Sony AF 20mm F2.8 A-mount lens reviews
reviews found: 24
 AVLB#45819 date: Jan-21-2022 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 17-35 2.8/4 D |
| price paid: | £92.50 |
| positive: | Compact Well built Ultra wide |
| negative: | Bit soft until stopped down a couple of stops (i.e f5.6) |
| comment: | This is the widest prime lens I have and can only compare it to my zoom 17-35 D lens. At 20mm the Minolta (at f3.2) is comparable to the Sony prime, but corners are definitely sharper with the prime. Very handy size to pack in the bag on days out for architecture and landscapes. Balances nicely on both the A850 and A99. A +1 MFA on the A850 was required, but nothing on the A99. Hood is sturdy and locks on tightly to the lens body. Filter size is large at 72mm, but not huge. A good ulta-wide lens that is a keeper for me. |
; 36MP| Eric T#31705 date: Oct-29-2016 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 3 flare control: 4 overall: 3.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | -SEL1635z -Rokinon 14mm f/2.8 |
| price paid: | 245 USD Used |
| positive: | -Lightweight -Fairly small -Relatively inexpensive |
| negative: | -Moderate to heavy Distortion -Poor sharpness -Focus shift -Plastic build -Heavy vignetting from stacking two or more filters |
| comment: | This lens is a great FL for general wide angle shooting. It's fairly small, lightweight, and inexpensive. When I do travel or event shooting, I like having easily portable gear that won't leave me tears if it breaks or gets stolen. The prices have fallen enough on this lens that it's probably the best UWA lens for the Sony system. AF works great on my Minolta Maxxum 7, and lens correction are applied to in-camera JPEGs on my a7r w/ la-ea4 adapter. Brilliant! Unfortunately, this is one of those older UWA designs that just isn't very sharp. You can get decent results if you stop down to f/8-f/11, but it will never give you that micro-contrast pop like you'd see from a Zeiss lens. The sel1635z isn't particularly good, but it's superior in just about every way to the Sony 20mm. I expected better performance from a prime lens, but it's just not there. The Rokinon 14mm smokes this in terms of sharpness performance. The Sony 20mm just isn't all that great optically. For film shooters, stacking even two filters yields terrible vignetting in the corners. Forget about combining an ND grad with a warming filter. One normal sized filter is fine, though. Despite my gripes, this lens works perfectly for 90% of the work that I do. while oddly shaped, it fits easily enough in my bag, and I take it with me just about everywhere I go. Flare and distortion control aren't great compared to newer lenses, but they're good enough that you don't have to worry about it. I complain about lack of sharpness because I look at pixels 1:1, but in the real world nobody is going to notice. Bring a tripod, stop down to f/8 and it'll be sharp enough for the web and for prints. Also, the prices of the Minolta version are so close that you might as well get the newer Sony 20mm and have lens corrections applied in-camera. This is a great, lightweight and affordable workhorse of a lens that delivers when you need it. |
| jeffreybehr#11940 date: Aug-6-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony Zeiss 16-35/2.8 |
| price paid: | US$500, used |
| positive: | Light weight, relatively low cost. |
| negative: | Lack of sharpness |
| comment: | This one surprised me. I was hoping I could retire my heavy 16-35/2.8, but not for this prime--its images are clearly softer than those from the big Zeiss zoom. Too bad--that Zeiss weighs two pounds! |
| BRWAT#11928 date: Jul-29-2014 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 100mm Macro Sony 85mm G-Series Sony 50mm Macro Sony 50mm f/1.4 Sony 35mm f/1.4 G-Series Sony 35mm f/1.8 Sony 30mm Macro Sony 20mm f/2.8 |
| price paid: | $400.00 |
| positive: | Its a relatively inexpensive full frame ultra wide angle lens. Its compact, light weight and has a robust build quality. |
| negative: | The screw-driven AF system is noisy. It doesn't feature weather-sealing. It is neither AF-D compatible or features distance encoding. |
