Hi there,
I'm looking to add a wide prime to my kit for indoor use. Something around the 20mm range seems right. None of the local stores have any of them in stock to get hands-on with and while I can find example photos from each lens on sites like flickr they're mostly landscape or astro photos and flickr doesn't really tell me much about what the lenses are really like to live with. So I'm hoping someone(s) here can weigh in with some impressions of what any of these lenses are like to use long-term.
Right now I have a 5D mark II with a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8, Sigma 35mm, Canon 50mm STM and 100mm f/2 and a Fuiifilm X100T. I have the 70-200 f/4 IS too but that's never for indoors. The Sigma is my main lens by far, barely use the rest. I'm mostly shooting expos and trade shows, semi-professionally, and sometimes that means trying to get a whole car in frame at short distance or other times it could be a big group of people or an entire company stand. With the 24-70mm f/2.8 I sometimes run out of space indoors. Backing up further sometimes isn't an option at some of the more crowded events. I rented a 16-35 but found I was only really using around 20mm and I don't really like zooms anyway, I'm a prime gal (my 24-70 only gets used for the wide end and I'd like to just sell it), so I figure I may as well get a 20mm prime.
Light is sometimes a problem. I can't often stop down more than f/2.8, maybe f/3.2 on the good days. So if a lens is only good at smaller than f/4 then it's not much use to me. 1/60th f/2.2 ISO3200 is about a normal bright exposure for the shows I'm at.
Autofocus isn't a huge concern because even the notorious Sigma 35mm has been fine for me so far. It's nice to have AF but for a wide angle I'm okay with manual focus.
Coma doesn't matter to me at all. Extreme corner performance doesn't really matter, but I do need more than just center sharpness.
I don't anticipate using filters with this lens.
The biggest deal for me is what it's like to really live with and use the lens day after day. Having to correct for complex distortion or watch for flaring all the time (backlighting and shooting into light a lot at trade shows!) is a big pain for me so I will happily accept a slight drop in optical quality if it means I can avoid those hassles. I do shoot raw but I'm asked to quickly deliver clear, clean files, so I can't really work with a lens which requires a lot of post-processing correction. Whether the weight really becomes a chore is another issue.
So far I'm looking at
[list type=decimal]
[*]Canon 20mm f/2.8. It's old and I've read about the strong field curvature, but it's also the smallest and lightest. Reviews suggest it's nowhere near good enough wide open.
[*]Sigma 20mm f/1.4. Fastest and seems clear, but it's the heaviest and at the top end of what I'm comfortable spending. DXO and TDP suggest the distortion is pretty extreme too.
[*]Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon. Seems to have the clearest rendering but it's fairly heavy and I'd need to buy the old Distagon version second hand as the new Milvus price is far more than I'm okay spending.
[*]Samyang 20mm f/1.8. Hard to find anything about this lens. Not many reviews at all and the few I've found mostly only talk about astrophotography. But my video friends swear by their Samyang Cine lenses.
[/list]
I've not seen any other options but I'm open to any suggestions.
(Sorry for bumping the apparently dead EF 20mm and Zeiss 21mm threads, but at the time the board wouldn't let me make a new topic!)
I'm looking to add a wide prime to my kit for indoor use. Something around the 20mm range seems right. None of the local stores have any of them in stock to get hands-on with and while I can find example photos from each lens on sites like flickr they're mostly landscape or astro photos and flickr doesn't really tell me much about what the lenses are really like to live with. So I'm hoping someone(s) here can weigh in with some impressions of what any of these lenses are like to use long-term.
Right now I have a 5D mark II with a Tamron 24-70 f/2.8, Sigma 35mm, Canon 50mm STM and 100mm f/2 and a Fuiifilm X100T. I have the 70-200 f/4 IS too but that's never for indoors. The Sigma is my main lens by far, barely use the rest. I'm mostly shooting expos and trade shows, semi-professionally, and sometimes that means trying to get a whole car in frame at short distance or other times it could be a big group of people or an entire company stand. With the 24-70mm f/2.8 I sometimes run out of space indoors. Backing up further sometimes isn't an option at some of the more crowded events. I rented a 16-35 but found I was only really using around 20mm and I don't really like zooms anyway, I'm a prime gal (my 24-70 only gets used for the wide end and I'd like to just sell it), so I figure I may as well get a 20mm prime.
Light is sometimes a problem. I can't often stop down more than f/2.8, maybe f/3.2 on the good days. So if a lens is only good at smaller than f/4 then it's not much use to me. 1/60th f/2.2 ISO3200 is about a normal bright exposure for the shows I'm at.
Autofocus isn't a huge concern because even the notorious Sigma 35mm has been fine for me so far. It's nice to have AF but for a wide angle I'm okay with manual focus.
Coma doesn't matter to me at all. Extreme corner performance doesn't really matter, but I do need more than just center sharpness.
I don't anticipate using filters with this lens.
The biggest deal for me is what it's like to really live with and use the lens day after day. Having to correct for complex distortion or watch for flaring all the time (backlighting and shooting into light a lot at trade shows!) is a big pain for me so I will happily accept a slight drop in optical quality if it means I can avoid those hassles. I do shoot raw but I'm asked to quickly deliver clear, clean files, so I can't really work with a lens which requires a lot of post-processing correction. Whether the weight really becomes a chore is another issue.
So far I'm looking at
[list type=decimal]
[*]Canon 20mm f/2.8. It's old and I've read about the strong field curvature, but it's also the smallest and lightest. Reviews suggest it's nowhere near good enough wide open.
[*]Sigma 20mm f/1.4. Fastest and seems clear, but it's the heaviest and at the top end of what I'm comfortable spending. DXO and TDP suggest the distortion is pretty extreme too.
[*]Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Distagon. Seems to have the clearest rendering but it's fairly heavy and I'd need to buy the old Distagon version second hand as the new Milvus price is far more than I'm okay spending.
[*]Samyang 20mm f/1.8. Hard to find anything about this lens. Not many reviews at all and the few I've found mostly only talk about astrophotography. But my video friends swear by their Samyang Cine lenses.
[/list]
I've not seen any other options but I'm open to any suggestions.
(Sorry for bumping the apparently dead EF 20mm and Zeiss 21mm threads, but at the time the board wouldn't let me make a new topic!)