If I didn't already own the GM I'd be getting that 20mm for sure. Good comparison here. I Really hope Sony release a wider GM prime at some stage. I'd love a 16mm f1.8 for astro. Not keen on Sigma's 14mm brick, might try a Laowa in the mean time.
I don’t get this wider is better for landscapes. It isn’t unless you have a dominate foreground. Unless your doin Astro personally the 24 is the winner
i love your video's Thanks and god bless you...i Feel 20mm /F1.8 is good...i feel lot of different with Prime lens and Zoom lens..i like to share with my photo's , may i know ur email id...thanks
Credible real world review, Jay; well done. Have the 20mm lens - impressive IQ. Aperture ring with A setting - wonder if that predicts Sony will include (Fuji type) dials on future cam body to match. Your thoughts? Re lens case, remember when lenses came standard w/hard cases that had inside padding and external metal rings for straps?
Thank you for the kind words and I'm not sure about the manual dials like Fuji. That has never been Sony's thing based on all my years of reviewing them. As far as lens cases go, I never got one with a hard case. I don't think I have been in the game long enough... My Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS Lens came with a nice soft case though about 12 years ago when I purchased it...
I’m thinking of these lenses. My camera is 6400 and I love macro but I don’t have wide lens in my collection. Should I grab 20mm rather than 24mm? Thanks for sharing. Cheers Hanh
On paper the GM should have a larger reproduction ratio at closest focus distance but your review clearly shows the 20mm having a greater reproduction ratio. Interesting. I borrowed my buddies 24gm and that thing is ridiculously sharp. Now I don’t know whether to take the. 20mm instead. Tough choice.
Hi. Great comparison video! I recently swipe from apsc to full frame and also get a sony 20mm used from a friend. After seeing several videos of 24 mm gm portrait footage I realized I like it to much, because I'm more into portrait than landscape. So, my question is: how can I get that 24 style with the 20? How different are the two lenses in terms of distortion and compression?
Every lens has a different "look" Marco. You can't really get results with the 20mm like the 24mm provides. The 24mm has a faster f/1.4 lens and additional optical advantages, that yield it better in some ways, and portraits would be a good example of that. Honestly I prefer using at least a 35mm for portraits if not a 50 or 85mm. Using a higher focal length lens can provide much better background separation and really helps isolate the subject.
Good Review but YOU MISSED OUT LOW LIGHT COMPARISON OF BOTH LENSES- NIGHT SHOTS..... That would have nailed the buying decision. So I'm still on the look out for another review of low light ability of 1.8G!
I'm still very much between these two, and can't really tell the difference even from all the videos I'm watching. Does the 20mm have any issues with getting the fish eye effect for If I'm doing architecture photography or real estate? Also how big of a difference make with 1.4 vs 1.8 for astro do you know?
The difference in color rendering is also apparent. I find the 24GM to generate more 'tangible' images due to the color and out-of-focus contrast, but both are well worth the asking price.
THose are great questions! The seals appear to be identical on both lenses. Near the mount it has a rubber gasket and all the other weather sealing that you can't see with your eyes looks the same according to Sony's engineering spec diagrams. As far as astrophotography I have not tried either lens in that area, so I can't really say. I would imagine both lenses would be excellent though, and if the opportunity presents itself I will try to capture some cosmos. Times are tuff currently as far as getting out for stuff like that in NY. We are on crazy lockdown currently and taking pictures is not deemed essential for travel... Take care John and thanks again for the excellent questions! Jay
For what it's worth, I think you are talking about sun stars. Lens flare is the globs or circles of green light that you usually try to avoid in a photo when shooting into the sun.
Finally got a chance to watch this- thanks,Jay for a very comprehensive test. For me. I am happy with my 24GM and was blown away when taking it to the streets for night photography (not right at the moment, obviously! staying inside....) I think it comes down to what works for the individual as a preferred focal length. You can't go wrong with either.The GM is just a little bit better and perhaps more versatile but the 20 f1.8 looks like a bit of a bargain!
I film roller skaters and sometimes there’s more than one at time skating as a group. I love what 24mm produces, but so you think for videography the 20mm would give me slightly the Same results on a A7iii?
