Just picked one up today to go with my a7C. Super compact and lightweight package, and produces excellent images. It does a lot of things really well and is very versatile - great for big landscapes, portraits when you want to put them within context, and you can do a lot of quasi-macro work with the really close focusing distance and relatively wide aperture.
Great review. I could have watched your comparisons to other lenses for another 30 minutes, but that's just me. Appreciate the work, Mr. Abbott. Thank you.
@@DustinAbbottTWI, I 100% agree, sir. I do find "vs" videos to be very popular, with the challenge being to get the lenses during the same period for comparison. Hopefully more of your viewers can send in the lenses in a coordinated effort to make intense direct comparison videos possible. I only have the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2, but I'd be happy to send you my copy for any comparison video you would like to do in the future.
Great review, it really seems to be a great lens in every way! One little point I've discovered with this lens is that in manual focus it has an even closer minimum focus distance. Seem to be barely 5 cm from the front of the lens, and according to my measurements a 0.27x magnification in manual focus. I've found the close focus ability of this lens really useful.
As a long time photographer from the days of film, I've had lens from the Nikon 16mm fisheye to super telephoto mirror lens. But I always love wide angle lens. I just picked up this 20mm after battling between the 14 and 24mm lens. Cost plus 20mm is good enough won out. It is sharp, fun to use and that f-stop ring is a god-send when using the a6600. Should also be welcomed to those A7C owners. Glad to see the aperture back on lens. Everyone of my old Nikon lens had one and I surely missed it on these new lens.
Already have the 17-28, but now I want this as well. Would be quite handy for low light vlogging and Astro. I’m curious about sun stars, and quality of bokeh... “roundness” of lights, and “creaminess” of the background. I know you briefly touched on it, thank you, but I also want to see more detailed photos involving crisp sun stars. If that makes sense. Nonetheless, thank you for this in-depth review. Cheers
The focus pulsing issue is prevalent in the 24GM too. I've heard people say "That's just something wide angle lenses do." I've never heard that before Sony released theirs though. I returned one 24GM, my second copy is a bit better but still pulses.
It is a bit of a Sony problem, I think. I saw it a bit with the Tamron 17-28, too. The autofocus system runs through too many possibilities and doesn't settle on any of them.
Thank you for the looking at the lens while shooting astro! There's quite a few lenses that I wish could see this on... especially any prime from 14mm to 85mm focal lengths. Maybe you could keep doing this more in the future. :)
Hi David, I tend to just test astro on wide angle lenses (which I have consistently done for years, BTW). The number of people that use 85mm lenses for astro is very limited, and astro is the most challenging thing to test for because it requires the right conditions.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for getting back with me. I mush not have seen enough of your wide angle lens reviews. I just saw your astro shots for the 24mm f1.4 GM, and I can say I've seen this issue in the corners and edges on the copy I have as well which is disappointing as I use it for astro a lot. The 20mm 1.8 look promising though!
Thanks for this review! Seems to backup other reviewers opinions, that it is a wonderful lense. I was originally planning on going for this and the 35mm 1.8 (20 for vlogging and 35mm for filming general stuff), but then I came to think about the crop mode on my A7C, actually making this 20 to a 30. So maybe the 35 would be redundant. All tho the same can be said about the 35, it can then turn into a ~50mm. The choices, haha! Cheers again, have a wonderful day.
Yup, I was about to put the money for the 24mm and this lens completely stole the spot and saved me a lot of money. No complains. I mostly keep it on the camera and crop if needed... and I only have a A73, if I had a A7R4 oh boy... It would be difficult to justify any other lens until the 85mm. Right now I'm doing either this 20mm or the 100-400mm, sometimes I whish for a 85 or 55 prime... and I'll probably get one at some point, and probably just the 85mm 1.8, I can't justify the 1.4.
The Sony is a strong competitor to both those lenses. It is sharper overall when compared at the same apertures and has better autofocus. It would be my choice.
I'm very glad I came across this review, owning this lens I've also found it does a crazy pulsing to focus thing in AF-C mode. I thought something was defective but you had the same experience. As you found when it's doing that you can get totally out of focus images. I do wonder why it does this, it seems worse at higher apertures, maybe the AF system simply can't see what's critically in focus because of so much DOF? Out of curiosity does the 16-35 exhibit any of this? I do find my 135 GM can also pulse to focus but only in really poor light, the 20mm is much more prone.
It seems to be a problem with Sony focus systems. I've seen similar on the 24GM and some third party lenses. You really have to learn how to manage it (usually grabbing a smaller focus area helps)
@@Thumpr110 yes I have had the A6000, but replaced that one when the A6600 came out, because of bigger batttery, IBIS, and the better grip. I did not like to combo of 2x no stabilization (i.e. in case of Sigma 16 and 56mm f1.4). On itself, I feel that the A6000 is a great camera value vs money. I see the A6600 more as a camera without concerns wherever I take it.
Great video! I feel like I can replace my Sony 28mm F2 with the 20mm F1.8 because I don't think the 28mm is sharp enough even for my hobby usage. The Ridge wallet is pretty cool - I purchased one about a year ago. Unfortunately the corners are a bit tough, or my Banana Republic jeans aren't high quality, but eventually the corners started ripping a hole through my back pocket. Great wallet though, still love it.
Very valuable review (as always) - many thanks! And, hey - where do you have the 10 (German) Deutsche Mark banknote from? This is very much appreciated. Greetings from Munich, Germany.
Thanks for the feedback. I don't exactly remember where I get the Deutsche Mark from. I've collected foreign currency for years, so it was either from myself or others traveling, or purchasing it from a swap meet or something like that.
