Has anyone compared nikon 24mm 1.4G and 1.8G? (and sigma 24mm art perhaps)

[PeterN]

After having used Fuji's 16mm for a while, I've become attached to the 24mm focal length. So I will probably add a 24mm lens to the collection.

Has anyone compared the 24mm 1.4G and 1.8G lenses already? What about the Sigma 24mm art lens?

Thank you!

[Frank Fremerey]

Interesting topic. Michael Erlewine has done the comparsion betwen Art and 24G/1.4. The Sigma is better

[PeterN]

Interesting topic. Michael Erlewine has done the comparsion between Art and 24G/1.4. The Sigma is better

Thanks Frank. I assume you refer to this post?
http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,117.0.html

I saw the Sigma Art yesterday and it is surprisingly lightweight. The ability to focus close is nice too. However, I am not sure if I need 1.4 for that focal length. I am not in concert photography or alike so low light performance is less important than center to corner sharpness and well controlled CA, distortion and vignetting. On the other hand, I would have never thought that I would use 1.4 with the 35mm either.... I guess I am somewhat of a OOF snob.

I also may look at the zeiss 25mm f2 and the samyang 24mm (I used a samyang 12mm with my Fuji X-T1 and was highly impressed by its performance).

Anyway, I am still curious about "real life" comparison between Nikon 1.4G and 1.8G. I am always somewhat suspicious about test charts. ;-)

[Frank Fremerey]

When I bought the 1.4 there was no 1.8 yet. It is a very new arrival. Generally the current 1.8-series did show no weakness, so I guess the 1.8/24 will be no exception.

As the Sigma ist 100 Euro cheaper thank the 1.8/24G and proven to be better than the 1.4/24G Nikkor even, I would go for the Sigma Art.

PS: Samyang and Zeiss do not have AF

PPS: The 1.4/24 is able to separate single people from a crowd fully open. This is very nice for candid/street shots.

[Frank Fremerey]

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2015/10/16/nikon-24mm-f-1.8g-lens-review-wide-fast-and-sharp-and-much-more-affordable

also follow the link to: http://slrgear.com/reviews/showproduct.php?product=1812

[PeterN]

Thank you, Frank.
The Sigma is here 50 euros more than the 1.8. The wonderful world of gear pricing. ;-)

regarding zeiss-samyang. Manual focusing should be less problematic with wide angle lenses but you're right. I did sell my 135mm zeiss apo sonnar lens for that reason. Something I still regret everyday I must add.

[Erik Lund]

Nikkor 24mm 1.4 AFS G is a really nice lens, I use it for many different types of images and it always delivers.
I believe the coating is better than on the 1.8

[Almass]

Interesting topic. Michael Erlewine has done the comparsion betwen Art and 24G/1.4. The Sigma is better

I do not seem to be able to find where Michael did a comparison between the Art and 24G/1.4.
More so, that he established that the Sigma is better.

Could you direct me to your reference?

[PeterN]

I do not seem to be able to find where Michael did a comparison between the Art and 24G/1.4.
More so, that he established that the Sigma is better.

Could you direct me to your reference?

http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,117.0.html

I think Frank refers to this post. Although no direct comparison, Michael says that the art lens is his favorite wide angle for now

http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,117.0.html

[Almass]

http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,117.0.html

I think Frank refers to this post. Although no direct comparison, Michael says that the art lens is his favorite wide angle for now

http://nikongear.net/revival/index.php/topic,117.0.html

Michael never ever did a Sigma Art 24/1.4 v Nikkor 24/1.4G and if he did, I never saw that.

Quote:
I have not had a great deal of time to work it and I still find myself just using Zeiss APOs because I love them, but I managed to squeeze out a little time with the Sigma 24mm ART lens. And the shot posted here was taken in a bit of a hurry for someone who requested it, so I make no claims. Still, the Sigma 24mm does a decent job. It is quite well corrected, sharp enough, and well made. If it lacks anything, it is the superb color the Zeiss APO lenses offer, but I am still chewing on that one.

I have not returned it, which for me says a lot. I believe I will keep it and use it as my wide-angle of choice until Zeiss gets around to producing what I imagine will be a jaw-dropping wide-angle Otus APO.
Unquote

To state otherwise is misleading. Michael does not even talk about the Nikkor 24/1.4G.

[PeterN]

Frank may have referred to another comparison. This was the only one I could find. So he may well refer to another -to me unknown- article. Perhaps it's best that Frank jumps in,
From the article one may conclude that Michael indirectly says that it's a better lens but that remains an interpretation until an other article pops up or Michael clarifies.
My question was about the 1.4 and 1.8 nikon lenses.

[Peter Forsell]

I have the 24 Art and 35 Art lenses as well as the old 28/1.4D. (Yes, I am a fast lens junkie  ). Can't help answering your questions and I have only had the 24 Art for a short time, but I'll keep a keen eye on this thread.

[Erik Lund]

Only disadvantage I can see on these 1.4 G lenses is the slow AFS gearbox design, so tracking and general acquiring focus is slow compared to for instance the 24-70 or 28-70 AFS 2.8

Michael has some special feature with lenses he likes, APO is one of them sharpness wide open is another, for focus stacking.

Frank stated in the other thread his 24mm 1.4 was not sharp, so must be defective.

Nano coating is really a big difference in many situations, so highly recommended IMHO.

[Almass]

Only disadvantage I can see on these 1.4 G lenses is the slow AFS gearbox design, so tracking and general acquiring focus is slow compared to for instance the 24-70 or 28-70 AFS 2.8

Michael has some special feature with lenses he likes, APO is one of them sharpness wide open is another, for focus stacking.

Frank stated in the other thread his 24mm 1.4 was not sharp, so must be defective.

Nano coating is really a big difference in many situations, so highly recommended IMHO.

I assume you are referring to Sigma lenses?
It is true that this is my main beef with Sigma Art series.

I concede that the Sigmas Art are sharp and even very sharp and Ughhh....that's about it.

Sigma Art lenses are unusable under certain conditions which are crucial to my type of photography.

1- Acquiring focus sucks.

2- Acquiring focus in low light.....fogetaboutit. This sucks big time.

3- I also have mega problems using Sigma Art lenses with Speedlights and Profoto. The reverse engineering of Sigma fails miserably.
Try shooting strobes in low light or any kind of light and you will walk away with disgust.

Of course, the cyberspace alleged reviewers sing songs of praise for Sigma. They do not tell you that Sigma Art is a one trick pony.

[Erik Lund]

No, I'm referring to Nikkor lenses - I have no clue to Sigma lenses
Thanks for you sharing about Sigma