# First Look: Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG Art from LensRentals.com



## Canon Rumors Guy (Dec 1, 2015)

```
LensRentals.com has posted their first look of the brand new Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG Art series lens with a series of MTF curve tests.</p>
<blockquote><p>With a wide-angle, wide-aperture prime lens, MTF is probably not the main consideration in whether you buy the lens or not. Theses lenses are used for different things by different photographers and bokeh, handling, vignetting, and dozens of other things I don’t test for will make a bigger difference in whether you like the lens, rather than simply how sharp it is.</p>
<p>Everyone’s first comment seems to be, “Well, I don’t need a 20mm f/1.4 lens”. I said that myself. But then I realized, well, I’ve never had the opportunity to use a sharp 20mm f/1.4 lens before, because there’s never been one . Will I like it? I have no idea. But I think I’ll at least check it out, it might be fun. Especially at this price point.</p>
<p>But the geek in me, at least, is totally impressed. Wider, faster, sharper, cheaper. What’s not to be impressed by? <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2015/11/sigma-20mm-f1-4-dg-hsm-a1-mtf-curves" target="_blank">Read the story</a></p></blockquote>
<p><strong>Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG Art: <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1191178-REG/sigma_20mm_f_1_4_art_lens.html/BI/2466/KBID/3296/DFF/d10-v21-t1-x678532" target="_blank">B&H Photo</a> | <a href="http://amzn.to/1NkFcIH" target="_blank">Amazon</a></strong></p>
```


----------



## gsealy (Dec 1, 2015)

I have found the combination of wide and open to work well indoors, say taking room shots. It could also work well taking evening or night landscape shots.


----------



## blanddragon (Dec 1, 2015)

Sigma is an interesting company. If they could just make the autofocus more reliable, I would be more interested. Price is not a big deal when the lens has focus that I can not trust. YMMV


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 1, 2015)

blanddragon said:


> Sigma is an interesting company. If they could just make the autofocus more reliable, I would be more interested. Price is not a big deal when the lens has focus that I can not trust. YMMV



+1. When I feel like I can use their lenses for events and weddings and rely on them, I'm in.


----------



## kirispupis (Dec 1, 2015)

For those interested in this lens, I found this review provides a lot more info - http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=457

I strongly considered buying this lens, but based on the review it has poor coma performance. Since my primary use for this lens is astrophotography, that meant a no go, I just ordered the Rokinon 24/1.4 instead.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 1, 2015)

kirispupis said:


> For those interested in this lens, I found this review provides a lot more info - http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=457
> 
> I strongly considered buying this lens, but based on the review it has poor coma performance. Since my primary use for this lens is astrophotography, that meant a no go, I just ordered the Rokinon 24/1.4 instead.



Agree, it would appear that the overwhelming opportunity of this lens to shoot astro -- nothing is wider + faster without going to Leica I believe -- will not be fully realized due to coma performance. 

But there are a host of other applications for this lens. I think it would be fine for interior events (if the AF pans out as reliable/consistent) and it would certainly give a unique perspective to environmental portraiture.

- A


----------



## infared (Dec 1, 2015)

Funny...sounds like Roger was trying to force himself not to like this lens. LOL! ....but he caved!!!!
This is a good review, too. http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1832 with a lot of info on the performance of the lens at all apertures and different sensor sizes.
I own the Sigma 35mm and 50mm Art series lenses. After some initial doubts and problems (sending the first 50mm back to B&H for another copy)..and a lot of my time tuning on the Sigma Dock....I have to say that I have found my lenses to be as good or better than any of my Canon L glass when it comes to focusing. 
I know others have not had the same experience....and I had to be pretty dogged to finally arrive at my current experience with those lenses. It was a hassle ....but now, I love them.
I plan on buying the 20mm Art as well to complement my Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS....for when I am shooting low light or need to be more creative. Plus, for me ....I LOVE the 20-21mm focal length. It is one of my favorites. Dramatic but not too...too.. wide. It must be my visual sweet spot. I sold my cherished Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 not long after I purchased the Canon 16-35mm f/4L IS zoom....I could no longer justify keeping it because I just was not using it as the the Canon was just as sharp and had AF. ...but this new Sigma is super exciting to me....f/1.4(!!!!), AF and as sharp or sharper than the Zeiss. WOWZER!!!!!!..all for $899!?!?!?!?!? I am in...Maybe today!!! 
I do not shoot Astro so the coma on this lens is not a deal-breaker for me.......the fact that I cannot put a ND filter on the lens is off-setting, no doubt...but then...name me something in photography that is not a compromise......(Sigma could have put a filter drawer at the back of the lens and really blown our minds!!!