| comment: | This is an excellent compact full frame ultra wide angle lens, and I recommend it to anyone using a Full Frame A-Mount camera. The SAL20F28 was deigned for use on full frame A-Mounts, and I don't recommend its use on APS-C. Its very sharp in the centre at f/2.8 and achieves corner to corner sharpness between f/4, and f/5.6. It has excellent flare control, and its distortion is normal for a compact ultra-wide angle lens, and easily correctable. There is mild light falloff at f/2.8 which dissipates by f/4. The colour rendition is distinctly Minolta (rich, and vibrant), and the bokeh is excellent. The noisy screw driven AF is very fast on the A850, and is very accurate, even in low light. I recommend this lens for any Full Frame A-Mount user. |
| shadowfax001#11111 date: May-14-2013 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.2 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | SAL1635z SAL24z |
| price paid: | 540 USD (Used) |
| positive: | Good angle-of-view on full-frame, A99 Sharp when stopped down (e.g. f8 - f11) Excellent colors and contrast |
| negative: | Some chromatic aberration No SSM and clunky AF noise Not very useful on an APS-C camera |
| comment: | It is now the widest lens I own. Works well on the Sony A99 FF. It is not as wide as the 16-35z or is it as sharp as the 24z. However, it is not as expensive as these lenses — both of which I've owned and subsequently sold. Due to the camera-based focusing, this lens is not suitable for video in AF mode (e.g. just too much noise from focusing). Also, has minor distortion and chromatic aberration but is usually fixable in PP. I purchased this lens used w/ two-year ADH for just over $600. If you can find it at this price (e.g. $750 may be a bit high) it is a worthwhile investment for your FF camera kit. |
| Snegren#9600 date: Nov-16-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | M 28 F2.8 SAL 28 F2.8 |
| price paid: | 394 EUR (new) |
| positive: | FF F2.8 Sharp when used with care (AF issues) |
| negative: | 72 mm filters cost a fortune AF sometimes erratic Flat images in poor light |
| comment: | Use it at F8 where it shines. Lens has more than average CA which makes AF less accurate. Petal shaped lens hood is adequate for FF only but watch out for flare like on any WA. Poor light (cloud cover) produces flat images, but not enough to give color a 4. On FF very decent WA landscape lense. Distortion can be awkward, off-center straight lines will wobble. |
| rsf3127#9449 date: Sep-26-2011 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 16-105mm 11-18mm 28mm 2.8 35mm 1.8 |
| price paid: | 320 USD |
| positive: | Distortion free Build |
| negative: | Price new Filter size Focus ring Bulk |
| comment: | Bought it 2nd hand in mint condition. Expected sharpness to be close to other sony primes. Well, it is not. But there is no way you can have a sharper lens in this lenght in the current sony line-up. Coupled with the a700, it becomes 35mm, which is less useful than FF but still more useful than a 50mm would be for me. BF a little bit in my a700. Much better IQ than the 28mm from minolta in my opinion (but that lens costs 70 USD used). The focus ring is too narrow and changes focus plane abruptly. I perceived that the focus peaking of the NEX-5N is not precise with this lens. Don't know why... |
| Lucas#7981 date: Sep-16-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Tokina 19-35 ATX Sigma 10-20 EX DC |
| price paid: | 420 USD new on eBay |
| positive: | Very good sharpness from center to corner Excellent colors/contrast, build |
| negative: | Hood could be stronger |
| comment: | I bought this lens for a bargain on eBay. It was brand new in the box - a "one of a kind" deal! I'd been using the Tokina 19-35 ATX and/or Sigma 10-20 for wide angle both on the A900 and A700, but the Sony is very much better than both in every way. IMO it's the ideal wide angle for it's size/weight, excellent colors and very good sharpness. |
| KlikArt#7833 date: Aug-20-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | good quality. |
| negative: | a little too noisy.. |
| comment: | A nice wide angle that I used for architecture. |
| cruiser#7687 date: Jul-13-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 10-20mm (no HSM) |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | +size +weight +sharpness +3D-look +less vignetting than Sigma +Minolta colors |
| negative: | -noisy |
