Keep in mind this lens may not do good for test chart, it's optimized for infinity focus for astro works. I just received my own copy and did a quick test at a local park, my Sigma 14mm DG DN is sharper than my own 14 GM at F1.8.
I’m also between Sony or sigma, I’m shooting northern lights , I have the 20mm f1.8 sony G and considering the 14mm how good is the 14mm for shooting also people with northern lights since I’m doing guided trips for northern light hunting?
That may be true (though I haven't heard that from Sigma), but testing at infinity is a little more difficult due to having a lot more variables that can affect performance.
Dear Dustin, what do you think about the theory that this kind of lense is focus optimized for near infinity, not close ups? My Sigma 20mm 1.4 DG DN certainly behaves this way. Its good, ok close up, but amazing when shot near infinity focus (aka starfield). I understand that reviewer like you have „their chart“ to test against. But when it comes to full coverage of a FF fov with a uw lense, i see limitations.
I did do a second test with it focused in the corner, but that didn't really change anything. I felt like real world infinity results were slightly better, but not exceptionally different...and I tested two different copies. But yes, it wouldn't be surprising if this lens performs better at distance.
I do see a potential issue with the performance review on a flat surface (test chart) regarding sharpness and contrast, since there's probably not a flat but rather curved depth of field especially wide open. So what looks like "not sharp" at the edges could just be out of focus.
I did do a second test with it focused in the corner, but that didn't really change anything. I felt like real world infinity results were slightly better, but not exceptionally different...and I tested two different copies.
Thank you for the review. Really looking forward to this lens. I don't think its optimized for sharpness close up as the field flatness is likely optimized for infinity focus. All those test charts are probably going to paint a different picture than what most landscape and astro photographers will experience. Also, with the 14mm 1.8 sigma, it really needed to be focused away from the center of the frame to get a good balance of corner and center sharpness.
I did test focusing on the corner instead and also tested two copies, so I don't think the latter point is true but I'm sure it is more optimized for infinity.
Thanks for your detailed review, Dustin. As I've mentioned on one of your previous reviews, your assessments are what I wait for prior to a lens purchase. One question - while the F-stop is lower than the Sony, is the T-stop noticeably lower too? i.e. does it actually let in more light? This is a more important metric for astrophotography. Thanks again.
That's a fair question, but a hard thing for me to evaluate without having them side by side, and even then I would just be comparing equivalent brightness. I'm not quite sure what is required to measure light transmission in a truly scientific fashion.
Hey Dustin, have been enjoying your content. Prior to this was going thru Sigma series DG DN Art ones. What would be your top recommendations for finest lenses for Action Videography for L-Mount (S5IIx)? Suggest me Primes please. Such as one of the shortlisted ones being, Sigma 28-70MM F2.8 DG DN Contemporary. I would be fine with one zoom lens! Thanks in advance.
Thank for a great review. I will replace 14 GM with this one. Did you try to install Haida rear filter? Some youtuber said the filter is too thick for this lens.
I shoot 14mm f/1.0 on R6, a7s2, S5... .. using Sigma 20mm f/1.4 plus a 0.71x speedbooster . Sure gets some vignetting but that's okay, edit, crop it... hey ! f/1.0 at 14mm ? 😊
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you , Sir, highly appreciated. You are one of the best lens reviewers out there. Respect ! Please call if you ever visit Switzerland , lunch is on me , and we can do a photoshoot ( wildlife, vultures, waterspouts in Italy, or northern lights in Iceland ... at f/1.0 ;-) . Cheers.
As an owner of the Sony 14mm f1.8 I can say I LOVE how sigma has pushed the industry forward with this doing something that hasn’t been done before. That being said I would go with the Sony still as I find the performance excellent (especially given modern what noise reduction can do) and the ease of getting out to a dark location which generally involves a decent hike is the priority for me. Truly doesn’t seem like you can go wrong either way though. All depends on your personal use case.
Hm, looking at that tripod collar really makes me wonder... how much can a lens mount handle...? 🤔 I do have the Sigma 40 mm f1.4 DG HSM, which is also > 1.2 kg...
One of the R bodies is great because it gives you more magnification when you crop, but a cheaper body like the a7IV has good low light performance and adequate resolution.
Usually I find your reviews fair and a little light on resolution comments. This one seems harsh and heavy on test charts! I’m shocked you didn’t compare with other 14mm lenses and despite loads of examples only two were late evening...no night shots. It would be great to compare with the Sigma 14mm f1.4 and give us all your Pro and Cons please?
