# Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG HSM Art Appears



## Canon Rumors Guy (Oct 14, 2015)

```
A new Sigma Art series lens has leaked. It looks like Sigma is adding a 20mm f/1.4 DG Art to their already stellar Art series lineup.</p>
<p><strong>Sigma 20mm f/1.4 DG Art Specifications:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Designed for 24×36 DSLR cameras</li>
<li>Lens construction: 15 elements in 11 groups</li>
<li>One large-diameter aspherical element</li>
<li>Two FLD elements and five SLD elements to best correct chromatic aberrations</li>
<li>In-lens HSM autofocus motor. New mechanism for full-time manual override in autofocus mode</li>
<li>Total length: 129.8mm</li>
<li>Maximum diameter: 90.7mm</li>
<li>Weight: 950g</li>
<li>9 diaphragm blades, rounded</li>
<li>Maximum magnification: 1:7.1 (0.14x)</li>
<li>Designed to minimise flare and ghosting</li>
<li>Very low distortion</li>
<li>Designed to minimise coma aberration</li>
<li>Available in Canon, Nikon and Sigma mounts</li>
<li>RRP: ¥ 162,000 (over-the-counter price should be around and above ¥ 120,000)</li>
</ul>
```


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 14, 2015)

Now Sigma's just toying with the folks who were pining for an 85mm f/1.4 Art, who thought they'd be next in line for Art prime goodness. 

- A


----------



## BroderLund (Oct 14, 2015)

Well yes please! If this turns out to be true, it will be an instant buy. Awesome for astro!


----------



## mrzero (Oct 14, 2015)

That looks pretty awesome. I might just go for that bad boy instead of the 16-35/4. Different beasts, of course, but a tough choice for a single spot in the bag.


----------



## chrysoberyl (Oct 14, 2015)

'•Designed to minimise coma aberration'. Yes, please!


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 14, 2015)

chrysoberyl said:


> '•Designed to minimise coma aberration'. Yes, please!



+1. If IQ is up to snuff, this may be the first Sigma I buy.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 14, 2015)

Random Orbits said:


> chrysoberyl said:
> 
> 
> > '•Designed to minimise coma aberration'. Yes, please!
> ...



One might imagine that in this unique case, the resolution testing we usually look for first becomes the _second_ most important test for prospective buyers.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but night sky coma is the real world test that makes or breaks this lens commercially, right?

- A


----------



## NorbR (Oct 14, 2015)

I sense a pre-order in my future ...
I have a Northern Lights trip scheduled for February, hopefully I can get my hands on this lens by then.


----------



## JMZawodny (Oct 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> One might imagine that in this unique case, the resolution testing we usually look for first becomes the _second_ most important test for prospective buyers.
> 
> Correct me if I'm wrong, but night sky coma is the real world test that makes or breaks this lens commercially, right?
> 
> - A



Right. Coma, or lack there of, is THE key spec for astro. 20mm f/1.4 certainly gets the juices flowing if indeed coma is well controlled.


----------



## NancyP (Oct 14, 2015)

MMM. How to justify, given that I have a beloved Zeiss 21mm f/2.8? 4x the photons would be wonderful, if coma is tiny.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 14, 2015)

NancyP said:


> MMM. How to justify, given that I have a beloved Zeiss 21mm f/2.8? 4x the photons would be wonderful, if coma is tiny.



I'm not an astro person, but doesn't 20mm + f/1.4 blow the doors off of other common choices for astro?

I've read charts like these which consider light gathering vs. FL max shutter and such, and wouldn't a 20 f/1.4 -- if coma was acceptable -- net some terrific shots?

- A


----------



## infared (Oct 14, 2015)

mrzero said:


> That looks pretty awesome. I might just go for that bad boy instead of the 16-35/4. Different beasts, of course, but a tough choice for a single spot in the bag.