| comment: | I compared the lens to the Sigma 10-20mm (no HSM) which I like. However, the Sony 20mm fixed lens offers better sharpness at 20mm. Colours are typically Minolta. The Sigma produces 'flat' pictures at 20mm, while the Sony delivers a more 'three-dimensional' image. Vignetting is less pronounced (measured at f6.3). Distortion is less visible. Nonetheless I will probably keep the Sigma as 20mm are a bit long on APS-C. |
| pcarmalt#7222 date: Apr-1-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.7 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 17-35 F2.8-4 EX DG Tamron 28-75 F2.8 Minolta 28-135 F4-4.5 |
| price paid: | GBP 280 |
| positive: | + Small and lightweight + Great colour and contrast + Good close focus ability + Lack of CA |
| negative: | - Heavy vignetting on full frame below f/5.6 - Not quite as sharp as CZ24-70 @ 24mm (but corners better) - Possible focus shift? |
| comment: | Love this lens. I can actually hold the camera at arms length with lens pointing towards me and my wife and get us both in the shot with background etc, like a point & shoot! Compared to Sigma 17-35 EX DG, it's clearly sharper but there is not much difference at f/11 where I normally use this lens. The biggest differences are in colour (no yellow cast like Sigma) and size/weight meaning much greater chance of this lens making it in to the bag :-) Compared to the CZ 24-70 @ 24mm, the CZ is a little sharper in the centre, the prime is a little sharper in the corners. I also used this lens to make a fantastic stitched panorama. Kurt Munger and Artaphot both say this lens has focus shift, i.e the AF works at f/2.8 but the focal plane at smaller apertures is actually behind the focal plan at f/2.8 causing backfocus but ONLY when stopping down, so microadjust is no use. I haven't personally noticed this as this only seems to affect middle apertures like f/5.6 which I rarely use, but something to be aware of. |
| jakobdam#7210 date: Mar-31-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | - Minolta 50mm f/1.7 - Minolta 50mm f/1.4 - Carl Zeiss 16-80 f/3.5-4.5 - Tamron 11-18 |
| price paid: | traded |
| positive: | + fullframe coverage + f/2.8 + amazing contrasts! + very sharp when stopped down + also quite sharp at f/2.8 in center + relatively fast |
| negative: | - corners not good at f/2.8, but who cares, as f/2.8 means you want shallow DoF... - vignetting at f/2.8-4, but again; who cares, as these apertures are not meant for landscapes? Actually this vignetting is a plus for portraits! |
| comment: | In terms of sharpness, it surpasses the old 50mm f/1.7, at max aperture. This is not totally fair, because at f/2.8 for both, it's pretty much a square, although the 20mm renders better colors and contrasts still. Very comparable with my f/1.4, but contrasts are still rendered better - without highlights getting blown. Vignetting is quite obvious on fullframe, propably won't be on aps-c though - at f/2.8-4. Looks great for portraits, but if anyonce fancies those apertures for landscapes... well, hopefully, noone does... at f/5.6 and onwards, the vignetting is totally gone. Mine came without a hood, and flares can be a minor issue when light sources are at an angle. Nothing serious and uncommon, though. I've bought a flower hood for it on ebay. Oh, as for the Tamron 11-18 - well, it gets spanked very hard by this 20mm! In terms of resolution, contrasts, distorsions - the Tamron just looses big time. The Zeiss 16-80 does deliver performance very similiar to this 20mm - actually better in some cases. But the Zeiss can't do f/2.8, and neither will it work on fullframe. - APS-C owners will propably avoid this lens, not much point in having a 35mm f/2.8 which can be equaled in the Zeiss which is what I'd recommend for a nice walk-around lens anyway. - Fullframe owners who likes landscapes and alternate portrait/model-field of views; this is a MUST-HAVE. - Nice and lightweight; this and the 50mm f/1.4 covers most of my needs, actually. Just need an additional 35mm. :) |
| DavidBo#7001 date: Mar-5-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Zeiss 24-70 ZA SSM |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Quite sharp af f/8 corner to corner. Acceptable already at f/5,6 |
| negative: | Nothing |
| comment: | missing |
| jeep#6951 date: Feb-22-2010 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | 24mm f2.8 Sigma super wide Macro 28mm f2.8 Minolta RS 50mm f1.7 Minolta RS 14mm f2.8 Samyang ultrawide |