Torn between watching this now or the Covid- 19 update! We are definitely living in "interesting times......" Will watch this later, Jay but with interest as I already own the 24 GM and am very happy with it. I also own the Tamron 17-28f 2.8 so I have a hard time justifying buying this 20mm lens ( except for GAS!) Already given this a like!
@@anilpanda3991 Both are excellent -24 GM might be easier to balance as it is fixed in length being a prime. Depends on whether that is your preferred focal length. It is a lovely lens, though.....
Just discovered your posts. Thanks! Very helpful in answering my question about the two. Quick question: What camera, lens, and f-stop are you using for this video? Thanks.
Hello and sorry for the delayed reply. Check out this video for all that info in detail: ruclips.net/video/jx_PC1DfBxI/видео.html In summary, the Sony A6400 and Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Lens at f/1.4 when in my studio...
They are both great lenses and neither of them have stabilization built in. I have the 20mm, because I wanted wider for vlogging type purposes, but the 24mm is faster aperture wise and also super high quality. I would say the 20mm so you save some cash for other gear your are certainly going to need at some point ;)
@@Jason_Hermann omg thank you I’m planing to do blogging in my RUclips channel is going to be a mix of gaming .. Lore and some blogging .. I think the 20 fit best .. thank you so much
It's about the same sharpness at f/1.8 I would say. As far as better for object photography, that really depends. You can get closer for sure, but sometimes you don't want to get closer depending on what you are shooting. The perspective changes when you get closer for example, which may not be desired. Food for thought ;)
@@Jason_Hermann so if you were to buy one of them now from not having them at all which one would be good to get and why? I already have a Sigma 14mm for landscape/architecture. I think the reason why you cannot get closer w/ the 24MM GM is because when you open up the lens to wide-open it will be sharper than the 20MM so all around the 24MM could be better but the green tint to prevent flaring I assume makes images look worse but can't you correct that in post? Also, when you did all the test, did you disable all the stuff like chroma aberration and the other one from auto? I find to get better RAW images w/ all those disabled.
Very cool comparison!! Filming 4k 30 in a small room (12ft x 12ft) with the Sony a7iii; looking for the widest view with little to no distortion, which lens would you prefer?
For the widest view possible, the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Lens (bhpho.to/381IsOA) would be a great option, or this Sony 20mm f/1.8 would be really nice as well. I would rather use the 20mm f/1.8, but you might require a wider view which is why I mentioned the Tamron which I currently have in hand for review. It's a very sharp lens with very little distortion.
Hello, That was due to the sun and where it was in relation to me when I took the photo. It was behind me, so it appeared in the shot and you saw it on the 20mm, because the lens offers a wider view than the 24mm.
Sorry about that. The GM Lens will certainly have an advantage in low light shooting due to the faster max aperture. As far as Astro goes, the f/1.4 will offer more light, but the wider 20mm view would be preferred by me and f/1.8 is fast enough for some killer frames!
@@Jason_Hermann thanks for taking your time for answer my question. In fact, I am sorry. I was rude for saying you "forgot" compare low light and astrophotography.
Impressed by your content, thanks! I have the 24mm gm and have been amazed at some random astro I’ve done and also love cropping in for the 35mm look ;)
Thanks alote .. just one question , if I crop the image from a 20 to the size of 24 will it be different in term of distortion ? ( assuming everything was corrected in camera = JPEG format ) .. it’s maybe silly question but I am new in this world ;; also did you notice any aperture sound ( like rattling or friction of the aperture blade ) in aperture mode with the 24 ? I have seen a video of someone having clicky sound when changing the aperture rapidly or even in manually through the ring
Love how you compare the two lens.. i wonder how it looks like the 20mm for a wedding like group shots? or group of people as i do more weddings.. Thanks
So now I am torn between the Tamron 17-28mm vs the Sony 20mm f/1.8. The reason for wanting the f/1.8 is not only do I shoot astro, but I like shooting day time wide portraits, however, AT A DISTANCE. Would shooting f/2.8 vs f/1.8 actually make a difference in subject separation if my subject was say, 20 feet away? I love to shoot "little person in a big landscape photos" Thank you, Jay Oh and to mention good job on the success of your channel! 53K wow! I remember when I watched you review the old Tamron 18-200mm vs the old Sony 18-200mm like 8 years ago. lol Oh and I just realized, I am torn between a Tamron and a Sony once again 8 years later, lol!