Damn...just when I thought that I had everything...I had the Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II...and a Zeiss 21mm f/2.8.
So I sold off my Canon 16-35mm f/2.8L II to buy the new Canon 16-35mm f/4L as is was such a sharper lens...and it is sharp! It was so sharp...that I stopped needing my Zeiss and sold it, as it was redundant at that point (which I found hard to believe..yes..did I mention that the new Canon Zoom is SHARP!? LOL!).... ...anyway..hmm...20-21mm is one of my favorite sweet spots for shooting....and I can have f/1.4 AND autofocus! hmmmm.....I already have the 35mm and 50mm Arts..and I think that they are stellar if you get a good copy and calibrate them correctly on the dock. Just well-priced stellar lenses..so...um...Sigma...come take my money!!!!!!!!!!! LOL!


----------



## siegsAR (Oct 14, 2015)

Random Orbits said:


> chrysoberyl said:
> 
> 
> > '•Designed to minimise coma aberration'. Yes, please!
> ...


Count me in! Might as well start selling my Samyang 14mm.


----------



## abbaen (Oct 14, 2015)

How much longer must I wait for an 85 Art 

Although this is the first 20mm 1.4 ever I believe? Great things from Sigma again.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 14, 2015)

abbaen said:


> How much longer must I wait for an 85 Art
> 
> Although this is the first 20mm 1.4 ever I believe? Great things from Sigma again.



First ever for an FF SLR, I believe. But I believe Leica M had a FF 21mm f/1.4 for 5-6 years now.

- A


----------



## nightscape123 (Oct 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> NancyP said:
> 
> 
> > MMM. How to justify, given that I have a beloved Zeiss 21mm f/2.8? 4x the photons would be wonderful, if coma is tiny.
> ...



Yep it would score around 3200 on that scale, significantly better than anything else on there. Though it really comes down to coma and vignetting. If there is 5 stops of vignetting then it isn't really f/1.4 for 50% of the sky.


----------



## Silvertt7 (Oct 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Now Sigma's just toying with the folks who were pining for an 85mm f/1.4 Art, who thought they'd be next in line for Art prime goodness.
> 
> - A



Yeah I agree. A 20mm? Common guys... get that 85 out.


----------



## ashmadux (Oct 14, 2015)

Where's the kool aid man when you need him, because..

_*OOOOOOOHHHHH YEEEEAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH*_

8) 8)


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Oct 14, 2015)

This is a very interesting focal length and could be a really killer lens. Nice to see Sigma thinking outside the box again. I look forward to giving this dude a test!


----------



## vscd (Oct 14, 2015)

This small familybased company surprises ones again. A 20mm f1.4... yay. Could be the first time that I buy a Sigma (at least a lens, I own the fabulous DP3M). The must be a new engineer-samurai inside the team, with intense karma 



> Count me in! Might as well start selling my Samyang 14mm.



I wouldn't sell my Samyang anytime... and the Samyang is nearly perfect, Coma-wise. And the 14mm Look is totally different from 20mm.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 14, 2015)

Now I wonder why Canon never made a 20mm f/1.4L. Is Canon wrong to think there's no money in it, or Sigma wrong to think there is?


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 14, 2015)

Antono Refa said:


> Now I wonder why Canon never made a 20mm f/1.4L. Is Canon wrong to think there's no money in it, or Sigma wrong to think there is?



The latter, surely. Canon knows from 23 years of poor sales of the EF 20mm f/2.8 USM to not offer an L in this FL.

- A


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 14, 2015)

Most of the technical points given are standard fare. "Low distortion" and "Corrected for CA" are labels applied to every lens they make.

If it does produce geometry as clean as the Fuji 14mmf2.8 then we have our best fast aperture wide angle lens ever. But I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 14, 2015)

9VIII said:


> Most of the technical points given are standard fare. "Low distortion" and "Corrected for CA" are labels applied to every lens they make.
> 
> If it does produce geometry as clean as the Fuji 14mmf2.8 then we have our best fast aperture wide angle lens ever. But I'm not holding my breath.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but each time one of these fast UWA lenses comes out, everyone gets geeked for astro use, but just _one_ test photo of bad coma completely kills it's appeal. 

This has happened a number of times in the past 12-18 months, hasn't it?

- A


----------



## tpatana (Oct 14, 2015)

Interesting for sure.


----------



## Antono Refa (Oct 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Antono Refa said:
> 
> 
> > Now I wonder why Canon never made a 20mm f/1.4L. Is Canon wrong to think there's no money in it, or Sigma wrong to think there is?
> ...



