After returning from my trip to NYC, I am debating getting either the Sigma 20mm or 24mm f/1.4 prime (B+H was shut whilst in NYC) after finding my Canon 24-70mm f/4 wasn't great with low light shots, despite the IS. I have read numerous reviews as we all do but struggling to decide between the two, i.e either the wider 20mm but not able to take filter for lens protection/Polariser/ Grad filter, against narrower 24mm, which has the ability to accept filters.
I would be grateful for any comments from owners of either lens with their opinion, or suggestions.
Thanks.. Richard
If you have the filters that fit the 24 and it received equally well reviews compared to the 20, I don't think 4mm will make that much of a difference. I'd go with the 24 so I could use the filters. But that's me.
cjc2
Loc: Hellertown PA
Since you already have the 24, I would suggest the 20. I have one lens that does not accept filters and I have been able to work with it for many years. I hear you about the speed but, with today's cameras I'm wondering why an F4 isn't enough. Without additional information such as camera body and type of shooting you want to do, it's had to give any more advice. What is it that you need/want to do with your existing lens that it won't do for you? Best of luck.
I was thinking the same, purely as protection for the front element, but would be good to get views fro any owners of the 20mm.
Longshadow wrote:
If you have the filters that fit the 24 and it received equally well reviews compared to the 20, I don't think 4mm will make that much of a difference. I'd go with the 24 so I could use the filters. But that's me.
Thanks, for the advice, I have both 5D Mk3 and 7D Mk2, I found that F4 hand held at night was a challenge and just felt I could do with a faster lens. Also would like to explore more with prime lenses.
cjc2 wrote:
Since you already have the 24, I would suggest the 20. I have one lens that does not accept filters and I have been able to work with it for many years. I hear you about the speed but, with today's cameras I'm wondering why an F4 isn't enough. Without additional information such as camera body and type of shooting you want to do, it's had to give any more advice. What is it that you need/want to do with your existing lens that it won't do for you? Best of luck.
Longshadow wrote:
... I don't think 4mm will make that much of a difference.
While 4mm may not seem like much, the 10° difference in field of view is significant.
Longshadow wrote:
To some...
The difference in field of view between 20 and 24 mm is significant for wide angle shooting, it just may not be important for what you shoot.
mwsilvers wrote:
The difference in field of view between 20 and 24 mm is significant for wide angle shooting, it just may not be important for what you shoot.
I'd rather be able to use the filters.
cjc2
Loc: Hellertown PA
rjallen wrote:
Thanks, for the advice, I have both 5D Mk3 and 7D Mk2, I found that F4 hand held at night was a challenge and just felt I could do with a faster lens. Also would like to explore more with prime lenses.
Night time, and for indoor sports, is when I break out the 2.8 and faster lenses. Just to contradict myself, I have been enjoying using the new 300/4 FL with its great VR system for night/lower light work. It's light enough and good enough when pared to a good body to be very useful even in darker settings. When compared to my 300/2.8 I don't mind carrying it around for a while. Best of luck.
I would probably go with the 20 since you have a 24 already. I think you can get around the filters issues.
Best,
Todd Ferguson
Harrisburg, NC
rjallen wrote:
After returning from my trip to NYC, I am debating getting either the Sigma 20mm or 24mm f/1.4 prime (B+H was shut whilst in NYC) after finding my Canon 24-70mm f/4 wasn't great with low light shots, despite the IS. I have read numerous reviews as we all do but struggling to decide between the two, i.e either the wider 20mm but not able to take filter for lens protection/Polariser/ Grad filter, against narrower 24mm, which has the ability to accept filters.
I would be grateful for any comments from owners of either lens with their opinion, or suggestions.
Thanks.. Richard
After returning from my trip to NYC, I am debating... (
show quote)
what exactly were you photographing? have you thought of not purchasing another lens and using a tripod?
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.