At F2.8, the Sony has the advantage in sharpness, distortion, and vignette. When stopped down to landscape apertures, the Loxia is slightly better (mostly because of awesome micro contrast and beautiful color).
@@DustinAbbottTWI I definitely agree with the better colour from the Loxia (maybe sunstars as well from what I've seen in this review with the Sony), but I guess the more obvious choice would be on the auto/manual focus here.
Hi Dustin! very nice review! What do you think about distortion in portraits compared to the 24mm GM? Can I get the same result by cropping a photo taken with the 20mm to reach 24 than taking it with the 24? Will there be any difference in perspective and distortion in the case of cropping? Thanks
I'm wrestling between buying this or the Tamon 17-28. That Tamron's close focusing distance is a neat perk, but 20mm with this sharpness and speed... I own the 28-75 and 70-180, but my only wide lenses are the 14mm Rokinon and the 35 Rokinon Cine, which doesn't really count.
I think it really comes down to what focal length you prefer. The 20mm is the better landscape lens (and astro, I think), while the 24mm is the better environmental portrait and "Bokeh" lens.
I know that this lens can take the resolution of the Sony a7R IV, but do you think the Sony 35mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 can resolve most of it as well when stopped down? I know that there certainly are faster and better lenses optically, but I just want something compact that can produce similiar results when stopped down. I’m not so sure if they can do so. I got some Voigtländers that can resolve it all, but I also want some AF lenses mostly for street and sometimes family, while using my Voigtländers mostly for landscapes. If not, I probably have to bite the sour apple and get bigger and more expensive options, although not too big or expensive, as some of the newer DN lenses, like the 14-24mm and 85mm. I hope Sigma will update their 35mm f/1.4, but I’m not so sure as they recently released a f/1.2. When it comes to some of the best wide angle options as the Sigma 14-24mm, Sony 20mm G, Loxia 21mm and Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4, all of them can probably resolve most of the a7R IV sensor when having a good copy, stopped down and focused properly. I have both read reviews of them doing very good but also excellent to outstanding. Not sure which one to get. I sometimes want the extra pop of the Cosina lenses but sometimes the wideness of the Sigma and AF for architecture and street. I also like the Sony. Maybe I just have to get two.
Great review Dustin! Thank you very much for your competence. I ask you for a suggestion. I have a Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 and I'm really happy about its perfomance in foto and video too. Recently I jump to Sony a7IV and, as you know, shooting at 50/60p the crop factor make my 25mm more than a 35mm. This is the reason I'm searching for a wider focal lens. Do you think this lens could give the same results of the Batis 25mm in term of image quality? Thank you in advance for your suggestion and... Happy new year!!!
Hi Dustin! I know my question is coming in a bit late but I would like to hear your thoughts about, how this Sony 20mm f1.8 compares to Batis 18mm and 25mm? I'm thinking of switching the Batises to the Sony, thanks.
Sir I m looking for a wide lense for filmmaking.....if there is no big difference between 20g and 24gm in terms of cinematic look...... what would you suggest me to go with 20g or 24gm ?
1. How does it compare to the 16-35 2.8 GMaster at 20mm in terms of image quality? 2. Does it have an element that moves in the barrel like that in the 35 1.8 Sony when not attached to the camera? Your reviews are excellent! Love that wallet!
Hi David, I haven't tested the GM, but it looks like if you compare 20mm, F2.8, the prime is definitely the winner: www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1177&Camera=1106&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=0&LensComp=1498&CameraComp=1175&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
I have the Sigma 14-24 DN DG ART and i see that a prime 20mm can replace it in terms of focal rang as i often is around 20mm, but will it perform better than the 14-24mm opticaly?
It is going to deliver higher resolution at comparative apertures, though the Sigma is very good. I would say the biggest reason to consider it (if you often shoot at 20mm) is for the small size and larger aperture.
I got Sony A7i and it don’t have ibis, and I want to find a Len with image stabilizer please give me recommandation? I am thinking of getting Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 ART or Tamron 28-75mm F2.8? For prime i am thinking of getting Sony 20mm F1.8 since I already got FE 50MM F1.8 LENS? . For telephoto zoom I should I get Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 or Tamron 75-180 F2.8?
Almost all of those lenses you mention DON'T have an image stabilizer. The only one you mention that has a stabilizer is the Sigma 100-400. You may want to compliment that with the Sony 24-105 OS if you want another lens with a stabilizer.
It really is fantastic, and thanks for another great review! When my wife asks my why the hell I spent $900 on a single lens, I'm going to blame Dustin from the interwebs ;-)
Hi Dustin, I like shooting astrophotography whilst I've Sigma 14-24/2.8 art already and I wish to take a faster one. Do you think Sony FE20/1.8 is a good option in that regard?
I feel like this lens is what the 35 1.8 should have been. Not to be overly pedantic: the 35 is functionally excellent, and in terms of IQ-mostly good. But this clearly shows Sony can do better, and the amount of CA on the 35 even at f11(!) often leaves grey edges on subjects after correction. (Don't own the lens, but you can see in the full res DPReview samples.) The build and aperture ring are also welcome touches. It shows a little of the limitations of the Batis 40 as well (which I do own) in that while I don't think I could pick a favorite in terms of IQ-the 20G achieves that level of performance without stopping down. Personally, I don't care a whit about the effect on the bokeh, but 1.8 vs 2.2-2.5 is 2/3rds to a whole stop of light gathering difference. In good lighting this doesn't matter at all, but in poor lighting situations it affects everything from IQ as ISO ramps up to even your AF accuracy. Thanks for the review! Very thorough as always and helped to assure me I made the right choice in my third e-mount lens after the 55 and the 40. :P
I recorded several landscapes video using A7RIII + Sony 20mm and used AF-C. It is pulsating quite poorly. Used f/1.8 as well as f/11. Is there any way to solve this?