Reviews make the 20mm f/2.8 a very poor performer, IQ wise, making it a poor basis to extrapolate from to an L lens.


----------



## LOALTD (Oct 14, 2015)

And a star is born!


Seriously, I will be first one in line to rent this. (and possibly buy, if the coma really is under control)


It's going to be a long, dark winter in Alaska.


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 14, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Most of the technical points given are standard fare. "Low distortion" and "Corrected for CA" are labels applied to every lens they make.
> ...



The was the hope with the Sigma 24A too. According to TDP, the 35L II performs well against coma and is definitely an astro contender, but sometimes you want wider. The Zeiss 21 is a popular landscape/astro lens, but a 20A with good coma performance at f/1.4 is a winner. I _almost_ don't care whether or not the 20A can AF or not.


----------



## Mika (Oct 14, 2015)

> Maximum magnification: 1:7.1 (0.14x)



Sigma! The earlier 20/1.8 had better close focusing ability (0.25x) which made that lens cool, why not provide 0.2x here?

That F/1.4, though, is intriguing

I suppose it came to the choice between 0.25x or F/1.4, and they went with F/1.4.


----------



## pwp (Oct 15, 2015)

I'm loving this. Sigma keeps coming up with surprises. If the Astroboys get their clean coma and the rest of us get reliable AF, and it delivers better IQ than my L24 f/1.4II at f/1.4 (wouldn't be hard....) then they've got themselves another winner.

-pw


----------



## preppyak (Oct 15, 2015)

Mika said:


> > Maximum magnification: 1:7.1 (0.14x)
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The earlier 20mm f/1.8 was also a pretty weak lens. Soft in the corners, never really sharp at any aperture...never really found a niche that it fit.

I'm betting the .25x wasnt possible with a formula that limits coma and is sharp across the frame...and the sales are in the latter two aspects.


----------



## Pixel (Oct 15, 2015)

I've been begging for this lens for a long time from Canon. Looks like Sigma is going to beat them to the punch and I'm fine with that.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 15, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > Most of the technical points given are standard fare. "Low distortion" and "Corrected for CA" are labels applied to every lens they make.
> ...



Yup.

We've had a deluge of "decent performers" arrive lately, but I really wish someone would just make a "no holds barred" technical lens. Sharp across the frame, no Coma, no distortion, no CA, I don't care if it weighs 5lbs.


----------



## Zanken (Oct 15, 2015)

Hold still my beating heart.



preppyak said:


> The earlier 20mm f/1.8 was also a pretty weak lens. Soft in the corners, never really sharp at any aperture...never really found a niche that it fit.
> 
> I'm betting the .25x wasnt possible with a formula that limits coma and is sharp across the frame...and the sales are in the latter two aspects.



Yeah this is pretty much the same as the 24mm f1.8 versus the 24 Art. I currently have both and the min focal distance on the new one is really disappointing. I really love it for pets and silly, surreal portraits.

I borrowed a friend's 20mm f1.8 and I really enjoyed it for event shooting. The sense of action it conveys is really fun, but at times you have to get uncomfortably close to fill the frame (this is why I opted for the 24 originally instead).

I'm keen to see the performance/price of this, and whether it will take a filter (did I miss the filter thread size?). This combined with a lighter 24 option for portability will make me extremely happy for both event and landscape shooting.


----------



## siegsAR (Oct 15, 2015)

vscd said:


> This small familybased company surprises ones again. A 20mm f1.4... yay. Could be the first time that I buy a Sigma (at least a lens, I own the fabulous DP3M). The must be a new engineer-samurai inside the team, with intense karma
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have to agree, thats what i thought after my previous post. I'm still looking forward to this Sigma, we'll see in the actual reviews soon.


----------



## tron (Oct 15, 2015)

pwp said:


> I'm loving this. Sigma keeps coming up with surprises. If the Astroboys get their clean coma and the rest of us get reliable AF, and it delivers better IQ than my L24 f/1.4II at f/1.4 (wouldn't be hard....) then they've got themselves another winner.
> 
> -pw


Well there are so many ifs in the above sentence... But count me in ... if ... all the above ...ifs are satisfied...