----------



## Hector1970 (Dec 1, 2015)

A missed opportunity perhaps.
Maybe astro isn't the most common of reasons to buy a wide angle lens but a 1.4 would be great.
It would have been the only thing to convince me to buy a 20mm lens. 
16-35 F4 covers 20mm quite well.
I'll stick to the Samyang 14mm F2.8.
I'd love a 14mm f1.4 - how big would that be. 
Bulbous lens never fail to make me uncomfortable. The 11-24 is lovely but I'm afraid of doing something to it. I'm paranoid when I use it.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 1, 2015)

blanddragon said:


> Sigma is an interesting company. If they could just make the autofocus more reliable, I would be more interested. Price is not a big deal when the lens has focus that I can not trust. YMMV



I don't think its possible. Canon has a big advantage, and cameras include data about each Canon lens that makes AF more reliable. Canon may have some data about third party lenses in the cameras, but it obviously is not helping third party autofocus.

Its been noted that the dual pixel AF on the 70D and 7D MK II makes AF accurate for all lenses. If they ever solve the issues of making DPAF work as a primary AF system, that would be a huge improvement. XXX company has done that, but still has some missing issues with pro level AF. Close though.


----------



## 9VIII (Dec 1, 2015)

If it weren't for the 18-35f1.8 I think this would be one of the best crop sensor lenses on the market.
The 18-35f1.8 is spectacular, even slightly wider, but this is still a small step up at 20mm specifically. The 18-35f1.8 is the real magical lens, I have to assume these fast wide angle lenses are based on that formula.

The only way Sigma can fix autofocus is if they start selling their own SLR. I know they did that, and tried to pass it off at the same price as a 1DX.
What they need is a body that is just "reasonable" in every respect and priced at $500. Nothing fancy, just functional.
Then build one with upgrades all around at $2,000 and you have pretty much the entire market covered.


----------



## risc32 (Dec 2, 2015)

blanddragon said:


> Sigma is an interesting company. If they could just make the autofocus more reliable, I would be more interested. Price is not a big deal when the lens has focus that I can not trust. YMMV



Yet various tamron and manual focuses lenses have found their way into your bag.


----------



## YellowJersey (Dec 2, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> kirispupis said:
> 
> 
> > For those interested in this lens, I found this review provides a lot more info - http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=457
> ...



Sorry to hear it. The thought of using it for astro had me titillating like a well endowed school girl riding a bicycle with a knobbly seat. Is the Rokinon 24mm 1.4 the best wide 1.4 out there for astro, then?


----------



## RogerCicala (Dec 2, 2015)

infared said:


> Funny...sounds like Roger was trying to force himself not to like this lens. LOL! ....but he caved!!!!
> This is a good review, too. http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php/product/1832 with a lot of info on the performance of the lens at all apertures and different sensor sizes.
> I own the Sigma 35mm and 50mm Art series lenses. After some initial doubts and problems (sending the first 50mm back to B&H for another copy)..and a lot of my time tuning on the Sigma Dock....I have to say that I have found my lenses to be as good or better than any of my Canon L glass when it comes to focusing.
> I know others have not had the same experience....and I had to be pretty dogged to finally arrive at my current experience with those lenses. It was a hassle ....but now, I love them.
> ...



Guilty as charged!
Roger


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 2, 2015)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> blanddragon said:
> 
> 
> > Sigma is an interesting company. If they could just make the autofocus more reliable, I would be more interested. Price is not a big deal when the lens has focus that I can not trust. YMMV
> ...



Agreed as the three copies of the 35 Art I have are all gone. I will say however, the 50 Art is working superbly on the A7R2. Since there is no native fast 50mm offering, I picked up the 50L again and then ran it next to the Sigma to see which one performed better adapted. Sure enough, the Sigma is not only (unsurprisingly) optically superior, but the AF performs significantly better (shockingly). At least in my setup, it is faster to catch focus and is very accurate (since it is on a mirrorless body). 

Based on the performance I'm getting with the Sigma I have now, I am very interested in the 20/1.4. I will be waiting patiently for a price drop


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 2, 2015)

RogerCicala said:


> infared said:
> 
> 
> > Funny...sounds like Roger was trying to force himself not to like this lens. LOL! ....but he caved!!!!
> ...



Uncle Rog sighting!

- A


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Dec 2, 2015)

I see the Sigma 35mm regularly at weddings. If you're a professional that also means you demand an ROI from your gear, and I think many have determined Sigma is giving them a bigger one these days. They see a 9/10 focus hit rate and an extra $1k left in the bank as preferable over a 9.5/10 hit rate.


