humidity doesnt respect weather sealing and fine dust is almost impossible to eliminate getting into a lens given lenses rack in & out or are exposed at the rear when dismounted from cameras.
Weather sealing limits the effects of the environment but we should never assume it eliminates those effects.

All you have said is true...but there is also a reason that more and more lenses are coming with weather sealing (including Zeiss repackaging a number of their lenses in new bodies with it). I think it is more than marketing. Yes, you should always use good judgment in protecting your gear, but some help from the lens is always welcome.

Funny how so many photographers rip on 6D, 70/80D, etc... because they "don't" have "pro-grade" weatherproofing (not true, BTW).

 

[AWR]

If the shoe fits...

 

[TWI by Dustin Abbott]

If the shoe fits...

LOL. I think the reason I wrote was to say that it didn't fit, but you, of course, are entitled to your opinion. That lens is not even on my radar yet.

 

[AWR]

Let's be honest here. You, Canon Rumors, are very important part of Canon's marketing.

All the "insider tips", which no one else gets.
Exclusive launch stories.
Expensive Canon L-lens giveaways.

Canon this, Canon that, Canon everywhere on this site. And that's okay, that's why I come here. After all, most of my gear comes from Canon.
But this to be trustworthy review site, HA!
I don't for one second think, that you are not smart enough not to understand, how big part of Canon's marketing this site is. In this day and age.

Even tough a Canon user mostly, I've had many pleasant surprises with Sigma lenses. The need for reviewers to find con lists, is sometimes unbelievable. Seems to be linked either cause to another manufacturer or desperate need for YouTube attention. So how is it with the shoe?

 

[Cali Capture]

Sounds like there is a bad case of caveat emptor ("buyer beware", For all you non Catholic school alums) against Dustin. Have the doubters "reviewed" his reviews, not just this or a few you may feel differ from your own opinion or more importantly "your priorities"? If you have you will find he follows the same format for all. Trying to bring forward negatives/cons is part of being objective and part of you weighing the impact those negatives may or may not have on how you use your gear. Same with the Plus points. To Imply that Dustin is sandbagging for Canon is truly unfair, and counter to every review I have seen/read from him. You could claim he was bias to Tamron, just because he one of the few that review Tamron's lenses.
I think a lot of folks on this site forget that photography is an Art, using very scientific tools! Not the other way around. Those tools will be used in very different ways by different artists. A review should let us Know objectively what those elements of a tool are so we can determine our "own" value of that tool! Dustin is one of the best at always communicating all the aspects of lenses/gear!

 

[verysimplejason]

Let's be honest here. You, Canon Rumors, are very important part of Canon's marketing.

All the "insider tips", which no one else gets.
Exclusive launch stories.
Expensive Canon L-lens giveaways.

Canon this, Canon that, Canon everywhere on this site. And that's okay, that's why I come here. After all, most of my gear comes from Canon.
But this to be trustworthy review site, HA!
I don't for one second think, that you are not smart enough not to understand, how big part of Canon's marketing this site is. In this day and age.

Even tough a Canon user mostly, I've had many pleasant surprises with Sigma lenses. The need for reviewers to find con lists, is sometimes unbelievable. Seems to be linked either cause to another manufacturer or desperate need for YouTube attention. So how is it with the shoe?

You might be mistaken if you think Dustin is like what you think he is. He's been using and endorsing some third party products like the Tamron 24-70 VC and oldies but goldies lenses. You can go to his site and read on a lot of his reviews including Zeiss lenses.

Anyway, I've tried some sigma lenses starting from the 35 and they've got quite good optics. If only AF isn't one of their problems. I've got high hopes from this Sigma lens but its coma performance is really a turn off.

 

[Cali Capture]

...
but there is also a reason that more and more lenses are coming with weather sealing (including Zeiss repackaging a number of their lenses in new bodies with it). I think it is more than marketing. Yes, you should always use good judgment in protecting your gear, but some help from the lens is always welcome.
...

They spend, what, 10 cents more on production to put a bit of foam in there and get to charge $hundreds more?

You're right, it is more than marketing, it is money making because a little bit of effort adds a lot to the price that punters will pay.

So you gotta ask why they don't spend the 10 cents! Same with Canon's "penny purse" lens bags. Why not just give use a better bag, or better sealing. If Canon can make a good bag for the 70-200mm f/2.8, why not the brand new 35mm II? Same for other mfg's. Sometimes the squeaky wheel has to wear down to the axel!

 

[Luds34]

...
but there is also a reason that more and more lenses are coming with weather sealing (including Zeiss repackaging a number of their lenses in new bodies with it). I think it is more than marketing. Yes, you should always use good judgment in protecting your gear, but some help from the lens is always welcome.
...

They spend, what, 10 cents more on production to put a bit of foam in there and get to charge $hundreds more?

You're right, it is more than marketing, it is money making because a little bit of effort adds a lot to the price that punters will pay.

You think so? I dunno. The only way we'd know for sure is if the exact same lenses existed in the two versions, weather sealed, and not. I know that I personally wouldn't pay any more for the weathered seal version.