----------



## chmteacher (Oct 15, 2015)

Thoughts on this for crop bodies? F 1.4 is much nicer than Canon's 35mm f/2 on full frame...


----------



## 3kramd5 (Oct 15, 2015)

Canon Rumors said:


> RRP: ¥ 162,000 (over-the-counter price should be around and above ¥ 120,000)



Out of curiosity, what percentage of canon rumors participants do you figure have an intuitive feel for what 100,000 yen means (as opposed to if you posted in euros or GBP or USD)?


----------



## Zanken (Oct 15, 2015)

chmteacher said:


> Thoughts on this for crop bodies? F 1.4 is much nicer than Canon's 35mm f/2 on full frame...



The Sigma 18-35mm looks to be about the same weight/size, but maybe half the cost?
It's a shame there aren't more ef-s primes. In theory they should be a hell of a lot smaller and cost less.


----------



## meywd (Oct 15, 2015)

I wanted the 50mm ART because well... its 50mm, but then the 35mm ART was better because I prefer environmental portraits, and it has good coma control - relatively - so its a higher priority, however now I really found my first ART - yeah if it delivers.



siegsAR said:


> vscd said:
> 
> 
> > This small familybased company surprises ones again. A 20mm f1.4... yay. Could be the first time that I buy a Sigma (at least a lens, I own the fabulous DP3M). The must be a new engineer-samurai inside the team, with intense karma
> ...



yup 14mm is very different, and its too cheap to sell it for funding a new lens, and it preforms well enough.


----------



## Hjalmarg1 (Oct 15, 2015)

Pixel said:


> I've been begging for this lens for a long time from Canon. Looks like Sigma is going to beat them to the punch and I'm fine with that.


It seems that they will beat them all again


----------



## noncho (Oct 15, 2015)

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.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 15, 2015)

Zanken said:


> chmteacher said:
> 
> 
> > Thoughts on this for crop bodies? F 1.4 is much nicer than Canon's 35mm f/2 on full frame...
> ...



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.


----------



## vscd (Oct 15, 2015)

> Thoughts on this for crop bodies? F 1.4 is much nicer than Canon's 35mm f/2 on full frame...



Can you clearify what you mean? Should be nearly the same from DOF/FOV... but the Canon had IS if I remember right...


----------



## infared (Oct 15, 2015)

I am excited about this lens......but definitely want to see a review. Hope it performs better across the frame than the 24mm Art.


----------



## Don Haines (Oct 15, 2015)

3kramd5 said:


> Canon Rumors said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


120 000 yen is $1310 Canadian, $1020 U.S., or 2640 Samoan Talas.......


----------



## meywd (Oct 15, 2015)

dilbert said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but this is the first* modern auto-focus lens* to be released with an EF mount that is wider than 24mm. What do I mean by "modern"? Released since DSLRs became widely available (i.e. post Y2K.)



Did you mean prime? fastest instead of first? what about the 14mm f2.8 II?


----------



## FramerMCB (Oct 15, 2015)

9VIII said:


> ahsanford said:
> 
> 
> > 9VIII said:
> ...


What you're looking for exists: the Zeiss Otuses 55mm f1.4 and 85mm f1.4, and the Zeiss (non-Otus) 15mm f2.8 UWA


----------



## tron (Oct 15, 2015)

dilbert said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong but this is the first modern auto-focus lens to be released with an EF mount that is wider than 24mm. What do I mean by "modern"? Released since DSLRs became widely available (i.e. post Y2K.)


You are wrong:

Tamron 15-30
Canon 16-35 f/4 L IS
Canon 14 2.8L II
Canon 11-24
Even Canon 16-35 2/8L II has been released post Y2K

Unless you meant fixed focus. But you didn't say so...


----------



## kevl (Oct 15, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> Now Sigma's just toying with the folks who were pining for an 85mm f/1.4 Art, who thought they'd be next in line for Art prime goodness.
> 
> - A



Yep. They're trolling us.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 15, 2015)

tron said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > Correct me if I'm wrong but this is the first modern auto-focus lens to be released with an EF mount that is wider than 24mm. What do I mean by "modern"? Released since DSLRs became widely available (i.e. post Y2K.)
> ...