Thank you very much for the kind words, and yeah it's been a long journey for sure ;) As far as your specific question, no the f/2.8 vs f/1.8 from 20 feet away is not going to make much of a difference. However, f/1.8 vs f/2.8 for astro will make a significant difference when it comes to noise and/ or shutter speeds required.... the Tamron 17-28mm is certainly a great lens and you can't go wrong. Having the 17-28mm zoom range would be nice as well. Thanks again for sticking around all these years and my very best to you and yours :) Jay
@Jelle Vanthuynemy decision was then to go for the 20mm f 1.8 and still do believe it is the right one, but for budget concerns later I had to buy Sigma 16mm 1.4 which is a very good choice as well.
wouldve liked some more math done for this review, the 20mm shouldve been closer to the subject so the (fov) frame was the same size so when magnifying the coin it has the same ppi (lab tripod not in the same position). also doing that will change the dof and the thickness of the focus plane at their most open aperture. may have even produced exact same results for bokeh and sharpness?
let's compare these two images where i have one just ever so slightly out of focus... And that's why i've reached a conclusion that's completely opposite of every other review! Here- can't you see at 9:40 in to the video where I show you a can in the corner that clearly shows a lack of definition compared to the flat white corner of the other picture???
The 24 is amazing for documentary photography at weddings, I was going to get one but looking at this I might go for the 20mm. Has anyone here used the 20mm for weddings and have you any samples??
I have not used it for weddings, but it would certainly work great for your wide angle needs. Not sure how much more use it would get over the 24mm though Darren....
I wish Sony will make a serie of lenses for very high resolution for landscape photography, compact, rugged, with aperture ring, the 20mm 1.8 G lens looks ok, I wish for macro lenses, manual focusing, with aperture and NO stabilizer, I wish for compact and light 300mm 3.0, 400 4.5 and 500mm 5.6, off course only primes ! Thank you very much Sony, oh I forgot, please upgrade the 55mm 1.8 with a AF on/on button (or make it in a manual focus version) plus aperture ring, a 60mm FF allround macro lens will be great ;)
How is it compare to Batis 18mm ? I really like the shorter min. focus distance 25 vs 19 mm and the 1.8 aperture, but I’m afraid that if it’s not wide enough or the image character is not par with the Batis 🧐 Which one would you choose if you could only have one?
I would say based on the raw files, the Batis has more contrast, punchy colors, and overall richer "look" based on my experience with it. However, the lower cost, faster f/1.8 aperture, and minimum focus distance advantage on the 20mm are important to consider. If I could only have one it would be the FE 20mm f/1.8 lens personally, but it would be a hard decision for sure. If the f/2.8 aperture and higher price are not an issue, I think the 18mm Batis would be a killer choice due to the richer character and wider view. By the way, encase you are unaware, my Zeiss Batis 18mm F/2.8 Lens Review is here: ruclips.net/video/dC8dpIDaERs/видео.html I really hope that helps, Jay
I keep saying this but I really think Sony could have marketed the new 20 mm as a GM lens too.
New drinking game. Take a shot whenever you hear "at the end of the day". :)
Excellent Review. I think I am going with 20mm.
lol ;)
thank you good sir, just buying a Sony A7c today and I'm going with the 20MM F.1.8 Lens!
Awesome, Have fun Robin :)
Good comparison. I really enjoy your reviews Jason Very detailed and yet done in a calm and confident way.
If I didn't already own the GM I'd be getting that 20mm for sure. Good comparison here. I Really hope Sony release a wider GM prime at some stage. I'd love a 16mm f1.8 for astro. Not keen on Sigma's 14mm brick, might try a Laowa in the mean time.
500$ is a big saving for small budget hobby.
High end prime lenses are not a good match for a tight budget in general, $900 or $1400 ;)
This is the review I have waited for. Great comparison. Very helpful!