| price paid: | L380.00 |
| positive: | Sharp when stopped down a couple of stops, good colour and flare control |
| negative: | Nothing really |
| comment: | I was looking for a wide prime for my a900, and there does not seem to be much choice at the moment if you want to buy new. I find it fine for landscape use with plenty of definition on the edges when used at f8, f9, f11. Not sure I can see the point of using it on a cropped sensor dslr though. Just added the Samyang f2.8 14mm ultra wide to my collection, a fully manual lens with great resolution and correctable distortion. Update: Not very good on a full frame Sony A7R. The 20mm Nikon f2.8 AF D is a much better compact wide angle on the A7R |
| raszomon#6393 date: Nov-16-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 3.5 color: 4 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | sigma 24 f1.8 , maf 24-50mm f4,pentacon 50 f1.8 , flektagon 35f2.4 |
| price paid: | GBG250 |
| positive: | Well build, great design, small, close focusing distance |
| negative: | not too sharp, af accuracy pretty bad . |
| comment: | On the paper price i paid for it - bargain, however this lens was the biggest dissapointment ever. Lens wouldn't achieve resolution you would expect from prime lens.Things are even getting worse when focusing on infinity. I belive it is down poor quality control and eventualy better sample of this lens can be found .Build quality and size of this makes it very handsome and great for street photograhpy.I got rid of it quickly but i hope to buy it again if i only can get better sample. |
| ihlbcn#5531 date: Jun-15-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Minolta 20mm f2.8 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | It's the same as the Minolta RS but with few extras. Front cap is way better than in Minolta RS. Rear cap adjust is also better. Sharpness is great even corner to corner. Typical minolta colors, just amazing. Same AF speed as Min RS. Good build and good flare control. |
| negative: | Nothing |
| comment: | Amazing lens very useful on FF. It is not that useful in APS-C, it lost the UWA character. It's a little improvent over a really great lens. |
| AsuAmo#5192 date: Apr-8-2009 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.9 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 11-18, 18-250 |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Light, well build, reasonably sharp, low distortions, good colour. |
| negative: | Can be sold only at big discount as second hand minolta models have the same IQ. |
| comment: | Very well build, sharpness and barrel distortions are way better than 11-18 or 18-250. Flare wasn't an issue even without hood. Very good lens if you are looking for a wide prime. |
| Samsonov#4485 date: Dec-7-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 4 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.1 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I have experience with this lens |
| compared to: | Sigma 30mm, Sigma 10-20mm, kitlens |
| price paid: | N/A |
| positive: | Small and light |
| negative: | Not really that sharp, and certainly not very low light, expensive for what it has to offer |
| comment: | Marks don't show it, but I was pretty disappointed with this lens, probably because I was in a position to compare it to Sigmas 10-20 and 30mm f1.4. Compared to f1.4 this lens gathers 4 TIMES less light, costs more, and is not any sharper than Sigma (in fact the opposite). It's wider than Sigma 30mm, but compared to 10-20 - well, it's no contest at all, as 10-20 beats it in every possible aspect, while also being a zoom lens, wider, and cheaper to boot. There is no visible difference in using Sigma 10-20 at 20mm or this lens. So what's the point? Again, f2.8 is not really "low light" in my book. |
| borjomi#4349 date: Nov-10-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Sony 18-70 kit Tokina 20-35/3.5-4.5 II |
| price paid: | missing |
| positive: | Sharp even at f/2.8 Very good color Low CA Pocket size (w/o hood) Vrey light weigth |
| negative: | Visible vignetting (only wide open) Overpriced new |
| comment: | Very good lens for landscapes and street photo especially at low light conditions. |
