Opinions on the Sony 20mm 2.8?

I am considering purchasing a new 20mm f/2.8 Wide-Angle Lens.

I currently own a Sony 50mm 1.4 and a Minolta AF 200/2.8 HS-APO G which are both fixed. I do like the fast fixed lenses over the zooms.

I also have a Tamron AF 17-50mm 1:2.8 (if) Aspeherical which I use for my wide angle work. However after looking at the 20mm listed above I really like the thought of the fixed lens.

I am sure there are opinions on this so please help me decide!

--
Rick Barber - Burbs of Chicago

I was just out looking and I see that Sigma has a 20mm fixed that is faster then the Sony. Any comparisons between the two?
--
Rick Barber - Burbs of Chicago

I purchased the Minolta version hoping for improved image quality and increased speed over the zooms I was using. I was somewhat disappointed. The 20/2.8 is pretty large and the IQ is certainly no better (maybe a little worse) than the 16-80. I wouldn't buy it again.

I've used the sigma on a canon and the IQ was not really acceptable below f/8. Hope my opinion helps ...

Thank you. It helps
--
Rick Barber - Burbs of Chicago

It seems nearly everyone has this opinion. The wide angle primes (20 and 24mm primarily) are not very sharp wide open, either Sigma or KM.

I actually found my 17-35mm D to be sharper wide open than the 24mm RS, and I previously found a 24mm Sigma 2.8 (old style) sharper than a previous 24mm KM original I had.

I also had the 20mm a couple times, but never kept it. The lack of a zoom combined with little to no speed increase over the zoom meant it was less useful, and without a comensurate increase in sharpness...why keep it?

Whereas my 17-35mm always impresses, and gives me an extra 3mm on the wide end with little loss of speed.

Plus, this is on APS...on FF, everything will get wider, so the 20 and 24mm primes would be even less useful and more restrictive for my uses.

Canon has a couple 24mm 1.4 lenses which cost a bunch...rumour has it CZ is coming out with something to compete. If you need IQ and speed in that range, this would be the one to look for.

Greg

My biggest disappointment in the prime line up is the Minolta 20mm on my a-900. !7-35 is superior by far.

I was expecting much better as 20mm is Ideal landscape size for me.I could just have a defective lens.

The Sony 20 mm f:2.8 seems to be the same as the Minolta 20 mm, maybe with a different coating. This was mentioned by a camera reviewer I know and trust. This tread should tell you something about the 20 mm lens, I think:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1037&message=29645147

I use a Minolta 20/2.8 RS version as my main wide angle on a KM 5D and am in fact pretty happy with it. No issues with sharpness (better than the SAL 18-250 or the kit), and colours are great. Since opinions are strongly divided, i might (a) have a good copy, or i might (b) not see the weaknesses on my 6MP APS-C sensor...

--
http://www.pbase.com/maurus_e/

Maybe you are looking at the pictures, not peeping on image quality ;-)

I am pleased with my Minolta 20 mm f:2.8. For maximum quality I do stop this lens down to f:8 or f:11 when using my FF camera, and to f:4.5 or smaller with my APS cameras. That said, this lens ain't bad wide open either.

Thank you for posting a link that thread. I did a search before I posted this one but I did not find that one. it is quite good.
--
Rick Barber - Burbs of Chicago

I had been looking at them over on dyxum.com (reviews, that is) yesterday for a while.

This might be garbled, so look into it yourself, but the impression I got was this:

The Sigma's are soft wide open, but if you stop them down to 2.8, they are sharper than the Minolta's.

The trade off is the size-- the Sigma 20mm 1.8 has an 82mm filter diameter. The 24mm is 77mm. The 24mm Minolta is only 55mm and is about the exact same size as the 50mm 1.7.

If you want portability and a cheap price, the Minolta 24mm is your best bet. It isn't amazingly sharp, but gives you a wider-perspective for around $200 (check on ebay, and look for the RS versions... they have the rubber grip on the focusing ring, instead of the plastic. Dyxum has pictures showing the difference).

If you really want wide, however, the 20mm offers 6mm difference on any non-full frame cameras. That can make a difference. I don't think I would ever want the 82mm filter of the Sigma, so the Minolta is the only way to go.

Me, personally... I was thinking of getting one of them, I might have settled for the 24mm, but i already have the Sigma 10-20. I'll settle with that for now, I never shoot at 2.8 that wide... my complaint is that I do not like the "wide angle look" that happens when you are zoomed out (10-17 or so on the Sigma) where it changes the perspective a lot.

I bought a Minolta 200mm instead, spur of the moment decision. I had never seen them below $1000, so getting it for $720 was great for me.

And the new Zeiss will cover the range from something like 16-35 at f2.8, but will cost around $1750 or so (I don't know if that is confirmed, I haven't been paying attention lately).
--
Gear:

A700, 5D, 50 f/1.7, Sigma 10-20, Tamron 28-75, Tamron 90mm Macro, Minolta 135mm 2.8, Beercan, 3600

Hi,

I have a Minolta 20/2.8 which i found to be a good lens on my A900. It should perform similarly to the A900 on Alpha 200 and Alpha 300 as they have essentially the same pixel pitch.

In general I would not recommend a 20/2.8 lens for APS-C format DSLRs, it corresponds to a 30 mm lens, not very exciting.

I have a couple of test pictures of the 20/2.8 on the A900 (which is full frame)

http://www.pbase.com/ekr/image/107003971/original

http://www.pbase.com/ekr/image/107305400/original

Best regards
Erik

I looked at your 20 mm images with the A-900. I wonder if the chromic aberration in the corners is easy to fix. I have a Tokina 17 mm that I have used with the A-900 and does produce considerable CA. I can usually clean up the CA in the center of the image fairly easily but it does leave considerable blue CA in the corners which is almost impossible to get rid of with CA reduction in Lightroom/ACR/Photoshop.
--
Erik H. Pronske, M.D.
http://www.pbase.com/epronske