Not sure if you'll see this Chris, but you should do playlists on your channel where you do all your highly recommended, very highly recommended, recommended etc separately. I couldnt find something like that there. Thanks!
3:59 as soon as I got there, the 20mm became a much better option in my mind. To me, this lens looks more like an higher end Samyang/Rokinon/Tokina lens than a new top notch Sigma Art lens. But it's not bad
@@acouragefann At f/2 it's still blurry in the corners. Astro is a great example of when you want as much of the frame razor-sharp as possible, at wide open apertures.
Hi Chris, nice review! What is your recommendation now that Sigma offers the art version of this lens along with the older contemporary I series version (the F2 version)?
thank for all your video. for this review below expectations as a newer art class product and f1.4 turns out to be only recommended, in contrast to 24mm dg dn f2 class c which is highly recommended. many thank to you Chris.
Maybe I got lucky with my copy of the lens but I found the corners to be nearly as sharp as in the middle in my use. Not sure if it's because you had an early copy or there's just some higher than average variance between copies of this lens. Figured it was worth noting nonetheless.
Thanks Chris. Is it me, or the Sigma 35mm f2 DG DN 'C' is better at f2? You didn't need to stop down the "C" version to f2.8 to get sharp corners. The coma levels were also better controlled on the cheaper lens and the build quality was also excellent, but it wasn't fully weather sealed and had problems with distortion. What are your thoughts about them? Is it worth getting the more expensive and heavier f1.4 Art? I would primarily shoot landscapes and astrophotography.
Thanks Chris. When looking at your test results for corner sharpness I was surprised you rated it so well…..looked very fuzzy to me wide open. The new 20mm is much better all round in my opinion.
Compared to the GM this seems like the better option though. Sharper in the middle wide open, sharper in the corners too when stopped down. And without the CA from the GM.
I may be a little difficult to please, and would add a caveat that I have never been a purchaser of only "fast"" lens. That said, if the additional expense of purchasing a 1.4 lens is taken, I expect to use the lens at 1.4, otherwise why not save the pesos and purchase a 2.8lens, which may have to opened to 5.6 to obtain the best results. No, I am not very difficult to please!
I have this lens, I use it at f/1.4, and find it perfectly acceptable. If you're a highly-paid pro photographer, whose professional image involves never using icky 3rd party lenses, get the G Master. Otherwise, the Sigma 24mm F/1.4 DG DN is at least 90% as good, and $500 cheaper. I AM a fast prime lens lover, and the Sigma 24mm has become my favorite lens.
Looks like it is a similar case than the one on Nikon primes. The 20mm being a bit better than the 24mm. Maybe new optical formulas and techniques make it easier to resolve 20mm than 24mm. Thanks for the video
@@skatedresden There are a reason I write it, the best Lenses are getting better and to see a difference you need a high megapixels Camera there are more than 42 Mp
I feel like Sigma just re-release the original art series with the aperture ring and couple of more buttons, instead of trying to improve the optic quality of the lenses. I wish they would re-done the 24-35mm f2.0
The Sigma DG "HSM" Art lenses are DSLR lenses with an extended mount ring, essentially a permanently attached lens adapter. They typically have slower autofocus and are bulkier than the DG DN Art lenses, which are designed specifically for mirrorless cameras. I have the 70mm f/2.8 DG HSM Macro lens and the 24mm f/1.4 DG DN lens. and the 24mm is the better lens. The 70mm is good, but the AF is slower and it's bulkier.
Can't help but criticise that corner sharpness when the first-party manufacturers (and even Sigma themselves, with the 20mm) are releasing perfect lenses (from a resolution point of view) these days.
It is frustrating when people say one lens is better than the other as if everyone has the same eyes. There is a difference between the way Sony, Sigma, Zeiss render images.
@@Smoothblue90 optical performance can be measured as well as weight, the GM wins in both cases - as it should given its pricetag. If you prefer a certain look, thats absolutely fine, there is no such thing as a perfect lens for everyone. except maybe the 135 GM.
The Sony is +60% in cost vs this SIgma, at least here (Sweden). The difference in weight and size is there but the difference in size and weight between the Sigma 20 1,4 DN and the Sony 20 1,8 is pretty significant. Not a worry for tripods but I have no interest whatsoever in the 20 1,4 DN. This 24mm though..it appears pretty reasonable and overall nice bokeh.
we have been blessed with two videos
I never buy a lens without watching Chris Video of it, this channel should've been like million sub already
Not sure if you'll see this Chris, but you should do playlists on your channel where you do all your highly recommended, very highly recommended, recommended etc separately. I couldnt find something like that there. Thanks!
There is indeed a playlist of recommendations and comparisons on my channel :-)
Looks like your assistant was helping demonstrate the aperture ring (in a few years they'll be directing!)
You spotted!
3:59 as soon as I got there, the 20mm became a much better option in my mind. To me, this lens looks more like an higher end Samyang/Rokinon/Tokina lens than a new top notch Sigma Art lens. But it's not bad
What are some applications where slight softness at f1.4 at 100% magnification in the extreme corners become relevant?
@@acouragefann Some landscape applications, architecture photography, fine art. But we are pixel peeping here, for sure
I think the Samyang 24mm F1.8 is much better than this one to be honest…..especially for astro.
@@TerabitTech Why would anyone shoot those at F1.4 where depth of field is minimal (and field curvature can impact sharpness as well)?
@@acouragefann At f/2 it's still blurry in the corners. Astro is a great example of when you want as much of the frame razor-sharp as possible, at wide open apertures.
