Sigma 20mm f/1.4 vs Nikon 20mm f/1.8

Eyon

Eyon

Suspended / Banned
Messages
101
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
Cannot currently decide between these two for my next lens purchase.

I intend to use the lens as a night time landscape lens and thus the extra half stop sounds very appealing. I've shot with both but only in the day and in the store so when pixel peeping they both look great to me.

Sigma is £699, Nikon is currently £684 with the offer of cashback right now. My local Wex has two excellent used examples of the Nikon for £531.

Where would the fine folk of TP put their money?
 
Sigma art I take it ...... such a hard choice! The nikon is pin sharp and I’ve had sigma arts before and can’t fault them !!!! Can’t call it! I think the nikon would take it by a whisker! That’s my choice anyway ....
 
I've owned both.

The sigma art is marginally better technically, both for daytime landscapes and for dealing with stars.

It is massively heavy though and the lens that is still in my bag is the Nikon 20mm 1.8g...

The sigma also doesn't take filters conventionally.
 
Yes the lack of ability to take filters (easily!) puts me off the sigma but having looked at both lately the sigma is better in the mid frames and corners than the Nikon.
 
Thanks for the replies all. Filters wise I'm not all that fussed right now, but it's something I may get into in the future. I assume Lee's 150mm system will work on the Sigma if I decide to go that way so there is an option. Does weight bother me? Not particularly, but a saving is a saving especially if they are similar in performance.

My use case is somewhat unique however. My usual shooting platform is from the cockpit of an aircraft, especially now the nights are getting darker the photo opportunities are improving (endless midday landscapes right now!). I've been shooting with a Tokina 16-28 f/2.8 for a while and it's a great lens and I've had some excellent results, but night time my D800 struggles. I'm in a situation where I need to keep a high shutter speed (my platform is moving around 500mph and I can't really take a tripod to work!) and thus shooting wide open at high ISO. For example the other day I was flying over southern Europe I had the Milky Way in clear view, thunderstorms close by and noctulecent clouds to the North, it was a perfect photo opportunity, but I know my current setup wouldn't be able to capture any of it to any detail. This got me thinking that a prime would be a better bet, 20mm is a good focal length too (I rarely shoot at 16mm on my Tokina). If I can go from f/2.8 to f/1.4-1.8 I can effectively go from ISO 6400 to 3200, or increase shutter speed, which would be brilliant for me.

I'm looking at taking multiple high ISO shots and layering in PS to reduce noise and maintain IQ. I've not tried this yet but I feel it might work going by some results I've seen on the internet.

Both lenses seem great, but given the above information, would the extra 1/2 stop be of benifit, or should I pocket the £150? Tough choices!
 
I had a samyang with 165mm filters and only problem I had was wind! Anything more than a puff the whole set up wobbled ! Useless it was
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top