Weather sealing is more marketing then anything else. Nothing is black and white. All various levels of grey. Just use your gear and be smart about it. I don't mind some misting, snow, etc. but you won't see me sitting outside in a hard rain either.

 

[Random Orbits]

The 20A is a good lens, but it is clearly not superior to other options near the same focal length as the 35A and 50A were when they first came out. The size/heft of this lens is a disadvantage. This is a lens that you know you'll be using when you pack your bag rather than leaving in your bag all the time like the 35 f/2 IS.

It compares well against something like the Zeiss 21 from an IQ/price perspective. I gives you the option of using apertures as large as f/1.4. It is significantly sharper than the 24A in the center to midframe wide open, and the 24A is slightly better sharpness-wise compared to the 24L II wide open. I think it is intended to compete with the fast 24mm lenses, and people now have the choice of a bulbous but sharper 20A or a filterable 24.

The thing that is a disappoint is that they marketed this as an astro lens, and the coma results are disappointing in that light. Having to stop down to a minimum of f/2.8 to eliminate most of the coma suggests that astro was not a prime consideration for this lens design.

AF isn't as accurate as Canon, but that is to be expected. On my 5DIII, center AF accuracy is good, but it tends to front focus using the left and right cross banks at closer distances (about the same amount on the left and right side so it's not a decentering issue).

 

[Luds34]

Solid review as usual from Dustin.

I have to say, as an owner of the Voightlander 20mm, I really enjoyed the physical comparison with that lens. Really starts to put the Sigma Art lens into perspective.

 

[Refurb7]

Its interesting to note the view on "weather sealing". Many professional lenses for cinematography which run many hundreds of thousands of $$$ more do not have weather sealing and nor do most motion picture cameras. They are used in hostile conditions and by & large with the exception of very fine dust remain OK because crew take precautions to protect the equipment.
Any sensible photographer is not going to leave even weather sealed lenses or cameras out in the rain they are not completely weather proof and its not ideal operating wet equipment. Humidity doesnt respect weather sealing and fine dust is almost impossible to eliminate getting into a lens given lenses rack in & out or are exposed at the rear when dismounted from cameras.
Weather sealing limits the effects of the environment but we should never assume it eliminates those effects.

I happen to do all of my stills photography without a crew. That's just the way that I roll. So weather sealing helps.

 

[Refurb7]

That's right. This "review" is a really a cliche.
In photography those "cons" will be overtaken by good photographer in a millisecond.
I think this "review" has more to do with marketing Canon's new 16-35mm launch.

That comment is a total non sequitur. Totally disconnected from reality.

 

[Refurb7]

Let's be honest here. You, Canon Rumors, are very important part of Canon's marketing.

All the "insider tips", which no one else gets.
Exclusive launch stories.
Expensive Canon L-lens giveaways.

Canon this, Canon that, Canon everywhere on this site. And that's okay, that's why I come here. After all, most of my gear comes from Canon.
But this to be trustworthy review site, HA!
I don't for one second think, that you are not smart enough not to understand, how big part of Canon's marketing this site is. In this day and age.

Even tough a Canon user mostly, I've had many pleasant surprises with Sigma lenses. The need for reviewers to find con lists, is sometimes unbelievable. Seems to be linked either cause to another manufacturer or desperate need for YouTube attention. So how is it with the shoe?

You're not being "honest". Besides making no sense at all, you're being grossly unfair.

 

[slclick]

Let's be honest here. You, Canon Rumors, are very important part of Canon's marketing.

All the "insider tips", which no one else gets.
Exclusive launch stories.
Expensive Canon L-lens giveaways.

Canon this, Canon that, Canon everywhere on this site. And that's okay, that's why I come here. After all, most of my gear comes from Canon.
But this to be trustworthy review site, HA!
I don't for one second think, that you are not smart enough not to understand, how big part of Canon's marketing this site is. In this day and age.

Even tough a Canon user mostly, I've had many pleasant surprises with Sigma lenses. The need for reviewers to find con lists, is sometimes unbelievable. Seems to be linked either cause to another manufacturer or desperate need for YouTube attention. So how is it with the shoe?

I doubt Canon, Inc gives a rats aperture about this site. Dustin is a huge 3rd party supporter and even a quick visit to his site proves that. Way off base imho.

 

[Stephen Melvin]

He really seems to gloss over the AF issue with this lens, not even listing it as one of the "cons." As somebody who used to buy and use a lot of Sigma lenses, I have to say that AF is something that is always my first question when Sigma introduces a new lens. I think I've had 1 out of 5 Sigma lenses that AF right. I no longer own any Sigma lenses, because they still don't know how to make the things autofocus. Even on a 20mm lens! Astonishing.

Also, "perspective distortion" isn't the stretching in the corners. PD is what happens when a camera is close to the subject and the subject looks distorted to the viewer. An enlarged nose, for example, when taking a photo at extreme close range. Even a 50mm lens can be used to take a photograph with perspective distortion. It's the distance, not the lens, that creates perspective distortion.

There's a reason the classic portrait lenses are from 85mm to 135mm.