When a lens is all in on optics (little thought given to compact size, here), I want ultimate performance in exchange. I tested two copies to be sure of my remarks, and while I'm very impressed for astro, I don't think the lens justifies the size for other areas.
Watching the review as a canon shooter just because the formula for this lens seemed so good! A bit less excited by it than I thought I would be following your review. The fringing seems a bit gnarly upclose especially at 18.46, the circles in the background are pretty green. The flare pattern at times and the wide open sharpness aren't as mind blowing as some other channels have claimed. Still of course an amazing lens to consider if f1.4 is needed, but I guess my trusty old Tamron 15-30 F2.8 still does it for me with fewer compromises and more fliexibility. Thanks for the review and love the new setup!
The Tamron was and continues to be a good astro lens, though this new lens really opens up a lot of new avenues for astro because it can be used at F1.4.
@Dustin Abbott Agreed! In my case, I personally use it occasionally for Astro where it is quite useful. Most of the time, I use it for general purpose wide-angle photography. So it has worked for me really well for that.
What would you suggest for astro? I have a canon 15-35 f2.8… I do a ton of night timelapse work so anything that will work on canon RF that lets in more light would be a big win!!!
@07wrxtr1 i think the biggest issue with the canon from what I was able to tell is that it has very heavy vignetting. This means that when shooting night shots at iso 3200+-, trying to recover that vignetting will induce a loot of noise. The Tamron on the other hand, at the same 15mm and F2.8, has I think around 2 less stops of vignetting, giving it an advantage for low light shooting.
Thanks for confirming the Astro performance of the lens, from your sample, 8 second exposure stars looked nice, really huge step up from the " old" 14 F1.8 Art (which I still own) in the coma performance, that is the biggest complaint I have with the old Sigma and why I bought the 14GM, looks like this Sigma 14 DG DN is another winner, 2/3 of stop faster than GM is not a just a bragging right, it's real, i have seen sample from Ian Norman 's ( from Lonely Speck) real Astro sample with ISO 640 and 6 seconds F1.4 , looks really amazing, looks really promising, Regarding the extreme edge/corner sharpness, I have seen comparison from other review showing the difference is much smaller, maybe that's due to sample variation? but even " as bad" as what you demonstrated, i will still take this Sigma DG DN over the GM, again the 2/3 stop better light gathering is no joke, it's very real advantage when it comes to Astro when you really want to have control your exposure time to avoid star trail , plus all the " little" things, like the Manual Focus Lock, larger front lip for easy heater install, the rear filter holder, the built in tripod mount.....all those translate it into a better lens for real world shooting, One has to be a real Astro landscape shooter and use the lens in the filed regularly to appreciate those " little thing", for keyboard warriors, this lens makes absolutely no sense. One surprised watching your review is the ( lack of ) ghosting when shooting against the sun, with such wide lens with huge front element I was expecting a much worse performance there, a nice surprise. Thanks for the review again, just put in my pre-order.
This Sigma is clearly aim for landscape astrophotography. It ia a specialist lens. I own Sony 14 1.8, shoot tons of astro but I won’t be upgrading to this Sigma. The reason is I can use H&Y magnetic 100x100mm filter system with the Sony and I own NDs, Polarizer, GNDs and black mist 1/8 and 1/4 in 100x100mm format. It makes to Sony 14 1.8 very versatile for both photography and videography. Not to mention the Sony is so light using it on gimbal is very easy. You can’t do this on the Sigma. Rear filters are very limited and such a pain in the arse to use. 😢
I agree, my tripod suffers greatly from the weight of this lens) The difference of 700 grams will be critical for most users, while the difference in the image is not so obvious.
Keep in mind this lens may not do good for test chart, it's optimized for infinity focus for astro works. I just received my own copy and did a quick test at a local park, my Sigma 14mm DG DN is sharper than my own 14 GM at F1.8.
I'm glad you're getting good results.
I am planning to buy it for the Northern lights in my upcoming trip but I am undecided between the Sigma 14mm 1.4 or the Sony GM 14mm 1.8
I’m also between Sony or sigma, I’m shooting northern lights , I have the 20mm f1.8 sony G and considering the 14mm how good is the 14mm for shooting also people with northern lights since I’m doing guided trips for northern light hunting?
Excellent review, thanks DA! One thing, this lens is optimized for infinity focus, not for usual, shorter focus distances.
That may be true (though I haven't heard that from Sigma), but testing at infinity is a little more difficult due to having a lot more variables that can affect performance.