| qwz#3991 date: Aug-22-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4 color: 5 build: 5 distortion: 4 flare control: 4 overall: 4.4 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I used to own this lens |
| compared to: | Vivitar 19-35mm 3.5-4.5 Tamron 17-50mm 2.8 Sony/Minolta 20mm 2.8 Tamron 17-35mm 2.8-4 Zeiss Distagon ZA 2/24mm |
| price paid: | 350 USD LN+ |
| positive: | Geometry (a little moustache-type but not ugly), colors (a little cool in contradiction to traditional minolta glass, similar to 28mm 2.8 situation), flare control, sharpness is good, very good two-three stops down. Good across frame (except wide open). |
| negative: | Overpriced new. Sharpness and contrast on frame edges is not good enough until F5.6. |
| comment: | Very nice on full-frame. Best sharpness uniformity over the full-frame stopped down the 20mm lens available on A-mount. |
| Mercury22#3695 date: Jun-8-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.6 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 699.00 |
| positive: | I love this lens. I use it for everything. I especially like it for scenic shots and portrait photography. It makes crytal clear shots, with vibrant color and superior sharpness. Its an expensive toy, but it is a ton of fun |
| negative: | My camera is an a700, which I love, but since it is not a full frame sensor, the fisheye doesn't give as much curve as I'd like. However, the upside of that is that the lens is more useful for portrait photography BECAUSE it doesn't bend so much. |
| comment: | Overall I am THRILLED with this lens. I was told by fellow photographers not to buy this lens because it is "too much of a novelty" lens. I've found it to be much more useful than that and I wouldn't want to be without it now. It is regularly on my a700 amd I love it. |
| ckone#3674 date: Jun-5-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 3 distortion: 5 flare control: 4 overall: 4.3 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 500$ |
| positive: | Picture quality, sharpness, distoresion; wrm colors. |
| negative: | Flare control |
| comment: | This is my wide angle work horse for landscape photography; beautiful Minolta colors: Warm. Sharpness in 95% of area great, the edges with my copy slightly decrease; maybe referring to a bad copy I had: The MF ring got loose, that's why I gave it a 3 in build quality; after fixing and new calibration the lens was better than ever. Flare is a slight problem, before and after repair - but doesn't hurt me much. Definitively a recommendation. |
| OG#3337 date: Mar-4-2008 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 5 flare control: 5 overall: 4.8 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | missing |
| price paid: | 500 Euro (new US) |
| positive: | Sharpness Good Colors Good AF performance (but this is not really relevant for landscape photography) |
| negative: | Build could be better, like the Canon 20mm USM or Sony/Minolta 35mm G, but dont worry, optical the Sony is the better one (to the canon) |
| comment: | missing |
| blackdog#2456 date: Jun-18-2007 | |
|---|---|
sharpness: 4.5 color: 5 build: 4 distortion: 4 flare control: 5 overall: 4.5 | tested on:
|
| ownership: | I own this lens |
| compared to: | Kit lens, KM35/1.4, KM24-105, |
| price paid: | 609 USD |
| positive: | Sharpness, contrast, color rendition and portability. Excellent flare control and very little CA as well |
| negative: | A bit of distortion. |
| comment: | This is an excellent landscape lens. I find that I use it all the time now. The colors and contrast are excellent, and it seems to be especially good at exposing rich sky colors. I am extremely impressed with the overall sharpness of this lens and the well controlled flare and CAs. As for bokeh, I haven't really explored its potential much, so I can't really comment. The only negative is distortion, but sometimes it adds an interesting perspective to the pictures. Other times, it needs to be corrected. PT lens works great with it (using the KM20 setting). The build is light and plastic, but doesn't feel cheap or flimsy. I think its size and weight are a big plus. |
reviews found: 24
rating summary
- total reviews: 24
- sharpness: 4.35
- color: 4.79
- build: 4.42
- distortion: 4.46
- flare control: 4.46
- overall: 4.50
to add your review
you need to login
you need to login