Hi Dustin! Greetings from Europe. Can you try Tokina Fírin 20mm f2 AF FE? It is an amazing lens (i have it). People should know about this lens too. Nice channel! I like your videos very much!
Hi Skipper - are you in Canada by any chance? We've done a little research, and I think that they activated it on the US website but not the Canadian one. That's being fixed as we speak.
So, Ridge just got back to me and said they've got it fixed for Canadians. I tested, and it does work now, @Skipper, so you should be able to proceed. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
@@lukaspicturesblog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/sony-20-1-8-g-20-1-8-nikkor-s-on-nikon-z7/ on z7, sony little bit sharper on center, nikon on the edges, thats about it.. on each native camera, sony a little bit better
here's the conclusion from jim kasson blog, he tests both lenses on their native camera, and on z7 with adapter for fairness.. Based on this test, there’s not much to choose between these lenses. If all you’re shooting is at 20 mm, you want a smaller, lighter, less-expensive lens, and have no MILC loyalty, buy the Sony and an a7x. But if you opt for the Nikon, you won’t be getting a materially inferior lens, and you will be getting a camera with, IMHO, better haptics and a better user interface. There are plenty of E-mount lenses around, and Z-mount ones are thin of the ground, but the quality of the few Z-mount lenses out there is outstanding.
Not alot of lenses that get that kind of praise. I was just choosing between the Tamron 17-28 and this. After seing this review I think I will go for the Sony. Native, brighter and almost no coma at 2.8. But man... you guys need to stop measuring stuff with bodyparts, pounds and so forth. The lens is in metric. ;-)
I think the Sony is a great choice. BTW - lenses list both metric and imperial on them, and I mentioned both measurements in my reviews. Also - my largest market (by far) is the USA, which uses imperial, not metric.
If you want the best quality then the sony 20mm prime - if you want more of a range then the tamron (which also has a good MFD at its entire range) so one can get some special perspectives.
First, thank you for another fine review. I am very happy with my copy. I know it's a slightly different focal length and aperture but how would you compare this to the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8. currently own both but can't decide which I should keep. The Batis is wider and slower but also very sharp. Any thoughts? if so please share.
Well, Steven, it sounds like you are in a better position to compare the two lenses than what I am (since I own neither!). Off memory, I would say the Batis is pretty close in the center but definitely lags in the corners. It also has much more distortion.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Sounds like I have a new project. Been looking for reasons to sell of certain lenses so I will have to take some images and compare them. May send a few your way to get your feedback on what you think.
Great and insightful review as always Dustin...how would you say this lens compares to the Batis 18mm f2.8?? I was hoping you would touch on it in your review!
TheChenza05 Some state that the Sony is equal in the center and slightly better in the corners than both at equal apertures. The Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4 is the sharpest 20-21mm lens on Sony FE, though. The Loxia is only a bit behind across the frame due to stronger field curvature. When comparing the Batis 18mm, Sony 20mm, Loxia 21mm and Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4, I would say that they all are equal in the center at normal distances when stopped down. When speaking of the corners, the Voigtländer has a slight edge, the Sony is very close, the Loxia is also close but a bit behind and the Batis is the worst performer. Not to say that the Batis is bad, it’s very good, but it doesn’t quite keep up, especially not on the 61 megapixels sensor of the Sony a7R IV. At longer distancers, however, both the Loxia and Voigtländer got a slight advantage over the AF lenses. That’s really just the nature of Zeiss and Voigtländer manual focus lenses. Their handling of micro contrast is just that tad bit better which the sharp eye can observe. Personally, I prefer many of Zeiss’ and Voigtländer’s offerings. Currently got the Voigtländer 50mm f/2 APO, Voigtländer 110mm APO and considering to add the Voigtlànder 21mm f/1.4 to my collection. I currently got the Batis 18mm, but it doesn’t take full advantage of the Sony a7R IV’s sensor. It’s also a bit of an odd focal length for me, as I tend to want to go a bit tighter but also a bit wider. Considering the Sigma 14-24mm just for the wider end, while I use the Voigtländer most of the time, as I tend to stick to around 21mm for the most of my use. I know this for a fact, as I tested it on zoom lenses as well. None of the zoom offerings compete with these primes at the same focal length at any aperture on the Sony a7R IV. Even the GM and the Sigma are “just” very good to excellent at most focal lengths and only outstanding at very few, while some of the above are excellent to outstanding at equal focal length and apertures. Sure, most might only need the wider end, but why compromise money, weight and size on a zoom when only certain focal lengths resolve your camera fully and when you only use a limited set of focal lengths. Sure, I get it if it’s something like the Sigma 14-24mm, as there really are no other 14-15mm offerings that can resolve as much of the Sony a7R IV sensor. One could pair it up with a 20-21mm, which I consider. Maybe check out Sony Alpha Blog “Which Lenses to maximise the potential of the Sony a7R IV”. It comes clear in most of his tests that you finally can take the full advantage of top end prime offerings, where many zooms just won’t resolve as much detail on such a high resolution sensor. We always knew that, but a sensor with higher resolution was necessary to prove it.
I think Carbon 6 has done a good job with the breakdown. I would definitely say that the Sony is sharper in the corners than the Batis, with them being about equal in the middle. And yes, the best color and contrast at landscape apertures belongs to the Loxia and Voigtlander. They obviously aren't nearly as practical for some kinds of photography, but when used to their strengths, they are special.