Awesome to hear Edward and thank you for the comments!
I don’t get this wider is better for landscapes. It isn’t unless you have a dominate foreground. Unless your doin Astro personally the 24 is the winner
In general Adam ;) Telephoto is often used for Landscapes as well...
thank you very much for the review, its really helpful , as i have a 24-70 2.8 GM i think i'll go with 20 mm 1.8
i love your video's Thanks and god bless you...i Feel 20mm /F1.8 is good...i feel lot of different with Prime lens and Zoom lens..i like to share with my photo's , may i know ur email id...thanks
Great comparison! Would go for the 20. ✨
Thanks for watching and I agree, for my purposes the 20mm is a better option and I actually just purchased one for myself ;)
Credible real world review, Jay; well done. Have the 20mm lens - impressive IQ. Aperture ring with A setting - wonder if that predicts Sony will include (Fuji type) dials on future cam body to match. Your thoughts? Re lens case, remember when lenses came standard w/hard cases that had inside padding and external metal rings for straps?
Thank you for the kind words and I'm not sure about the manual dials like Fuji. That has never been Sony's thing based on all my years of reviewing them. As far as lens cases go, I never got one with a hard case. I don't think I have been in the game long enough... My Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8 L IS Lens came with a nice soft case though about 12 years ago when I purchased it...
Excellent and very detailed test. Thanks! I would go for the 20mm. :-)
I’m thinking of these lenses. My camera is 6400 and I love macro but I don’t have wide lens in my collection. Should I grab 20mm rather than 24mm? Thanks for sharing.
Cheers
Hanh
On paper the GM should have a larger reproduction ratio at closest focus distance but your review clearly shows the 20mm having a greater reproduction ratio. Interesting. I borrowed my buddies 24gm and that thing is ridiculously sharp. Now I don’t know whether to take the. 20mm instead. Tough choice.
Yes, it is a very hard choice for sure ;)
Hi. Great comparison video! I recently swipe from apsc to full frame and also get a sony 20mm used from a friend. After seeing several videos of 24 mm gm portrait footage I realized I like it to much, because I'm more into portrait than landscape. So, my question is: how can I get that 24 style with the 20? How different are the two lenses in terms of distortion and compression?
Every lens has a different "look" Marco. You can't really get results with the 20mm like the 24mm provides. The 24mm has a faster f/1.4 lens and additional optical advantages, that yield it better in some ways, and portraits would be a good example of that. Honestly I prefer using at least a 35mm for portraits if not a 50 or 85mm. Using a higher focal length lens can provide much better background separation and really helps isolate the subject.
24mm..lowlight and closeup shots looks like cinematic.😊
Good Review but YOU MISSED OUT LOW LIGHT COMPARISON OF BOTH LENSES- NIGHT SHOTS..... That would have nailed the buying decision. So I'm still on the look out for another review of low light ability of 1.8G!
I know it’s a year later but did you find a low light comparison?
@@HSoto-dd7hj nope.....Finally I bought 20mm f1.8 & checked low light capability myself🤣🤣 it was impressive👍
@@gardenst4398 cool, thanks for the response
meanwhile, I only have 28FE ad 85FE for now.
Not a bad start ;)
I'm still very much between these two, and can't really tell the difference even from all the videos I'm watching. Does the 20mm have any issues with getting the fish eye effect for If I'm doing architecture photography or real estate? Also how big of a difference make with 1.4 vs 1.8 for astro do you know?
Other than focal length and aperture, the only difference I could see was a little more contrast on the GM. But, both looked excellent.
The difference in color rendering is also apparent. I find the 24GM to generate more 'tangible' images due to the color and out-of-focus contrast, but both are well worth the asking price.
Just ordered the 20mm for myself. Thanks for the review.
Good choice and thank you for the kind words ;) Clearly can't go wrong with either lens, but I also went with the more affordable 20mm!
How are the seals on each? Also, did you compare astrophotography?