----------



## ahsanford (Dec 2, 2015)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> I see the Sigma 35mm regularly at weddings. If you're a professional that also means you demand an ROI from your gear, and I think many have determined Sigma is giving them a bigger one these days. They see a 9/10 focus hit rate and an extra $1k left in the bank as preferable over a 9.5/10 hit rate.



On the Sigma 35 Art, my hit rate was outright poor than f/2 with a careful, deliberate handheld technique. It was not front or back focused, it was inconsistently focused.

I'd love -- LOVE -- to see a head to AF hit rate test between the 35L II and the 35 Art. Unfortunately, someone like LensRentals may have to do it. We'd likely need a number of lenses to confirm it's a lens to lens consistency issue and not a calibration-correctable issue.

- A


----------



## JohnDizzo15 (Dec 2, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> CarlMillerPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I see the Sigma 35mm regularly at weddings. If you're a professional that also means you demand an ROI from your gear, and I think many have determined Sigma is giving them a bigger one these days. They see a 9/10 focus hit rate and an extra $1k left in the bank as preferable over a 9.5/10 hit rate.
> ...



I had three copies of that lens which were all horribly inconsistent on two different 5d3s and a 6d. The third one I tried to put up with for a while but ended up selling it anyway because I just couldn't rely on it.

However, as I stated earlier, this has definitely not been the case with the 50 Art on a mirrorless body so far. I am thoroughly pleased and impressed with it.


----------



## infared (Dec 3, 2015)

Just ordered one of these! Am very excited about new opportunities with this lens to create exciting images.
I see a lot of complaints here about Sigma AF...and I think that they are justified...but with this particular lens...I have read 5 reviews and not one has mentioned any problem with the AF with this lens. Plus, I have the Sigma Dock and can fine-tune the focus to my camera. I am buying it from B&H...and if focus is an issue I can return it. No fuss, no muss. (I did exactly that with my Sigma 50mm f/1.4 Art, as it did not focus well so they sent me a new one and that one has been extremely accurate for me the way that I work with my 5DIII once fine-tuned on the Dock). 
My only real concern is the bulbous front end...but that design is what makes the lens perform so well...so I will just have to be more careful than usual. 
I don't think that many are buying into this piece of glass...so I am happy to own something very unique and on the edge...like the photos I hope to make with it!!!!


----------



## blanddragon (Dec 3, 2015)

risc32 said:


> blanddragon said:
> 
> 
> > Sigma is an interesting company. If they could just make the autofocus more reliable, I would be more interested. Price is not a big deal when the lens has focus that I can not trust. YMMV
> ...


No they have not. I own only Canon lenses because third party lenses do not perform well enough. Which was my point.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Dec 3, 2015)

blanddragon said:


> risc32 said:
> 
> 
> > blanddragon said:
> ...



I think that may have been directed at me. I had quoted you and +1'd your post and they saw my signature.

On that note, two things. Yes, I own three (soon to be four) Tamron lenses. My three that I've regularly used (24-70, 70-200, and 15-30) have been deadly accurate for me. I can trust them, so they've gotten heavy usage in my bag.

The second thing is a bit ironic and addresses the MF glass in my kit. Wide aperture AF lenses are sometimes a challenge for people. Outer points aren't as reliable, and focus/recompose in some cases can subtly alter focus. The irony is that the wider the aperture the easier it is to visually confirm focus when using an EG-S focus screen or something similar. You don't worry about AF points - just compose how you want and fire away when you nail focus. I actually have a really high keeper rate with MF wide aperture glass WITH an EG-S, but on my bodies without it my keeper rate drops a lot.


----------



## Ladislav (Dec 4, 2015)

TWI by Dustin Abbott said:


> blanddragon said:
> 
> 
> > risc32 said:
> ...



I actually own Tamron 24-70 VC. I bought it after reading your spectacular review. It is good value for money - especially now after price drop BUT - I have a second copy and I definitely don't have the same experience with AF and VC as described in all your Tamron reviews. AF is reliable only for stills and VC is 2 stops max for me (my first copy was mostly 1+ stop). So its either because of my inferior technique or because of significant variance among different copies of Tamron lenses. Since this lens, I'm going Canon only and I wasn't disappointed again.


----------



## Pitbullo (Dec 5, 2015)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> blanddragon said:
> 
> 
> > Sigma is an interesting company. If they could just make the autofocus more reliable, I would be more interested. Price is not a big deal when the lens has focus that I can not trust. YMMV
> ...


I know my Canon lenses are way more accurate than my Sigmas, thoug a little work with the Dock worked wonders for my 35mm ART. Since I use an old Canon camera body (550D), would that make new Canon lenses less accurate for focusing, since my camera does not get firmware updates (and info about new lenses)? I just wonder how that works, as I do suspect that those lens data included in camera is primarely for corrections, not for focusing.


----------