Dustin Abbott thanks Dustin. Part of me wishes Sony released something wider than 20mm...maybe the idea was to make it and alternative to the 24mm GM...anyway thanks for another great review, I’m a big fan of your channel
Bummer, lol ; my curiosity as to how it compares to the Sigma DG DN 14-24mm is thuse not adressed yet, lol. I knew this 20mm was way more attractive to me than the however much GMMMM of the Sony GM24mm that I resisted, "waiting" for that zoom. I hope I will never miss that f1.8 over it's 2.8 that I don't need much but is good. (Then, the Brenzier-technics with DN 35mm f1.2 or Sony-Planar 50mm could perhaps kick in - though rather not just for simulating 20mm exactly. ) I believe the DG DN happens to have distortion neutrality just at 20mm and here "natively better" than the G20, then there is the rumor of a replacement by Sony of it's own zoom in that range ..but I wonder if they should not rather first issue a 'perfect" 10 or 11mm instead, (beating the Laowa 12), or dare inovate a fullframe fisheye zoom 'but' of the stereoscopic type as is the unic and excellent (and surprisingly usefull) Samyang 12mm full frame fisheye. The 3 in 1 DG DN 14-24 however is convincing to me even "small size wise".
The DN 14-24 is a great lens. It is slightly better in the distortion department at 20mm, but isn't nearly as punchy in the middle of the frame and lags a bit in the corners. I didn't show comparison results as I didn't have one on hand and changed my testing methods since I did the test of the 14-24. I wouldn't have a direct way to compare them.
That really depends on whether or not you need the zoom range. The 20G is the highest performing option, but it some shooters will prefer the flexibility of a zoom range.
I find your reviews very calming, AND technically comprehensive!
That's an interesting combination.
Dustin Abbott 😂Keep up the great work Sir!🤓
Getting really close to 100k!! Congrats! You deserve a million, IMO.
Thank you. Got a long way to go for that!
Just picked one up today to go with my a7C. Super compact and lightweight package, and produces excellent images. It does a lot of things really well and is very versatile - great for big landscapes, portraits when you want to put them within context, and you can do a lot of quasi-macro work with the really close focusing distance and relatively wide aperture.
It really is a strong lens. Great value, I think.
Great review. I could have watched your comparisons to other lenses for another 30 minutes, but that's just me. Appreciate the work, Mr. Abbott. Thank you.
hi David, not everyone feels that way, but I'm glad to hear that.
@@DustinAbbottTWI, I 100% agree, sir. I do find "vs" videos to be very popular, with the challenge being to get the lenses during the same period for comparison. Hopefully more of your viewers can send in the lenses in a coordinated effort to make intense direct comparison videos possible. I only have the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2, but I'd be happy to send you my copy for any comparison video you would like to do in the future.
Thank you for the awesome review! 😎👍
Glad you liked it!
Again a great review, thanks!
My pleasure!
One of the best channel on RUclips. Excellent review as always.
Thanks again!
Great review, it really seems to be a great lens in every way!
One little point I've discovered with this lens is that in manual focus it has an even closer minimum focus distance. Seem to be barely 5 cm from the front of the lens, and according to my measurements a 0.27x magnification in manual focus. I've found the close focus ability of this lens really useful.
That actually sounds right to me. I felt like I was able to get closer than the stated level of magnification.
I was looking for a discount for the ridge wallet! Thanks, Dustin! Best reviewer and endorser!
Happy to help!
Thanks for sharing.. Solid review as always.
Thanks for watching!
Nice work Dustin
Thanks, Michael.
As a long time photographer from the days of film, I've had lens from the Nikon 16mm fisheye to super telephoto mirror lens. But I always love wide angle lens. I just picked up this 20mm after battling between the 14 and 24mm lens. Cost plus 20mm is good enough won out. It is sharp, fun to use and that f-stop ring is a god-send when using the a6600. Should also be welcomed to those A7C owners. Glad to see the aperture back on lens. Everyone of my old Nikon lens had one and I surely missed it on these new lens.
It really is a great little lens with fabulous optics.
Already have the 17-28, but now I want this as well. Would be quite handy for low light vlogging and Astro. I’m curious about sun stars, and quality of bokeh... “roundness” of lights, and “creaminess” of the background. I know you briefly touched on it, thank you, but I also want to see more detailed photos involving crisp sun stars. If that makes sense. Nonetheless, thank you for this in-depth review. Cheers
Hi there, if it isn't in my image gallery, I won't have anything more, as I review loaners for the most part.
The focus pulsing issue is prevalent in the 24GM too. I've heard people say "That's just something wide angle lenses do." I've never heard that before Sony released theirs though. I returned one 24GM, my second copy is a bit better but still pulses.
It is a bit of a Sony problem, I think. I saw it a bit with the Tamron 17-28, too. The autofocus system runs through too many possibilities and doesn't settle on any of them.
As always, great review. Any plan for a comprehensive comparison with the GM? Thank you.
I'm afraid not, Mike. I get Sony loaners one at a time and only once. Sony Canada has a really limited supply of loaners.
Thank you for the looking at the lens while shooting astro! There's quite a few lenses that I wish could see this on... especially any prime from 14mm to 85mm focal lengths. Maybe you could keep doing this more in the future. :)
Hi David, I tend to just test astro on wide angle lenses (which I have consistently done for years, BTW). The number of people that use 85mm lenses for astro is very limited, and astro is the most challenging thing to test for because it requires the right conditions.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks for getting back with me. I mush not have seen enough of your wide angle lens reviews. I just saw your astro shots for the 24mm f1.4 GM, and I can say I've seen this issue in the corners and edges on the copy I have as well which is disappointing as I use it for astro a lot. The 20mm 1.8 look promising though!