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


----------



## Matthew Saville (Oct 15, 2015)

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.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 15, 2015)

Matthew Saville said:


> 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.



Matthew, did you get the shakes when this Sigma rumor dropped? Seems right up your alley, as the iffy rando AF problems of the Art line won't matter so much with astro.

- A


----------



## SloPhoto (Oct 15, 2015)

Well - If this brings the same quality that the rest of the line has - and doesn't have a permanent hood rending filters challenging at best - I may be sending my Zeiss 21 packing.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 15, 2015)

SloPhoto said:


> Well - If this brings the same quality that the rest of the line has - and doesn't have a permanent hood rending filters challenging at best - I may be sending my Zeiss 21 packing.



SloPhoto: the limited evidence we have points to a permanent hood, but who knows?

- A


----------



## tpatana (Oct 15, 2015)

preppyak said:


> I'm betting the .25x wasnt possible with a formula that limits coma and is sharp across the frame...and the sales are in the latter two aspects.



Also if the .25x (missing) becomes problem on star photos, you have one helluva leg-zoom on you. Or you work for Nasa.


----------



## 9VIII (Oct 15, 2015)

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.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 15, 2015)

9VIII said:


> 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.



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


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Oct 15, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> 9VIII said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...



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.


----------



## JMZawodny (Oct 16, 2015)

tpatana said:


> preppyak said:
> 
> 
> > I'm betting the .25x wasnt possible with a formula that limits coma and is sharp across the frame...and the sales are in the latter two aspects.
> ...



I do work for NASA


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 16, 2015)

PhotographyFirst said:


> 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.



I hear you. Astro is the first thing that comes to my mind with this, but I'm sure this forum may have other designs for it. 

I could also see this being used as a flash-prohibited low-light event lens, where the subjects might be moving such that IS doesn't do you much good -- concerts, perhaps?

- A


----------



## Random Orbits (Oct 16, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> PhotographyFirst said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...



Dunno. 20mm is an odd focal length. For how many people will the 20mm displace a 24 f/1.4?


----------



## abirkill (Oct 16, 2015)

Now live on Sigma's site:

http://sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_20_14/index.html

The press photos show a protruding front element, so almost certainly no support for screw-on filters.


----------



## Chapman Baxter (Oct 16, 2015)

Another Sigma first is that this must be the world's first lens for which the lens cap is an extra-cost option. ;D

The thing about Sigma's Art line is that before the 24mm was released, we had come to expect optical excellence across the frame at all apertures. The 24mm Art shows that, even for Sigma, the practical limitations of optical design still apply. Much as I would love to imagine this 20mm will be the perfect astro lens, I'm not expecting miracles from it.

EDIT: apparently there is a standard lens cap included. The extra-cost option is for a metal version. Still, a lens cap upgrade option may be a world first. ???


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Oct 16, 2015)

dilbert said:


> PhotographyFirst said:
> 
> 
> > ...
> ...


Might as well pull up your down riggers. There's nothing to troll for in my waters. 

My post was about f1.4 on 20mm, not 20mm alone.


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Oct 16, 2015)

ahsanford said:


> PhotographyFirst said:
> 
> 
> > 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.
> ...



That's a good point. I could see this being useful for low light event work. It would need some Hulk arms to carry around with complimentary lenses and cameras, but having such speed and width would be unmatched. Hopefully the vignetting is very well controlled to make it a true f1.4 transmission lens.


----------



## Chapman Baxter (Oct 16, 2015)

B&H has listed it at $899 - same price as the 35mm Art. That seems like a great price to me.

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1191178-REG/sigma_20mm_f_1_4_art_lens.html


----------



## NNature (Oct 16, 2015)

What do they mean with this? Is the lens hood detachable or not?
"The included lens hood can be attached to block out extraneous light, which can have a negative effect on rendering performance."

Read under "flare and ghosting reduction".
http://sigma-global.com/en/lenses/cas/product/art/a_20_14/features.html





9VIII said:


> 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.