THose are great questions! The seals appear to be identical on both lenses. Near the mount it has a rubber gasket and all the other weather sealing that you can't see with your eyes looks the same according to Sony's engineering spec diagrams. As far as astrophotography I have not tried either lens in that area, so I can't really say. I would imagine both lenses would be excellent though, and if the opportunity presents itself I will try to capture some cosmos. Times are tuff currently as far as getting out for stuff like that in NY. We are on crazy lockdown currently and taking pictures is not deemed essential for travel... Take care John and thanks again for the excellent questions! Jay
For what it's worth, I think you are talking about sun stars. Lens flare is the globs or circles of green light that you usually try to avoid in a photo when shooting into the sun.
Finally got a chance to watch this- thanks,Jay for a very comprehensive test. For me. I am happy with my 24GM and was blown away when taking it to the streets for night photography (not right at the moment, obviously! staying inside....) I think it comes down to what works for the individual as a preferred focal length. You can't go wrong with either.The GM is just a little bit better and perhaps more versatile but the 20 f1.8 looks like a bit of a bargain!
Thank you for watching and I totally agree with your assessment ;)
20 mm is sharper
Got the GM 24mm for USD $1125 brand new.... I Guess street price is lower than website retail price
Do they have more?
Here in Malaysia 24mm costs 1100 usd and 20mm 850 usd
I film roller skaters and sometimes there’s more than one at time skating as a group. I love what 24mm produces, but so you think for videography the 20mm would give me slightly the Same results on a A7iii?
Most professional comparisons on RUclips. Thank you. Can you compare 85gm and 85 batis ?
Thank you very much for the comments and I'll see what I can do ;)
just buy viltrox 85 1.8, they are about the same.
Torn between watching this now or the Covid- 19 update! We are definitely living in "interesting times......"
Will watch this later, Jay but with interest as I already own the 24 GM and am very happy with it. I also own the Tamron 17-28f 2.8 so I have a hard time justifying buying this 20mm lens ( except for GAS!) Already given this a like!
Hi Chryseas, Between 24mm GM and tamron 17-28 , which one you recommend for video on a gimbal.
@@anilpanda3991 Both are excellent -24 GM might be easier to balance as it is fixed in length being a prime. Depends on whether that is your preferred focal length. It is a lovely lens, though.....
Thanks 😊
If shooting in Full Auto, which is best?
Using Full Auto is not going to effect the lens quality in either case Justin.
Thank you for this video. Liked and subbed :)
The bokeh is a preference. I like to see some background so 20mm is a good option for me.😃
Totally agree!
Just discovered your posts. Thanks! Very helpful in answering my question about the two. Quick question: What camera, lens, and f-stop are you using for this video? Thanks.
Hello and sorry for the delayed reply. Check out this video for all that info in detail: ruclips.net/video/jx_PC1DfBxI/видео.html In summary, the Sony A6400 and Sigma 30mm f/1.4 Lens at f/1.4 when in my studio...
it was really help full video thanks
I had to go with the GM.
for stater do you recomend the 20 or the 24 im new to this but im loving it..NOTE .my camera do not have stabilization...
They are both great lenses and neither of them have stabilization built in. I have the 20mm, because I wanted wider for vlogging type purposes, but the 24mm is faster aperture wise and also super high quality. I would say the 20mm so you save some cash for other gear your are certainly going to need at some point ;)
@@Jason_Hermann omg thank you I’m planing to do blogging in my RUclips channel is going to be a mix of gaming .. Lore and some blogging .. I think the 20 fit best .. thank you so much
@@Jason_Hermann this is my channel and thank you for your response subscribing
Very nice. A 20mm for me, please :)
Thanks for sharing, very comprehensive analysis.
Thanks for watching, and I really appreciate your nice comments:)
so when doing object photography, it seems the 20MM F/1.8 is a winner because you can get closer than the 24mm and the 20MM is sharper??
It's about the same sharpness at f/1.8 I would say. As far as better for object photography, that really depends. You can get closer for sure, but sometimes you don't want to get closer depending on what you are shooting. The perspective changes when you get closer for example, which may not be desired. Food for thought ;)
@@Jason_Hermann so if you were to buy one of them now from not having them at all which one would be good to get and why? I already have a Sigma 14mm for landscape/architecture. I think the reason why you cannot get closer w/ the 24MM GM is because when you open up the lens to wide-open it will be sharper than the 20MM so all around the 24MM could be better but the green tint to prevent flaring I assume makes images look worse but can't you correct that in post? Also, when you did all the test, did you disable all the stuff like chroma aberration and the other one from auto? I find to get better RAW images w/ all those disabled.