Dustin, Are you going to review the Sony ZV-1 vlogging 📷?
I don't have any plans to at the moment. If Sony approaches me, then perhaps.
Thanks for this review! Seems to backup other reviewers opinions, that it is a wonderful lense.
I was originally planning on going for this and the 35mm 1.8 (20 for vlogging and 35mm for filming general stuff), but then I came to think about the crop mode on my A7C, actually making this 20 to a 30. So maybe the 35 would be redundant. All tho the same can be said about the 35, it can then turn into a ~50mm.
The choices, haha! Cheers again, have a wonderful day.
Choices, choices. This is an excellent lens, though - the best small 20mm prime I've used to this point.
Yup, I was about to put the money for the 24mm and this lens completely stole the spot and saved me a lot of money. No complains. I mostly keep it on the camera and crop if needed... and I only have a A73, if I had a A7R4 oh boy... It would be difficult to justify any other lens until the 85mm. Right now I'm doing either this 20mm or the 100-400mm, sometimes I whish for a 85 or 55 prime... and I'll probably get one at some point, and probably just the 85mm 1.8, I can't justify the 1.4.
It's really a great lens.
i have 85 mm prime......really amazing ! deciding bethen tamron 20 40 f2.8 or just 20mm 1.8
Thank you for all the great info shared about this lens. How would you compare this 20mm to the batis 18mm and the batis 25mm? Thanks in advance
The Sony is a strong competitor to both those lenses. It is sharper overall when compared at the same apertures and has better autofocus. It would be my choice.
I'm very glad I came across this review, owning this lens I've also found it does a crazy pulsing to focus thing in AF-C mode. I thought something was defective but you had the same experience. As you found when it's doing that you can get totally out of focus images. I do wonder why it does this, it seems worse at higher apertures, maybe the AF system simply can't see what's critically in focus because of so much DOF? Out of curiosity does the 16-35 exhibit any of this? I do find my 135 GM can also pulse to focus but only in really poor light, the 20mm is much more prone.
It seems to be a problem with Sony focus systems. I've seen similar on the 24GM and some third party lenses. You really have to learn how to manage it (usually grabbing a smaller focus area helps)
Great review Dustin! I also use this lens for my A6600, next to my full frame. Great combo for ie street photography.
Agreed.
Did you have another a6xxx camera before the 6600? And if so, was it worth the money for you?
@@Thumpr110 yes I have had the A6000, but replaced that one when the A6600 came out, because of bigger batttery, IBIS, and the better grip. I did not like to combo of 2x no stabilization (i.e. in case of Sigma 16 and 56mm f1.4). On itself, I feel that the A6000 is a great camera value vs money. I see the A6600 more as a camera without concerns wherever I take it.
Great video! I feel like I can replace my Sony 28mm F2 with the 20mm F1.8 because I don't think the 28mm is sharp enough even for my hobby usage.
The Ridge wallet is pretty cool - I purchased one about a year ago. Unfortunately the corners are a bit tough, or my Banana Republic jeans aren't high quality, but eventually the corners started ripping a hole through my back pocket. Great wallet though, still love it.
lolol
That's interesting about the wallet. I haven't used mine long term enough to see that, and I put it mostly in my front pocket anyway.
Curious to see how this lens holds up in its value proposition with regards to the new Sigma 20 f/1.4 in terms of IQ & Focus 🧐
It definitely gets more competitive. The Sigma is more pro in a lot of ways, with size now being the main advantage for this lens.
Very valuable review (as always) - many thanks!
And, hey - where do you have the 10 (German) Deutsche Mark banknote from? This is very much appreciated. Greetings from Munich, Germany.
Thanks for the feedback. I don't exactly remember where I get the Deutsche Mark from. I've collected foreign currency for years, so it was either from myself or others traveling, or purchasing it from a swap meet or something like that.
Great review. Would love to know how does it compare to the Zeiss Loxia 21mm tho
At F2.8, the Sony has the advantage in sharpness, distortion, and vignette. When stopped down to landscape apertures, the Loxia is slightly better (mostly because of awesome micro contrast and beautiful color).
@@DustinAbbottTWI I definitely agree with the better colour from the Loxia (maybe sunstars as well from what I've seen in this review with the Sony), but I guess the more obvious choice would be on the auto/manual focus here.
Hi Dustin! very nice review! What do you think about distortion in portraits compared to the 24mm GM? Can I get the same result by cropping a photo taken with the 20mm to reach 24 than taking it with the 24? Will there be any difference in perspective and distortion in the case of cropping? Thanks
You should get cleaner results along the edge if that is your approach.
I'm wrestling between buying this or the Tamon 17-28. That Tamron's close focusing distance is a neat perk, but 20mm with this sharpness and speed...
I own the 28-75 and 70-180, but my only wide lenses are the 14mm Rokinon and the 35 Rokinon Cine, which doesn't really count.
That is a tough call. I think it comes down to whether or not you need the zoom range.
Dustin, how does the 20mm compared with the 24mm GM? Which is your choice? Thanks!
I think it really comes down to what focal length you prefer. The 20mm is the better landscape lens (and astro, I think), while the 24mm is the better environmental portrait and "Bokeh" lens.
Hi Dustin. Given how much you liked this can you give your opinion on this lens vs the new tamron 20-40mm for landscape/low light?
That's a good question. I love this little lens as a prime, but if you want the versatility of that zoom range, it's hard to vote against the Tamron.