----------



## meywd (Oct 16, 2015)

NNature said:


> What do they mean with this? Is the lens hood detachable or not?
> "The included lens hood can be attached to block out extraneous light, which can have a negative effect on rendering performance."
> 
> Read under "flare and ghosting reduction".
> ...



I believe that's a typo, because I can't find info about the filter size


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 16, 2015)

meywd said:


> NNature said:
> 
> 
> > What do they mean with this? Is the lens hood detachable or not?
> ...




1) As surmised from the leaked photos, the hood is permanent + front element is bulbous = no front filtering via threads. Confirmed at B&H. You have to hand-hold your filters or wait for Lee / Wonderpana to bail you out on that front.

2) Lens cap comes in the box with the lens, but apparently there is _another_ lens cap (different SKU) you can optionally buy.

- A


----------



## vscd (Oct 16, 2015)

dilbert said:


> meywd said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



You're quite new to canon, aren't you?  Just kidding... but you forgot a few primes for your searchfilter:
- 15mm fisheye
- 20mm 2.8 USM

The 20mm is really quite uncommon.


----------



## JMZawodny (Oct 16, 2015)

So what is currently the best 20-ish mm, fast, full frame lens for astrophotography? I'm just curious to see how hard it will be for this Sigma to become top dog.


----------



## ahsanford (Oct 16, 2015)

JMZawodny said:


> So what is currently the best 20-ish mm, fast, full frame lens for astrophotography? I'm just curious to see how hard it will be for this Sigma to become top dog.



I've heard the RokiBowYang glass does well with astro, but it's not something I typically shoot.

- A


----------



## PhotographyFirst (Oct 17, 2015)

JMZawodny said:


> So what is currently the best 20-ish mm, fast, full frame lens for astrophotography? I'm just curious to see how hard it will be for this Sigma to become top dog.


The Tamron 15-30 f2.8 VC is probably the all-around best Astro lens out there currently in the wide end and f2.8, IMO. Very well controlled coma, even compared to prime lenses. Plus, you get a wide focal range to use. Keep it at 15mm for wide shots, or zoom in a stitch multiple images together. Tons of options without swapping lenses all day and night. 

Even though it is a Nikon, I personally like the nearly non-existent vignetting of the 14-24 f2.8 lens. More coma than the Tamron, but the lack of vignetting in the Nikon is just outstanding for a wide and fast lens. When applying vignetting correction to lenses with dark corners, it can be brutal, especially if there is some amp glow added to the mix. My old 16-35L II f2.8 had bad coma, but it was the 3+ stops of vignetting that really became a huge issue. 

Many people like the Sammy 14mm f2.8 due to low coma, but it does have horrendous distortion and vignetting wide open. Distortion can be an issue for panoramas. It's cheap and that's the largest reason it's an astro favorite.


----------



## TWI by Dustin Abbott (Oct 17, 2015)

PhotographyFirst said:


> JMZawodny said:
> 
> 
> > So what is currently the best 20-ish mm, fast, full frame lens for astrophotography? I'm just curious to see how hard it will be for this Sigma to become top dog.
> ...



+1. this almost perfectly echoes my thoughts.


----------



## Talley (Oct 17, 2015)

PhotographyFirst said:


> JMZawodny said:
> 
> 
> > So what is currently the best 20-ish mm, fast, full frame lens for astrophotography? I'm just curious to see how hard it will be for this Sigma to become top dog.
> ...



I love my 15-30.

I agree with your comments completely.

However... this 20mm intrests me for the purpose of portraits. Kinda unusual huh.


----------



## StudentOfLight (Oct 20, 2015)

The MTF charts do not inspire much confidence personally.






At maximum aperture there is a massive astigmatism at MTF-10 and significant dropoff in performance for the outer third of frame. MTF-30 also drops to poor levels in the outer third of the image circle. The lens will have to do better than that to earn my dollar. If I need to crop to APS-H to get a usable image then what good is it really? 

I guess I'll have to see how much it improves on stopping down. If there's no big improvements by f/2.8 (especially in the outer third of the frame ) then there's no real threat of me selling my 24L II. Just my personal take...

Looking forward to seeing some tests.


----------