Batis 25 f2 could be an option for light weight
Yes, the Batis 25mm f/2 Lens is a great option as well for sure Jonathan, as is the Batis 18mm f/2.8 lens.
Very cool comparison!! Filming 4k 30 in a small room (12ft x 12ft) with the Sony a7iii; looking for the widest view with little to no distortion, which lens would you prefer?
For the widest view possible, the Tamron 17-28mm f/2.8 Lens (bhpho.to/381IsOA) would be a great option, or this Sony 20mm f/1.8 would be really nice as well. I would rather use the 20mm f/1.8, but you might require a wider view which is why I mentioned the Tamron which I currently have in hand for review. It's a very sharp lens with very little distortion.
@@Jason_Hermann Thanks for your time! It's challenging starting out and learning which cameras and lenses suites best. Keep up the good work!
At 17:09 I can see a shadow of your head in the footage.... I didn’t like that at all this is going to be a big factor
Hello, That was due to the sun and where it was in relation to me when I took the photo. It was behind me, so it appeared in the shot and you saw it on the 20mm, because the lens offers a wider view than the 24mm.
Today my 24mm came in the mail thanks 💯 for the information
Thans! A very enjoyable video and comprehensive.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Oh man. You forgot compare low light and astrophotography. Thats why I needed the vs review :(
Sorry about that. The GM Lens will certainly have an advantage in low light shooting due to the faster max aperture. As far as Astro goes, the f/1.4 will offer more light, but the wider 20mm view would be preferred by me and f/1.8 is fast enough for some killer frames!
@@Jason_Hermann thanks for taking your time for answer my question. In fact, I am sorry. I was rude for saying you "forgot" compare low light and astrophotography.
I have to make a quick decision. Used 24 or new 20. Roughly the same price, less than $100 difference. The 24 looks brand spanking new.
Impressed by your content, thanks! I have the 24mm gm and have been amazed at some random astro I’ve done and also love cropping in for the 35mm look ;)
Thank you Taylor :)
Great comparison, thanks! 👌🏻
Thanks for watching!
@Sony what are you doing the G is better than the GM
lol ;) Thanks for the comments!
Coma distortion and astigmatism with stars at night will be the key comparison for me.
Yeah, sorry I was not able to get any astrophotography sample photos while I had the lens for review...
@@Jason_Hermann No worries I appreciate you taking the time to do the comparison.
Thank's, I go to buy 20mm :)
Good choice!
Awesome jobs. Thnaks
Thanks for watching!
First :)
perfect Video and very helpful
Glad you think so!
Thanks alote .. just one question , if I crop the image from a 20 to the size of 24 will it be different in term of distortion ? ( assuming everything was corrected in camera = JPEG format ) .. it’s maybe silly question but I am new in this world ;; also did you notice any aperture sound ( like rattling or friction of the aperture blade ) in aperture mode with the 24 ? I have seen a video of someone having clicky sound when changing the aperture rapidly or even in manually through the ring
Love how you compare the two lens.. i wonder how it looks like the 20mm for a wedding like group shots? or group of people as i do more weddings.. Thanks
So now I am torn between the Tamron 17-28mm vs the Sony 20mm f/1.8. The reason for wanting the f/1.8 is not only do I shoot astro, but I like shooting day time wide portraits, however, AT A DISTANCE. Would shooting f/2.8 vs f/1.8 actually make a difference in subject separation if my subject was say, 20 feet away? I love to shoot "little person in a big landscape photos" Thank you, Jay
Oh and to mention good job on the success of your channel! 53K wow! I remember when I watched you review the old Tamron 18-200mm vs the old Sony 18-200mm like 8 years ago. lol
Oh and I just realized, I am torn between a Tamron and a Sony once again 8 years later, lol!