Dear Dustin, what do you think about the theory that this kind of lense is focus optimized for near infinity, not close ups? My Sigma 20mm 1.4 DG DN certainly behaves this way. Its good, ok close up, but amazing when shot near infinity focus (aka starfield). I understand that reviewer like you have „their chart“ to test against. But when it comes to full coverage of a FF fov with a uw lense, i see limitations.
I did do a second test with it focused in the corner, but that didn't really change anything. I felt like real world infinity results were slightly better, but not exceptionally different...and I tested two different copies. But yes, it wouldn't be surprising if this lens performs better at distance.
I do see a potential issue with the performance review on a flat surface (test chart) regarding sharpness and contrast, since there's probably not a flat but rather curved depth of field especially wide open. So what looks like "not sharp" at the edges could just be out of focus.
Not saying you did sth "wrong" of course. As always excellent review! Just sth I was thinking about.
I did do a second test with it focused in the corner, but that didn't really change anything. I felt like real world infinity results were slightly better, but not exceptionally different...and I tested two different copies.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Ah, you are just the best! Interesting! Thanks for sharing!
Thank you for the review. Really looking forward to this lens. I don't think its optimized for sharpness close up as the field flatness is likely optimized for infinity focus. All those test charts are probably going to paint a different picture than what most landscape and astro photographers will experience. Also, with the 14mm 1.8 sigma, it really needed to be focused away from the center of the frame to get a good balance of corner and center sharpness.
I did test focusing on the corner instead and also tested two copies, so I don't think the latter point is true but I'm sure it is more optimized for infinity.
When are we going to have reviews of Nikon S Lenses ??
Unfortunately I have no plans to add Nikon to the stable. I'm too busy as it is!
Thanks for your detailed review, Dustin. As I've mentioned on one of your previous reviews, your assessments are what I wait for prior to a lens purchase. One question - while the F-stop is lower than the Sony, is the T-stop noticeably lower too? i.e. does it actually let in more light? This is a more important metric for astrophotography. Thanks again.
That's a fair question, but a hard thing for me to evaluate without having them side by side, and even then I would just be comparing equivalent brightness. I'm not quite sure what is required to measure light transmission in a truly scientific fashion.
Hey Dustin, have been enjoying your content. Prior to this was going thru Sigma series DG DN Art ones.
What would be your top recommendations for finest lenses for Action Videography for L-Mount (S5IIx)? Suggest me Primes please. Such as one of the shortlisted ones being, Sigma 28-70MM F2.8 DG DN Contemporary. I would be fine with one zoom lens!
Thanks in advance.
Thank for a great review. I will replace 14 GM with this one. Did you try to install Haida rear filter? Some youtuber said the filter is too thick for this lens.
I don't think that's true. I didn't have the Haida on hand, but a similar filter that I reviewed as the same time as the Haida, and it worked fine.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thank you for your reply
I shoot 14mm f/1.0 on R6, a7s2, S5... .. using Sigma 20mm f/1.4 plus a 0.71x speedbooster . Sure gets some vignetting but that's okay, edit, crop it... hey ! f/1.0 at 14mm ? 😊
That’s fun!
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you , Sir, highly appreciated. You are one of the best lens reviewers out there. Respect ! Please call if you ever visit Switzerland , lunch is on me , and we can do a photoshoot ( wildlife, vultures, waterspouts in Italy, or northern lights in Iceland ... at f/1.0 ;-) . Cheers.
As an owner of the Sony 14mm f1.8 I can say I LOVE how sigma has pushed the industry forward with this doing something that hasn’t been done before. That being said I would go with the Sony still as I find the performance excellent (especially given modern what noise reduction can do) and the ease of getting out to a dark location which generally involves a decent hike is the priority for me. Truly doesn’t seem like you can go wrong either way though. All depends on your personal use case.
Exactly. That's a good summation
Hm, looking at that tripod collar really makes me wonder... how much can a lens mount handle...? 🤔 I do have the Sigma 40 mm f1.4 DG HSM, which is also > 1.2 kg...
I've used a lot of heavy lenses over the year and have never noticed any issue with stresses on the lens mount. Don't get too worried ;)
OK thx 😊
What would be the best camera for this lens, for Milky Way shots?
One of the R bodies is great because it gives you more magnification when you crop, but a cheaper body like the a7IV has good low light performance and adequate resolution.
Usually I find your reviews fair and a little light on resolution comments. This one seems harsh and heavy on test charts! I’m shocked you didn’t compare with other 14mm lenses and despite loads of examples only two were late evening...no night shots. It would be great to compare with the Sigma 14mm f1.4 and give us all your Pro and Cons please?
