[toni-a]

My friend Ghas shoots mainly theaters, concerts and artistic events, his setup is simple: 7D plus 18-135 plus 50mm f1.4

in low light he is almost always on 50mmf1.4 and he needs a fast wider lens, (not an ultrawide)

something in the 16-24mm area (24-35 full frame equivalent)

of course Sigma 20/24 mm f1.4 ART is great but out of reach, what lenses should I suggest for him

[JJ_SO]

Sigma 18-35/1.8 

 

But he should try it first. I was googling today for another reason "canon af problems", and exactly that combination came up first, so careful...

[Brightcolours]

Since the Sigmas are already too expensive?

 

Samyang 16mm f2 (MF only)

Canon EF-S 24mm f2.8 STM

Canon EF 24mm f2.8 IS USM

Samyang 24mm f1.4 (MF only)

Sigma 20/24/28mm f1.8 (old line of lenses)

[toni-a]

Today I will see Ghas and give him my EFS 17-55f2.8 IS, he wil tell me if f2.8 is enough for him or no

[JJ_SO]

Ah, yes, this is so much more affordable than the Sigmas...  But actually I was surprised: I had the price of the Nikon 17-55/2.8 in mind which still is quite steep. But the Canon only costs not even 100$ more than the Sigma 18-35.

 

I would not recommend the 20 or 24 on an APS-C body, both are big, the 20 very heavy and the 24 only heavy. And for stage, concerts or artistry, manual focus are something for people who like life extra difficult.

[Brightcolours]

Ah, yes, this is so much more affordable than the Sigmas...  But actually I was surprised: I had the price of the Nikon 17-55/2.8 in mind which still is quite steep. But the Canon only costs not even 100$ more than the Sigma 18-35.

 

I would not recommend the 20 or 24 on an APS-C body, both are big, the 20 very heavy and the 24 only heavy. And for stage, concerts or artistry, manual focus are something for people who like life extra difficult.

I think Tony is lending him his 17-55mm f2.8 to test the f2.8 aspect, not to see if he should get that same lens? If f2.8 is enough for him, a Canon 24mm f2.8 IS USM would be a choice, or even the very affordable EF-S 24mm f2.8 STM pancake lens. 

[toni-a]

I think Tony is lending him his 17-55mm f2.8 to test the f2.8 aspect, not to see if he should get that same lens? If f2.8 is enough for him, a Canon 24mm f2.8 IS USM would be a choice, or even the very affordable EF-S 24mm f2.8 STM pancake lens. 

Exactly, when I think again that I had Sigma 20mm f1.8 that made me plenty of keepers, it was a more than perfect lens, and I sold it for a low price.....

[JJ_SO]

I doubt very much, there's something like "more than perfect" on this planet, "whiter than white" or something of this blown superlatives. And I doubt also about the use of "perfect" and "Sigma 20/1.8" in one sentence.  ^_^ With 1 1/2 stars in PZ's verdict, "perfect" is not even in sight.

[Brightcolours]

I doubt very much, there's something like "more than perfect" on this planet, "whiter than white" or something of this blown superlatives. And I doubt also about the use of "perfect" and "Sigma 20/1.8" in one sentence.  ^_^ With 1 1/2 stars in PZ's verdict, "perfect" is not even in sight.

PZ ratings are based on MTF measurements, in case of 20mm, very close subject distance.

Does that mean one can't make good photos with it? No, it does not mean that.

 

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sizes/o/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sizes/o/

https://www.flickr.com/photos/[email protected]/sizes/o/

 

A lens for snobs? No. A lens for pixel peepers? Probably not so much. A lens for photographers? Yes, especially if funds are limited. A lens for someone looking for a wider angle bigger aperture lens, on a limited budget? Yes. For those, it sure might be perfect.

 

Will the lens compare just great next to the Sigma 20mm f1.4 Art? Probably not.

[toni-a]

Of course sharpness is great, but for the intended job,  you don't need the best lens in the world, he will be using high ISO anyway