Thank you very much for the kind words, and yeah it's been a long journey for sure ;) As far as your specific question, no the f/2.8 vs f/1.8 from 20 feet away is not going to make much of a difference. However, f/1.8 vs f/2.8 for astro will make a significant difference when it comes to noise and/ or shutter speeds required.... the Tamron 17-28mm is certainly a great lens and you can't go wrong. Having the 17-28mm zoom range would be nice as well. Thanks again for sticking around all these years and my very best to you and yours :) Jay
@@Jason_Hermann Thanks for the help! See you in 8 years! LoL!
Amazing review... thanks for helping me come to a decision.
Glad I could help ;)
What was your decision?
@Jelle Vanthuynemy decision was then to go for the 20mm f 1.8 and still do believe it is the right one, but for budget concerns later I had to buy Sigma 16mm 1.4 which is a very good choice as well.
What about wedding or in door family pictures
wouldve liked some more math done for this review, the 20mm shouldve been closer to the subject so the (fov) frame was the same size so when magnifying the coin it has the same ppi (lab tripod not in the same position). also doing that will change the dof and the thickness of the focus plane at their most open aperture. may have even produced exact same results for bokeh and sharpness?
Do you have a comparison for video with these two lenses ?
let's compare these two images where i have one just ever so slightly out of focus... And that's why i've reached a conclusion that's completely opposite of every other review! Here- can't you see at 9:40 in to the video where I show you a can in the corner that clearly shows a lack of definition compared to the flat white corner of the other picture???
but i do like the microphone you use that my 11 year old uses for playing video games with his friends.
20 1.8 pls :)
The 24 is amazing for documentary photography at weddings, I was going to get one but looking at this I might go for the 20mm. Has anyone here used the 20mm for weddings and have you any samples??
I have not used it for weddings, but it would certainly work great for your wide angle needs. Not sure how much more use it would get over the 24mm though Darren....
@@Jason_Hermann thank you :)
I wish Sony will make a serie of lenses for very high resolution for landscape photography, compact, rugged, with aperture ring, the 20mm 1.8 G lens looks ok, I wish for macro lenses, manual focusing, with aperture and NO stabilizer, I wish for compact and light 300mm 3.0, 400 4.5 and 500mm 5.6, off course only primes ! Thank you very much Sony, oh I forgot, please upgrade the 55mm 1.8 with a AF on/on button (or make it in a manual focus version) plus aperture ring, a 60mm FF allround macro lens will be great ;)
20mm. Is price friendlier! (Is that even an English word)
Men, if 20mm would cost 800, it would be insta buy for its 1.8, now when tamron 17-28 exist it is weird
Well f/1.8 is faster than the f/2.8 zoom lens, but I totally hear ya ;) Jay
@@Jason_Hermann i ordered 20mm f1.8 XD it costed 819 which is close to what I wanted
How is it compare to Batis 18mm ?
I really like the shorter min. focus distance 25 vs 19 mm and the 1.8 aperture, but I’m afraid that if it’s not wide enough or the image character is not par with the Batis 🧐
Which one would you choose if you could only have one?
I would say based on the raw files, the Batis has more contrast, punchy colors, and overall richer "look" based on my experience with it. However, the lower cost, faster f/1.8 aperture, and minimum focus distance advantage on the 20mm are important to consider. If I could only have one it would be the FE 20mm f/1.8 lens personally, but it would be a hard decision for sure. If the f/2.8 aperture and higher price are not an issue, I think the 18mm Batis would be a killer choice due to the richer character and wider view. By the way, encase you are unaware, my Zeiss Batis 18mm F/2.8 Lens Review is here: ruclips.net/video/dC8dpIDaERs/видео.html I really hope that helps, Jay
Jay SonyAlphaLab Thanks man!
I already watched your Batis 18mm review. I probably end up selling my 16-35mm zeiss to get one of these 20mm beauties.
Awesome video! @Jay, would you recommend this lens over Sigma 16mm f1.4 for A6600? Thank you.
Thanks!! No, I would still recommend the Sigma 16mm f/1.4 for the Sony A6600 over this lens ;)
Jay SonyAlphaLab Thank you :) Appreciate your response.