When a lens is all in on optics (little thought given to compact size, here), I want ultimate performance in exchange. I tested two copies to be sure of my remarks, and while I'm very impressed for astro, I don't think the lens justifies the size for other areas.
Watching the review as a canon shooter just because the formula for this lens seemed so good! A bit less excited by it than I thought I would be following your review. The fringing seems a bit gnarly upclose especially at 18.46, the circles in the background are pretty green. The flare pattern at times and the wide open sharpness aren't as mind blowing as some other channels have claimed. Still of course an amazing lens to consider if f1.4 is needed, but I guess my trusty old Tamron 15-30 F2.8 still does it for me with fewer compromises and more fliexibility.
Thanks for the review and love the new setup!
The Tamron was and continues to be a good astro lens, though this new lens really opens up a lot of new avenues for astro because it can be used at F1.4.
@Dustin Abbott Agreed! In my case, I personally use it occasionally for Astro where it is quite useful. Most of the time, I use it for general purpose wide-angle photography. So it has worked for me really well for that.
What would you suggest for astro? I have a canon 15-35 f2.8… I do a ton of night timelapse work so anything that will work on canon RF that lets in more light would be a big win!!!
@07wrxtr1 i think the biggest issue with the canon from what I was able to tell is that it has very heavy vignetting. This means that when shooting night shots at iso 3200+-, trying to recover that vignetting will induce a loot of noise. The Tamron on the other hand, at the same 15mm and F2.8, has I think around 2 less stops of vignetting, giving it an advantage for low light shooting.
What do you guys/gals think about the fujinon 16 f1.4
I haven't reviewed it yet, but its on my list.
Thanks for confirming the Astro performance of the lens, from your sample, 8 second exposure stars looked nice, really huge step up from the " old" 14 F1.8 Art (which I still own) in the coma performance, that is the biggest complaint I have with the old Sigma and why I bought the 14GM, looks like this Sigma 14 DG DN is another winner, 2/3 of stop faster than GM is not a just a bragging right, it's real, i have seen sample from Ian Norman 's ( from Lonely Speck) real Astro sample with ISO 640 and 6 seconds F1.4 , looks really amazing, looks really promising,
Regarding the extreme edge/corner sharpness, I have seen comparison from other review showing the difference is much smaller, maybe that's due to sample variation? but even " as bad" as what you demonstrated, i will still take this Sigma DG DN over the GM, again the 2/3 stop better light gathering is no joke, it's very real advantage when it comes to Astro when you really want to have control your exposure time to avoid star trail , plus all the " little" things, like the Manual Focus Lock, larger front lip for easy heater install, the rear filter holder, the built in tripod mount.....all those translate it into a better lens for real world shooting, One has to be a real Astro landscape shooter and use the lens in the filed regularly to appreciate those " little thing", for keyboard warriors, this lens makes absolutely no sense.
One surprised watching your review is the ( lack of ) ghosting when shooting against the sun, with such wide lens with huge front element I was expecting a much worse performance there, a nice surprise. Thanks for the review again, just put in my pre-order.
Fair points all around. I too was disappointed with that aspect of the Sigma 14mm F1.8, so the 1.4 is a huge improvement when it comes to astro work.
can I use this for 360° photography ?
I don't see why not, though I'm not overly familiar with that type of photography.
Nice review as always! It's a good help that you compare the lenses with others like the GM or the new viltrox! thx for that!
My pleasure!
Thanks for another review done with professional touch.
My pleasure!
This Sigma is clearly aim for landscape astrophotography. It ia a specialist lens. I own Sony 14 1.8, shoot tons of astro but I won’t be upgrading to this Sigma. The reason is I can use H&Y magnetic 100x100mm filter system with the Sony and I own NDs, Polarizer, GNDs and black mist 1/8 and 1/4 in 100x100mm format. It makes to Sony 14 1.8 very versatile for both photography and videography. Not to mention the Sony is so light using it on gimbal is very easy. You can’t do this on the Sigma. Rear filters are very limited and such a pain in the arse to use. 😢
I agree, my tripod suffers greatly from the weight of this lens) The difference of 700 grams will be critical for most users, while the difference in the image is not so obvious.
Sigma is a great company. I own their lenses. I would love to own this as well! Excellent review!
Hopefully you'll have one some day.
I’ll keep my light, sharp, and awesome 14mm GM
I've heard that a few times :)
I will keep my sharp, small and light 14mm 1.8 GM. This sigma looks great but to big and heavy.
Fair enough. I liked the 14GM as well.
Thanks for that.
You're welcome
1st.
:)