I know that this lens can take the resolution of the Sony a7R IV, but do you think the Sony 35mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 can resolve most of it as well when stopped down? I know that there certainly are faster and better lenses optically, but I just want something compact that can produce similiar results when stopped down. I’m not so sure if they can do so. I got some Voigtländers that can resolve it all, but I also want some AF lenses mostly for street and sometimes family, while using my Voigtländers mostly for landscapes. If not, I probably have to bite the sour apple and get bigger and more expensive options, although not too big or expensive, as some of the newer DN lenses, like the 14-24mm and 85mm. I hope Sigma will update their 35mm
f/1.4, but I’m not so sure as they recently released a f/1.2.
When it comes to some of the best wide angle options as the Sigma 14-24mm, Sony 20mm G, Loxia 21mm and Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4, all of them can probably resolve most of the a7R IV sensor when having a good copy, stopped down and focused properly. I have both read reviews of them doing very good but also excellent to outstanding. Not sure which one to get. I sometimes want the extra pop of the Cosina lenses but sometimes the wideness of the Sigma and AF for architecture and street. I also like the Sony. Maybe I just have to get two.
I do think the F1.8 lenses you mention will do just fine when stopped down.
Compared to the Zeiss 18mm 2.8 which one would be a better option? I’m in the market for a wide I’m just not sure which one to get.
I prefer this lens. The Zeiss is nice, but has more flaws.
Where did you get that 100 Drachmas currency ,have you ever been in Greece ? It's more than 17 years since I saw one 🙂
I got it either traveling on from a friend traveling. It's been a long time, and I've collected currency for a while.
Great review Dustin!
Thank you very much for your competence.
I ask you for a suggestion. I have a Zeiss Batis 25mm f2 and I'm really happy about its perfomance in foto and video too.
Recently I jump to Sony a7IV and, as you know, shooting at 50/60p the crop factor make my 25mm more than a 35mm. This is the reason I'm searching for a wider focal lens. Do you think this lens could give the same results of the Batis 25mm in term of image quality?
Thank you in advance for your suggestion and... Happy new year!!!
I do. It's a very strong lens.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thank you very much!
The sign for sensor level is on the left side circle with a line... on the right is only the PSAM Marker.
I think you misunderstood where I was pointing.
@@DustinAbbottTWI see yourself at 7:09....
Please, would you prefer this or the Samyang 24mm f/1.8 (if those 4mm and price difference doesn't really matter) ?
Hope to hear your opinion. Thanks!
Both lenses are very good, so if you're on a budget, the Samyang is a great option.
How does the colour rendering of the 20mm compare to the 24mm gm? I’m having a real hard time deciding what to buy.
I reviewed them not far apart and found them more similar than different
Hi Dustin!
I know my question is coming in a bit late but I would like to hear your thoughts about, how this Sony 20mm f1.8 compares to Batis 18mm and 25mm?
I'm thinking of switching the Batises to the Sony, thanks.
I think it is overall the better lens, myself. Sharper, nicer build, better AF.
Sir I m looking for a wide lense for filmmaking.....if there is no big difference between 20g and 24gm in terms of cinematic look...... what would you suggest me to go with 20g or 24gm ?
I think the 20G is a great value. The GM has slightly nicer bokeh, but both are incredibly sharp.
1. How does it compare to the 16-35 2.8 GMaster at 20mm in terms of image quality?
2. Does it have an element that moves in the barrel like that in the 35 1.8 Sony when not attached to the camera?
Your reviews are excellent! Love that wallet!
Hi David, I haven't tested the GM, but it looks like if you compare 20mm, F2.8, the prime is definitely the winner: www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=1177&Camera=1106&Sample=0&FLI=1&API=0&LensComp=1498&CameraComp=1175&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=0&APIComp=2
And yes, there is a floating element in the lens. That allows for better close up performance.
Hi Dustin, if i dont need autofocus, do you recommend this or the samyang
okinon 20mm f1.8? I am able to pick the latter up for about 330$
I honestly think this lens is worth the money.
I have the Sigma 14-24 DN DG ART and i see that a prime 20mm can replace it in terms of focal rang as i often is around 20mm, but will it perform better than the 14-24mm opticaly?
It is going to deliver higher resolution at comparative apertures, though the Sigma is very good. I would say the biggest reason to consider it (if you often shoot at 20mm) is for the small size and larger aperture.
@@DustinAbbottTWI thanks, i also love pola filters. I did get the ND's that you tested. They are great, but a plunder to instal in the field.
I got Sony A7i and it don’t have ibis, and I want to find a Len with image stabilizer please give me recommandation? I am thinking of getting Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 ART or Tamron 28-75mm F2.8? For prime i am thinking of getting Sony 20mm F1.8 since I already got FE 50MM F1.8 LENS? . For telephoto zoom I should I get Sigma 100-400mm f/5-6.3 or Tamron 75-180 F2.8?
Almost all of those lenses you mention DON'T have an image stabilizer. The only one you mention that has a stabilizer is the Sigma 100-400. You may want to compliment that with the Sony 24-105 OS if you want another lens with a stabilizer.
It really is fantastic, and thanks for another great review!
When my wife asks my why the hell I spent $900 on a single lens, I'm going to blame Dustin from the interwebs ;-)
I've been blamed for many things over the years. Wives hate me (except mine) :)
I own this lens. love it
Not surprised. It is fantastic.
Hi Dustin, I like shooting astrophotography whilst I've Sigma 14-24/2.8 art already and I wish to take a faster one. Do you think Sony FE20/1.8 is a good option in that regard?
I think it is a good choice. Good angle of view, nice bright aperture.