I like 24mm-like framing... my Sigma 16mm F/1.4 is probably my favourite lens at the moment
Hi Chris, nice review! What is your recommendation now that Sigma offers the art version of this lens along with the older contemporary I series version (the F2 version)?
thank for all your video. for this review below expectations as a newer art class product and f1.4 turns out to be only recommended, in contrast to 24mm dg dn f2 class c which is highly recommended. many thank to you Chris.
Did the APS-C image quality section get cut? Not that I'd miss it...
Maybe I got lucky with my copy of the lens but I found the corners to be nearly as sharp as in the middle in my use. Not sure if it's because you had an early copy or there's just some higher than average variance between copies of this lens. Figured it was worth noting nonetheless.
Very good review again Chris. The portrait in BnW is lovely n crisp.
Looks like a winner overall!
gooood eeeeevening, by any chances are you going to review the R7 and the 18-150 kit lens?
Thanks Chris. Is it me, or the Sigma 35mm f2 DG DN 'C' is better at f2? You didn't need to stop down the "C" version to f2.8 to get sharp corners. The coma levels were also better controlled on the cheaper lens and the build quality was also excellent, but it wasn't fully weather sealed and had problems with distortion.
What are your thoughts about them? Is it worth getting the more expensive and heavier f1.4 Art? I would primarily shoot landscapes and astrophotography.
Thanks Chris. When looking at your test results for corner sharpness I was surprised you rated it so well…..looked very fuzzy to me wide open. The new 20mm is much better all round in my opinion.
Compared to the GM this seems like the better option though. Sharper in the middle wide open, sharper in the corners too when stopped down. And without the CA from the GM.
Would you recommend the 20mm over this then? All things considered
I may be a little difficult to please, and would add a caveat that I have never been a purchaser of only "fast"" lens. That said, if the additional expense of purchasing a 1.4 lens is taken, I expect to use the lens at 1.4, otherwise why not save the pesos and purchase a 2.8lens, which may have to opened to 5.6 to obtain the best results. No, I am not very difficult to please!
I have this lens, I use it at f/1.4, and find it perfectly acceptable. If you're a highly-paid pro photographer, whose professional image involves never using icky 3rd party lenses, get the G Master. Otherwise, the Sigma 24mm F/1.4 DG DN is at least 90% as good, and $500 cheaper.
I AM a fast prime lens lover, and the Sigma 24mm has become my favorite lens.
thanks a lot Chris, frankly impressed about the 20mm IQ, not that much about this one... great work
Siwmae? How does it compare to their 24mm Contemporary lens which is likely to be very substantially cheaper?
Looks like it is a similar case than the one on Nikon primes. The 20mm being a bit better than the 24mm. Maybe new optical formulas and techniques make it easier to resolve 20mm than 24mm. Thanks for the video
Thx for the great video! : ) Will Sony's in-camera correction software remove the chromatic aberration?
Thanks your duscription
Awesome and easily best review. Can you please review the canon ref 24 f1.8. Thank you.
Wish they make a smaller 24mm 1.4 for apsc
Hi from Ukraine! Is this lens already on sale? Where can you buy it? What is its price?
Чудовий огляд обектива, і українського прапора👍🇺🇦
Man I bet you've been busy. Just wondering if there's gonna be more lens announced?
You should upgrade to a 61 megapixels Camera for testing new Lenses.
If you send him the money to buy a R4?
You see the problems even with 42mp, so there is no need to upgrade....
@@skatedresden There are a reason I write it, the best Lenses are getting better and to see a difference you need a high megapixels Camera there are more than 42 Mp
I feel like Sigma just re-release the original art series with the aperture ring and couple of more buttons, instead of trying to improve the optic quality of the lenses.
I wish they would re-done the 24-35mm f2.0
Check the MTF charts and you'll find that is not the case.
The Sigma DG "HSM" Art lenses are DSLR lenses with an extended mount ring, essentially a permanently attached lens adapter. They typically have slower autofocus and are bulkier than the DG DN Art lenses, which are designed specifically for mirrorless cameras.
I have the 70mm f/2.8 DG HSM Macro lens and the 24mm f/1.4 DG DN lens. and the 24mm is the better lens. The 70mm is good, but the AF is slower and it's bulkier.
Nice video, thanks. Very happy with Samyang 24mm 1.8 tough.
But autofocus is some tricky to use.
Can't help but criticise that corner sharpness when the first-party manufacturers (and even Sigma themselves, with the 20mm) are releasing perfect lenses (from a resolution point of view) these days.
Canon rf 24 1.8 review plz
The purple color fringing is a no-go for me.
The Sony 24mm 1.4 GM have better optical performance, the Sony are also smaller and lighter.
The 24mm GM is my favorite lens to date. Brilliant sharpness and contrast. It never left my camera.
Sigma prices point always interesting as well, plus the lenses are having strong character indeed than others brand. Never failed.
It is frustrating when people say one lens is better than the other as if everyone has the same eyes. There is a difference between the way Sony, Sigma, Zeiss render images.
@@Smoothblue90 optical performance can be measured as well as weight, the GM wins in both cases - as it should given its pricetag. If you prefer a certain look, thats absolutely fine, there is no such thing as a perfect lens for everyone. except maybe the 135 GM.
The Sony is +60% in cost vs this SIgma, at least here (Sweden). The difference in weight and size is there but the difference in size and weight between the Sigma 20 1,4 DN and the Sony 20 1,8 is pretty significant. Not a worry for tripods but I have no interest whatsoever in the 20 1,4 DN. This 24mm though..it appears pretty reasonable and overall nice bokeh.
Two videos at the same time? What's that for?
Sigma announced two lenses at the same time.
man i wish i could afford this lens 😂