I feel like this lens is what the 35 1.8 should have been. Not to be overly pedantic: the 35 is functionally excellent, and in terms of IQ-mostly good. But this clearly shows Sony can do better, and the amount of CA on the 35 even at f11(!) often leaves grey edges on subjects after correction. (Don't own the lens, but you can see in the full res DPReview samples.) The build and aperture ring are also welcome touches.
It shows a little of the limitations of the Batis 40 as well (which I do own) in that while I don't think I could pick a favorite in terms of IQ-the 20G achieves that level of performance without stopping down. Personally, I don't care a whit about the effect on the bokeh, but 1.8 vs 2.2-2.5 is 2/3rds to a whole stop of light gathering difference. In good lighting this doesn't matter at all, but in poor lighting situations it affects everything from IQ as ISO ramps up to even your AF accuracy.
Thanks for the review! Very thorough as always and helped to assure me I made the right choice in my third e-mount lens after the 55 and the 40. :P
Some valid points. This is one of Sony's better efforts, for sure.
I recorded several landscapes video using A7RIII + Sony 20mm and used AF-C. It is pulsating quite poorly. Used f/1.8 as well as f/11. Is there any way to solve this?
Reduce the area the camera is trying to focus on. When a lot is in focus, sometimes the focus system can't decide what to settle on.
Or maybe just shoot in manual mode? 🤷🏽♂️
My greatest confusion is whether to get this lens or a zies batis 40mm f2 or zies 85 f1.8....for casual photography and video
Those are very different focal lengths. I think you need to really give some thought as to what focal length is your shooting priority.
@@DustinAbbottTWI in terms of image quality who do you think is the best
Hi Dustin! Greetings from Europe. Can you try Tokina Fírin 20mm f2 AF FE? It is an amazing lens (i have it). People should know about this lens too. Nice channel! I like your videos very much!
I tried to approach Tokina about sending me a loaner of the Firin. They didn't respond.
Great review, again. I traded my stimulus monopoly money for one of these - Yay!
So...do you feel stimulated? :)
@@DustinAbbottTWI Hah! Yes, in fact.
Hey Dustin the discount code for the wallet doesn't work.
Let me reach out to them and find out why that is. I'll check back in here when I've heard from them.
Hi Skipper - are you in Canada by any chance? We've done a little research, and I think that they activated it on the US website but not the Canadian one. That's being fixed as we speak.
Dustin Abbott yes I am in Canada.amazon always forgets Canadians. Trust me.
So, Ridge just got back to me and said they've got it fixed for Canadians. I tested, and it does work now, @Skipper, so you should be able to proceed. Thanks for bringing it to my attention.
Hope you are going to compare this Sony to the Nikon 20mm F1.8 S Mirrorless
Afraid not, Peter. I don't review Nikon.
@@DustinAbbottTWI that's sad, cause nikon might be even better. Not so many people do in depth reviews.
@@lukaspicturesblog.kasson.com/nikon-z6-7/sony-20-1-8-g-20-1-8-nikkor-s-on-nikon-z7/
on z7, sony little bit sharper on center, nikon on the edges, thats about it.. on each native camera, sony a little bit better
here's the conclusion from jim kasson blog, he tests both lenses on their native camera, and on z7 with adapter for fairness..
Based on this test, there’s not much to choose between these lenses. If all you’re shooting is at 20 mm, you want a smaller, lighter, less-expensive lens, and have no MILC loyalty, buy the Sony and an a7x. But if you opt for the Nikon, you won’t be getting a materially inferior lens, and you will be getting a camera with, IMHO, better haptics and a better user interface. There are plenty of E-mount lenses around, and Z-mount ones are thin of the ground, but the quality of the few Z-mount lenses out there is outstanding.
Not alot of lenses that get that kind of praise. I was just choosing between the Tamron 17-28 and this. After seing this review I think I will go for the Sony. Native, brighter and almost no coma at 2.8. But man... you guys need to stop measuring stuff with bodyparts, pounds and so forth. The lens is in metric. ;-)
Totally on your side. Dustin needs to use the metric system.
I think the Sony is a great choice. BTW - lenses list both metric and imperial on them, and I mentioned both measurements in my reviews. Also - my largest market (by far) is the USA, which uses imperial, not metric.
SwitchRich - there are definitely reasons for some people to go with a zoom, and yes, autofocus definitely behaves like native.
If you want the best quality then the sony 20mm prime - if you want more of a range then the tamron (which also has a good MFD at its entire range) so one can get some special perspectives.
Can't decide between this and the Tamron 17-28! Help!
That's tough - the 20G is optically superior, but the Tamron is very sharp and very, very flexible.
@@DustinAbbottTWI I decided to go with the 20mm and I'm so excited to play around with it
First, thank you for another fine review. I am very happy with my copy. I know it's a slightly different focal length and aperture but how would you compare this to the Zeiss Batis 18mm f/2.8. currently own both but can't decide which I should keep. The Batis is wider and slower but also very sharp. Any thoughts? if so please share.
Well, Steven, it sounds like you are in a better position to compare the two lenses than what I am (since I own neither!). Off memory, I would say the Batis is pretty close in the center but definitely lags in the corners. It also has much more distortion.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Sounds like I have a new project. Been looking for reasons to sell of certain lenses so I will have to take some images and compare them. May send a few your way to get your feedback on what you think.
Was that focus pulsing only in AF-C mode? Hopefully a firmware update fixes it. Thanks.
That's what I saw.
Great and insightful review as always Dustin...how would you say this lens compares to the Batis 18mm f2.8?? I was hoping you would touch on it in your review!
+1 and loxia 21mm if you can share thx
TheChenza05
Some state that the Sony is equal in the center and slightly better in the corners than both at equal apertures. The Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4 is the sharpest 20-21mm lens on Sony FE, though. The Loxia is only a bit behind across the frame due to stronger field curvature. When comparing the Batis 18mm, Sony 20mm, Loxia 21mm and Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4, I would say that they all are equal in the center at normal distances when stopped down. When speaking of the corners, the Voigtländer has a slight edge, the Sony is very close, the Loxia is also close but a bit behind and the Batis is the worst performer. Not to say that the Batis is bad, it’s very good, but it doesn’t quite keep up, especially not on the 61 megapixels sensor of the Sony a7R IV. At longer distancers, however, both the Loxia and Voigtländer got a slight advantage over the AF lenses. That’s really just the nature of Zeiss and Voigtländer manual focus lenses. Their handling of micro contrast is just that tad bit better which the sharp eye can observe. Personally, I prefer many of Zeiss’ and Voigtländer’s offerings. Currently got the Voigtländer 50mm f/2 APO, Voigtländer 110mm APO and considering to add the Voigtlànder 21mm f/1.4 to my collection. I currently got the Batis 18mm, but it doesn’t take full advantage of the Sony a7R IV’s sensor. It’s also a bit of an odd focal length for me, as I tend to want to go a bit tighter but also a bit wider. Considering the Sigma 14-24mm just for the wider end, while I use the Voigtländer most of the time, as I tend to stick to around 21mm for the most of my use. I know this for a fact, as I tested it on zoom lenses as well. None of the zoom offerings compete with these primes at the same focal length at any aperture on the Sony a7R IV. Even the GM and the Sigma are “just” very good to excellent at most focal lengths and only outstanding at very few, while some of the above are excellent to outstanding at equal focal length and apertures. Sure, most might only need the wider end, but why compromise money, weight and size on a zoom when only certain focal lengths resolve your camera fully and when you only use a limited set of focal lengths. Sure, I get it if it’s something like the Sigma 14-24mm, as there really are no other 14-15mm offerings that can resolve as much of the Sony a7R IV sensor. One could pair it up with a 20-21mm, which I consider. Maybe check out Sony Alpha Blog “Which Lenses to maximise the potential of the Sony a7R IV”. It comes clear in most of his tests that you finally can take the full advantage of top end prime offerings, where many zooms just won’t resolve as much detail on such a high resolution sensor. We always knew that, but a sensor with higher resolution was necessary to prove it.
I think Carbon 6 has done a good job with the breakdown. I would definitely say that the Sony is sharper in the corners than the Batis, with them being about equal in the middle. And yes, the best color and contrast at landscape apertures belongs to the Loxia and Voigtlander. They obviously aren't nearly as practical for some kinds of photography, but when used to their strengths, they are special.
Carbon 6 wow, thank you for sharing your observations and experiences! It definitely helps paint a more complete picture. That was great!
Dustin Abbott thanks Dustin. Part of me wishes Sony released something wider than 20mm...maybe the idea was to make it and alternative to the 24mm GM...anyway thanks for another great review, I’m a big fan of your channel
Bummer, lol ; my curiosity as to how it compares to the Sigma DG DN 14-24mm is thuse not adressed yet, lol. I knew this 20mm was way more attractive to me than the however much GMMMM of the Sony GM24mm that I resisted, "waiting" for that zoom. I hope I will never miss that f1.8 over it's 2.8 that I don't need much but is good. (Then, the Brenzier-technics with DN 35mm f1.2 or Sony-Planar 50mm could perhaps kick in - though rather not just for simulating 20mm exactly. )
I believe the DG DN happens to have distortion neutrality just at 20mm and here "natively better" than the G20, then there is the rumor of a replacement by Sony of it's own zoom in that range ..but I wonder if they should not rather first issue a 'perfect" 10 or 11mm instead, (beating the Laowa 12), or dare inovate a fullframe fisheye zoom 'but' of the stereoscopic type as is the unic and excellent (and surprisingly usefull) Samyang 12mm full frame fisheye.
The 3 in 1 DG DN 14-24 however is convincing to me even "small size wise".
Dafuq?
The DN 14-24 is a great lens. It is slightly better in the distortion department at 20mm, but isn't nearly as punchy in the middle of the frame and lags a bit in the corners. I didn't show comparison results as I didn't have one on hand and changed my testing methods since I did the test of the 14-24. I wouldn't have a direct way to compare them.
@@DustinAbbottTWI
Oh interesting. I hope I can see that one day (unfortunately lol)
I knew it wasn't my dad-bod, pants have changed!
That's right :)
$600 difference between Sony and Tamron versions, one has to decide is it worth it?
That is true.
Why not just get and use the sigma 12-24 f2.8 which is sharp at the edges even in Astro?
Well, the Sigma does cost $500 more and weighs more than twice as much...so that's a factor.
This or a 16-35/17-28?
That really depends on whether or not you need the zoom range. The 20G is the highest performing option, but it some shooters will prefer the flexibility of a zoom range.
@@DustinAbbottTWI Thanks
At $900, this lens is very good value for the money
I think so. It's probably the best all round 20mm lens I've reviewed if you value size at all
Just resolutions who is winner at wide open 24gm vs 20g. Because i use a7r4 and you konw that camera has higher iso noise 😂
I saw lenstip's mtf chart , 20g's center resolution is incredibly high so i think i will buy 20g..
The 20mm F1.8 is impressively sharp.
You didn't say "Let the light in!" 😢
This review came before I started adding that.
For what I got, 24mm LN is $200 cheaper than a new 20mm. So no brainer.
That's interesting.
Thank u sir first
Enjoy
Lens review starts at 2.00